Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Look, I am not going to argue any further with you, because our experiences have been on the opposite sides. I am a CP who had to do almost ALL the supporting, and you are an NCP who has had to do almost all the supporting.
Maybe what it boils down to do is that some people just get over, and the rest of us get screwed.
I feel bad about your difficulty getting time with your daughter. That is just not right, and I hope as she grows older she makes the effort to establish a closer relationship with you. Good luck.
The bolded is very true; it's really my whole point, that the courts let too many get over.
Taking the high road and letting the kids figure it out when they get older does not get them the time back that they missed with their other parent. Hardly a solution. Taking the custodial parent to court is an option but you will eventually run out of money and even if you win the judgment is still not enforceable.
The solution is to not have a custodial parent where possible, to allow enforcement of parental access with the same amount of teeth that enforcement of support has and, in situations where having a custodial parent is unavoidable, to allow non custodial parents to put support money in escrow when parental access is denied from the custodial parent against the court's orders. The money in escrow to be paid to the custodial parent when the parental access guidelines outlined by the courts were complied with. This puts access to the support money for the children purely in the custodial parent's hands. It is right there to be utilized upon compliance with the court order.
Taking the high road and letting the kids figure it out when they get older does not get them the time back that they missed with their other parent. Hardly a solution. Taking the custodial parent to court is an option but you will eventually run out of money and even if you win the judgment is still not enforceable.
The solution is to not have a custodial parent where possible, to allow enforcement of parental access with the same amount of teeth that enforcement of support has and, in situations where having a custodial parent is unavoidable, to allow non custodial parents to put support money in escrow when parental access is denied from the custodial parent against the court's orders. The money in escrow to be paid to the custodial parent when the parental access guidelines outlined by the courts were complied with. This puts access to the support money for the children purely in the custodial parent's hands. It is right there to be utilized upon compliance with the court order.
No, it does not give them the time back. That's the saddest part.
I did not say that, please don't put words in my mouth. What I said is that the courts do not require the custodial parent to financially support their children. This is proven by the fact that courts do not require custodial parents with zero income to get a job.
There are a million ways you could do it. I believe the best thing for the children would be 50/50 default custody, both parties are responsible for the children on their own time. Medicals and extracurriculars could be split by percentage based on income.
At a minimum, as a start you could start requiring custodial parents with zero income to work ft subject to the same remedies that non custodial parents face if they don't pay- suspension of drivers license and jail.
BTW, you should still haven't answered my question, asked for the 5th time:
Do you think its right that custodial parents are not required by the court to support their children- not even one dollar or one penny? Do you think this is good for children? You think its right for courts to support custodial parents that refuse to financially support their children- not even one dollar or one penny?
The bolded I agree with you completely; 50/50 custody should be the norm (obviously excluding situation where a parent is abusive or negligent). Not that I anticipate it happen, but there is no way I'd demand full custody if my husband split; we'd live next door to each other if we had to. I don't believe it is ever beneficial for a child to have time with their parent limited to weekends and holidays (again, excluding abuse or neglect). But that fact is, he'd suddenly find himself in the position of having to coordinate babysitting, taking off when a kid is home sick, managing their social calendars, medical and dental appointments.
I have no issue with both parents equally sharing custody and the expectation of financially supporting their children; the problem arises when one parent doesn't want joint custody and isn't willing to help solve the issue of who will watch the children when the custodial parent is working, especially when childcare costs would consume nearly all of the parents' paycheck. It's hard enough to coordinate that when both parents are under the same roof, let alone when they live in separate homes and are barely on speaking terms.
I think no one is answering this because it doesn't ring true. It wasn't true for ME--I most certainly WAS required to support my child. It was never a question, because I always supported her without being "required". But I held the larger share of income, and so I was required to take on the larger share of our daughter's support. And because he was not employed at the time of the divorce--his share, too.
As I outlined in the formula I posted, the cost of the support is allocated according to income:
See Page 3, "How does the court determine the amount of the child support obligation?"
Now, this seems to be YOUR situation, that your ex is not supporting your child because she has no income.
So, how does she live? How does she pay for housing and food and utilities if she has no income? There is something missing in the story.
My ex lives in a million dollar house with her mother, who has very deep pockets. She goes on trips to foreign countries 4x a year, out to fancy restaurants 3-5x week, has the nicest clothes, the best attorney money can buy (I'd estimate that she has spent 250k in legal fees in our case so far), a nice car, the whole works. The child support I pay is used for her bar tabs and her drugs. If I get even one day behind on it, she will file a contempt charge against me, trying to throw me in jail. In fact, TWICE she even filed contempt charges against me when I was 100% current and up to date. In both cases, she dropped the charge one day before court. But of course, that made me pay $350/hr to my attorney to defend myself, money I'll never get back.
She has a restraining order against me that she gets renewed every single year. This despite the fact that she has changed her story 100x, I have it in writing, AND I haven't spoken to her, even one word, for over 5 years. This restraining order bars me from going to my daughters school, which hurts my daughter (my ex doesn't go to any of her school events or have any interest in them), but no one cares.
My daughter has 2 former therapists that saw exactly what was going on. My ex responded by firing both therapists, suppressing the evidence so it will never see the light of day in court, and blocking the therapists from appearing as witnesses on behalf of my daughter in trial. A parenting coordinator also saw what was going on and was going to testify that I should have custody. My ex responded by threatening to have him removed from every single case he is on and that he would 'never work in this town again'. She's also trying to have him blocked from appearing as a witness in trial.
