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.
BLAME SOCIALISM
All authority for non-custodial child support comes from your "voluntary" participation in national socialism (aka "Social Security").
Prior to that, no state imposed a duty to support upon a parent deprived of possession of his children.
“ Where mother is awarded the custody of her minor children on a decree of divorce from the father, he is thereby deprived of all rights to the services of the child, and consequently is freed from all liability to the mother for the care, support, and maintenance of the child.”
- - - Husband v. Husband , 67 Ind. 583, 33 Am.Rep. 107 (Ind.1879)
“ When a wife deserts her husband, and continues to live separate from him, and retains custody of a child, refusing to deliver him up to the father, who offers to support him, an action cannot be maintained against the father for the support and education of the child.”
- - - Fitler v. Fitler , 2 Phila. 372 (Pa.1857)
Maybe you missed this?
1910: The Uniform Desertion and Non-Support Act
The Uniform Desertion and Non-Support Act was approved by The National Conference of Commissions on Uniform State Laws in 1910. It was initially adopted by 24 jurisdictions and made it a crime to for a husband to willfully abandon or neglect to provide support for children under the age of 16.
Yet women aren't forced to pay anything. Not even $1/mo.
Your premise is wrong. You only see that a father gives to a child's mother money for his portion of a child's expenses. You aren't considering that the money is then going into a pool with the mother's money the total of which covers everything.
The cost to raise a child from 0-18 is an average of $233,610 not including college according to the US Department of Agriculture. Divided by 18 the cost is $12,978 a year or $1180 a month. Average child support payment in the US is $430 according to the census. Where do you think the other $750 comes from? A hint, the other parent. So in our average scenario, dad is paying $430 a month, mom is paying $750. Of course, nothing is average, I am just using it to illustrate where you are missing that the other parent is contributing too.
Another way to think of it. You give your buddy $5 to pay for a pizza you are going to share. Buddy orders a $10 pizza and you both eat. Just because you paid your buddy for half of the pizza doesn't mean he didn't pay something too. He just didn't pay you because he was the one buying the pizza. Same goes with the custodial parent. Custodial parent is buying the food, clothes, shelter, school supplies, etc for the kid. Non-custodial chips in his or her part too, but that doesn't mean the other person isn't paying.
Now, there are special or bad situations of course. Dead beat moms, dead beat dads, custodial parents who spend money on drugs, etc. But all those things can get a person in trouble with the law or the courts. Some parents do illegal things. But the system itself is set up for the majority of parents out there who are honest and care about their kids.
Last edited by TMBGBlueCanary; 08-09-2019 at 10:47 AM..
Yet women aren't forced to pay anything. Not even $1/mo.
You keep saying this, but it isn't true.
The formula is that they take the income of both parents, figure out the percentage of each, and apply that percentage to the number the state has determined it costs to support a child. So, if that number is $1000 a month, to use round numbers, and the kids are living with the mother and the mother makes $60,000 a year and the father makes $40,000 a year, the father pays 40% of that $1000, or $400 a month. This doesn't mean the mother "doesn't pay anything"! She is responsible for the other $600.
Of course it can get more complicated if there was a lot of wealth involved, but basically, that's how it works.
The only way it works the way you so desperately want to believe it works is if the parents agreed to begin with that the mother stays home with the kids. The father wants out of the marriage, but for the past years he's been insisting that wifey stay home, well, then, he can't just up and change his mind.
Or he can, but adjustments have to be made. My friend's husband insisted she quit her job and be a full-time SAHM. When they got divorced, he had to pay alimony but only for four years in order to give her the opportunity to obtain training to make her more employable. The alimony ended after those four years, and the child support had to be adjusted.
If financial support for a child that approximates 25-40% of Dad's gross income is so important, why are those in authority perfectly ok with Mom providing 0 financial support to their child?
Technically, it's supposed to cut the way of the higher income period. I can't think of any man I personally know receiving child support. I know many men paying it.
Your premise is wrong. You only see that a father gives to a child's mother money for his portion of a child's expenses. You aren't considering that the money is then going into a pool with the mother's money the total of which covers everything.
The cost to raise a child from 0-18 is an average of $233,610 not including college according to the US Department of Agriculture. Divided by 18 the cost is $12,978 a year or $1180 a month. Average child support payment in the US is $430 according to the census. Where do you think the other $750 comes from? A hint, the other parent. So in our average scenario, dad is paying $430 a month, mom is paying $750. Of course, nothing is average, I am just using it to illustrate where you are missing that the other parent is contributing too.
