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.
They just have to make an example out of a few people trying to game the system and their ex to discourage the proliferation of behavior we are seeing now. It would be worth a little extra money up front to save all of the nonsense we are seeing today later down the road.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reneeh63
Pleazzzze! The courts can't even sort out a criminal rape case and you're asking them to decide on the details of a years-long marriage who is MORE at fault? Based on what? Friends and relatives coming in to testify?! How much will THAT process cost good taxpayers?
You do realize that Moderator cut: Language happens to people like lay-offs, injuries, reduced hours, right. If your working and making X, your CS is based on that X. Now you lose your job and your making y but your still required to pay X you no longer have. You think castration is the answer.
So what if your in a happy marriage and you lose your job and cant afford the rent or electricity or food for your family, should you be castrated?
I think the courts need to use a bit of logic and differentiate between those who have no intention of paying and those who are having financial difficulty and actually cant pay X.
Not that I dont think both parents should support their children but I also believe we should all be financially prepared to support our children without the income of a partner.
I didn't say all dads. I said deadbeat dads. The ones that work hard at hiding their income to avoid paying. That quit their job before the government catches up to avoid paying.
Yes, the courts should use logic, but our government is severely lacking in logic. The result is deadbeat dads are allowed to beat the system, and we the taxpayers end up on the hook for raising their children.
My ex is an evil person and he is the one that left our relationship. I won't say that I was not relieved because his bipolar, manic phases were a strain and stress that I was over dealing with. Case in point, I am friends with all of my exes, including my ex husband, with the exception of my sons father. If I can be friendly with all the rest, who is the problem? We never will get a long because of his narcissistic and crazy behavior. And a child protection services caseworker has testified in court about his crazy behavior. I just do not associate with liars and manipulative people.
He easily makes 5x my salary including the cash he deposits to his account, but since he left me and adopted a single mom with two kids, he states he can't afford to support our child. She does not work. That is not fair to our child. He chose to adopt another family before considering what he could afford and not. He pays $900 a month in car payments because he went right out and bought 3 cars. He pays a jewelry credit card $300 a month. Those are his priorities. He belongs in jail.
Don't you have a huge car payment on a brand new, expensive car? Don't you have expensive gadgets that you've chosen to hold on to instead of selling to pay for your kids? If priorities put folks in jail, you might be in the cell next to him.
I have mentioned in numerous threads that he is untreated bipolar. He was fine for years, then he went off in a big way. Up until that point I thought he was the perfect man. Which is very characteristic of sociopaths. He waited until after our breakup to show me his really crazy behavior like trying to kill me and abusing our child. How was that helpful? We already had our son for years at that point.
Now that I think about it, I was already pregnant when he had his first crazy spell. I only took him back for the kids. Lot of good that did. They both will say we are exponentially better off without him.
And I would be fine without child support if he disappeared, and I have told him if he disappears, I won't go look for him. But if he is going to be a thorn in my side ALL the time, and he starts weekly drama, he is going to pay his court ordered support and I will stay on child support caseworkers to make that happen.
Then why are you harping about getting child support from him? And why are you talking about going on public assistance? Revenge? Because you "can"?
Nice example you're setting for your children. Just sayin'......
But she still let this guy have sex with her when there are lot of great guys who cant get a date to save their lives.
She thought he was normal at first also. She thought she had lucked out and finally found a good guy. He is good at making you think that. Again that is part of the narcissistic /sociopath thing. Great actors.
I didn't say all dads. I said deadbeat dads. The ones that work hard at hiding their income to avoid paying. That quit their job before the government catches up to avoid paying.
Yes, the courts should use logic, but our government is severely lacking in logic. The result is deadbeat dads are allowed to beat the system, and we the taxpayers end up on the hook for raising their children.
You know every non custodial parent who misses a few payment even when it is something beyond their control is labeled a deadbeat, right? As one poster talked about, it is exactly those that fall on unfortunate times, layoff, medical problems, etc. that the courts go after because they are easy targets while those who purposely dodge their payments skate because no one wants to put in the time and money to actually investigate their earnings. Like no one cares if your CS is based on a potential 100K/year when you actually only make 50K/year.
See, I dont get why the custodial parents income can be subsidized by the tax payer and no one blinks and eye. Why cant the custodial parent support their children? Why do they have to go on welfare if dad isnt paying $430/month? But if dad cant support his children and live he is automatically labeled a deadbeat and can go to jail. Both parents should be able to support their children independently, married or divorced.
The person at fault for the break up should shoulder most of the burden. Award amounts should be based on the circumstances of the break up. People should know that if they play house and have kids and they don't make it work the person most responsible for it will be the one most at fault (> 50%). why should the person in the minority fault have to shoulder all kinds of burden?
Divorce is not about divvying out punishment.
There is a reason we went away from fault divorce. People do know the burdens of divorce and what their responsibilities will be but that doesn't seem to make them take marriage anymore seriously or change/control their behavior. Marriage needs to be more difficult to get into not out of.
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.