My beef is not with you or anyone like you. My beef is with the system. You see, none of this crap that my ex pulls would work if those in charge didn't fully support it. I find it disgusting that someone like me, who IS paying 50% of my check to child support, is borderline homeless and living right on the edge, all the while being told that 'kids need financial support' all the while my ex doesn't pay a penny.
how come my ex wife isn't in jail for failing to pay? She hasn't worked in years. Who do I see about that?
Dysgenic,
You'll never convince these lazy entitled custodial parents that their children are simply nothing more than a monthly check. Many states also require the NCP to contribute to college expenses even though a married couple isn't required too.
The system is designed to take from the higher earner and redistribute that wealth to the lower earner.
To the OP's question of whether a NCP should be required to lay CS even if they don't see their kids, the answer is quite obviously "yes". That ignores the issue of the female bias in the court system. Hell, there's even judges that believe in the tender years doctrine. My female judge sure did. Most of the other judges in Illinois must as well since only about 3% of CPs in Illinois are the father.
With the incredibly onerous spousal support guidelines along with the CS guidelines, the higher earner is typically saddled with the majority of marital debt while the lower earner gets more assets. Since the higher earner is now up Sh-t Creek without a paddle, they have to work more to try to catch up. That in turn causes their CS obligation to go up more. It's a viscous spiral which steals fathers from their childrens' lives.
Our system is broken but the pendulum is beginning to swing back towards the middle and the feminazis are upset. Entitled people usually get upset when they are told they need to start carrying their own water.
The bolded I agree with you completely; 50/50 custody should be the norm (obviously excluding situation where a parent is abusive or negligent). Not that I anticipate it happen, but there is no way I'd demand full custody if my husband split; we'd live next door to each other if we had to. I don't believe it is ever beneficial for a child to have time with their parent limited to weekends and holidays (again, excluding abuse or neglect). But that fact is, he'd suddenly find himself in the position of having to coordinate babysitting, taking off when a kid is home sick, managing their social calendars, medical and dental appointments.
I have no issue with both parents equally sharing custody and the expectation of financially supporting their children; the problem arises when one parent doesn't want joint custody and isn't willing to help solve the issue of who will watch the children when the custodial parent is working, especially when childcare costs would consume nearly all of the parents' paycheck. It's hard enough to coordinate that when both parents are under the same roof, let alone when they live in separate homes and are barely on speaking terms.
My ex lives in a million dollar house with her mother, who has very deep pockets. She goes on trips to foreign countries 4x a year, out to fancy restaurants 3-5x week, has the nicest clothes, the best attorney money can buy (I'd estimate that she has spent 250k in legal fees in our case so far), a nice car, the whole works. The child support I pay is used for her bar tabs and her drugs. If I get even one day behind on it, she will file a contempt charge against me, trying to throw me in jail. In fact, TWICE she even filed contempt charges against me when I was 100% current and up to date. In both cases, she dropped the charge one day before court. But of course, that made me pay $350/hr to my attorney to defend myself, money I'll never get back.
She has a restraining order against me that she gets renewed every single year. This despite the fact that she has changed her story 100x, I have it in writing, AND I haven't spoken to her, even one word, for over 5 years. This restraining order bars me from going to my daughters school, which hurts my daughter (my ex doesn't go to any of her school events or have any interest in them), but no one cares.
My daughter has 2 former therapists that saw exactly what was going on. My ex responded by firing both therapists, suppressing the evidence so it will never see the light of day in court, and blocking the therapists from appearing as witnesses on behalf of my daughter in trial. A parenting coordinator also saw what was going on and was going to testify that I should have custody. My ex responded by threatening to have him removed from every single case he is on and that he would 'never work in this town again'. She's also trying to have him blocked from appearing as a witness in trial.
My beef is not with you or anyone like you. My beef is with the system. You see, none of this crap that my ex pulls would work if those in charge didn't fully support it. I find it disgusting that someone like me, who IS paying 50% of my check to child support, is borderline homeless and living right on the edge, all the while being told that 'kids need financial support' all the while my ex doesn't pay a penny.
Ok dysgenic, we get it, you hate your ex wife and she is a horrible person. You do realize, though, that the scenario you have outlined above is not the norm anywhere, for anyone, right? You are in a unique situation. The vast majority of separated/divorced parents do not have someone with unlimited income to support them while they don't work, take vacations, buy fancy clothes, etc. Ok, that is not the norm. Yes, it should make you angry, but do you really need to take it out on all the decent custodial parents here who are doing what they're supposed to do, pay their bills, take care of their kids, and just expect the non-custodial parent to provide a minimum of financial contribution without it having to be an issue every goddammed month?
Your beef is not with "the system." Your beef is with "the haves," the 1%, the rich, of which your ex wife is a member, and it's a tale as old as time. I don't know what you would expect any of us here to do about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campfires
You'll never convince these lazy entitled custodial parents that their children are simply nothing more than a monthly check. Many states also require the NCP to contribute to college expenses even though a married couple isn't required too.
And then we've got ^^^^ this guy who's going to call me a lazy, entitled custodial parent while I'm working three jobs and paying 98% of everything, and diminish my relationship with my child to "a monthly check." You, sir, are a name I cannot call you on C-D and you can take your opinion and shove it.
And then we've got ^^^^ this guy who's going to call me a lazy, entitled custodial parent while I'm working three jobs and paying 98% of everything, and diminish my relationship with my child to "a monthly check." You, sir, are a name I cannot call you on C-D and you can take your opinion and shove it.
If that statement didn't apply to you, why in the world would you think it was referring to you? How odd.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