Another way to think of it. You give your buddy $5 to pay for a pizza you are going to share. Buddy orders a $10 pizza and you both eat. Just because you paid your buddy for half of the pizza doesn't mean he didn't pay something too. He just didn't pay you because he was the one buying the pizza. Same goes with the custodial parent. Custodial parent is buying the food, clothes, shelter, school supplies, etc for the kid. Non-custodial chips in his or her part too, but that doesn't mean the other person isn't paying.
Now, there are special or bad situations of course. Dead beat moms, dead beat dads, custodial parents who spend money on drugs, etc. But all those things can get a person in trouble with the law or the courts. Some parents do illegal things. But the system itself is set up for the majority of parents out there who are honest and care about their kids.
Everything you wrote was fine until the bolded. When Dad doesn't pay (the full amount ordered by the court), the State takes his driver's license, then throws him in jail.
When Mom doesn't pay, there is no accountability whatsoever. In fact Mom can even quit her job, move to a trailer park, and contribute 0. So therefore, Mom isn't required to financially support her kids. Even worse is that the State will even give her welfare and bennies if she doesn't.
The formula is that they take the income of both parents, figure out the percentage of each, and apply that percentage to the number the state has determined it costs to support a child. So, if that number is $1000 a month, to use round numbers, and the kids are living with the mother and the mother makes $60,000 a year and the father makes $40,000 a year, the father pays 40% of that $1000, or $400 a month. This doesn't mean the mother "doesn't pay anything"! She is responsible for the other $600.
Of course it can get more complicated if there was a lot of wealth involved, but basically, that's how it works.
The only way it works the way you so desperately want to believe it works is if the parents agreed to begin with that the mother stays home with the kids. The father wants out of the marriage, but for the past years he's been insisting that wifey stay home, well, then, he can't just up and change his mind.
Or he can, but adjustments have to be made. My friend's husband insisted she quit her job and be a full-time SAHM. When they got divorced, he had to pay alimony but only for four years in order to give her the opportunity to obtain training to make her more employable. The alimony ended after those four years, and the child support had to be adjusted.
It doesn't matter whether Mom was a stay at home Mom during the marriage or not. She has full authority to do whatever she wants financially, including quitting her job, becoming underemployed, even spending 100% of the child support on herself. Whereas Dad goes to jail if he does any of those things.
For anyone that is wondering, yes I do understand that not all Mom's would take advantage of the system. Nevertheless, the fact remains that Mom is not required to financially support her children. She may do so voluntarily because it's the right thing to do, but that's not the same thing as being required to.
Everything you wrote was fine until the bolded. When Dad doesn't pay (the full amount ordered by the court), the State takes his driver's license, then throws him in jail.
When Mom doesn't pay, there is no accountability whatsoever. In fact Mom can even quit her job, move to a trailer park, and contribute 0. So therefore, Mom isn't required to financially support her kids. Even worse is that the State will even give her welfare and bennies if she doesn't.
Show me a law written that is gender specific. Everything I can find out there says "the parent paying support." If women aren't going to jail or losing their license due to lack of paying support it's because they are either paying or no one is turning them in (and I think it's the latter. I know of at least one women who is supposed to pay support and doesn't. He ex husband just doesn't report her).
Dad can also quit his job and get no pay and not have to pay support. Of course, you have to go back to court and file a motion to modify support. If someone doesn't bother to do that, I don't know what to say. I really don't know why someone wouldn't protect themselves like that.
From everything I've read due to this thread is true, I think a lot of men can fix their situations if they were just informed and followed procedures (reporting mothers who don't contribute, filing for modifications when their income changes, etc). I think far too often men in these situations don't put up a fight for their rights. I noticed that in my divorce support group ears ago, I notice that with my boyfriend (who is also divorced), and articles I've been reading about custody, child support, etc also seem to back that up. Complaining won't help, knowing your rights and action will.
One last thing to add. All of this is state specific. I am thinking about my state which is fairly progressive when it comes to these things. If there are problems with your state, it's up to you to fix them. I can't help you because your lawmakers don't care what I think or do. They care about their own constituants.
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.
