Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-07-2019, 04:54 PM
 
3,691 posts, read 1,334,824 times
Reputation: 2552

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by kell490 View Post
I have no sympathy for anyone who chooses to have a child then complains about paying for that child.
What if the woman claims she was taking birth control, the man took her to planned parenthood clinics regularly and paid for the prescriptions, and she ends up pregnant because she never took them?
What if they are married but the woman is having an affair? In the state of CA "presumptive paternity" assumes the child is his anyway.
What if they divorce and to spite the man and deny any role of the man in the childs life the mother moves thousands of miles away?
What if the woman is defrauding welfare by not declaring shes living with a man who supports her?

In these situations is paying child support fair?
All the above apply in my case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-07-2019, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Texas
44,257 posts, read 64,072,561 times
Reputation: 73913
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic View Post
The question is simple:

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?
What % is the dad living with the kid, feeding them, driving them around, taking them to sports/appointments/parties/playdates, etc?

Btw, I know 2 women who have custody of their kids who are paying their spouses thousands a month in alimony bc the women have the good job. AND have to take care of the kids nearly full time, too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2019, 05:36 PM
 
Location: Boulder, CO
2,066 posts, read 891,818 times
Reputation: 3489
I have four kids, wife left with them and moved in with her boyfriend. They were 5, 6, 7, and 9 ish at the time (about 10 years ago). She never started working when my youngest started kindergarten, her boyfriend couldn't even pay his own bills. During the 10 years since she left, the courts only imputed her at minimum wage, so I was forced to pay just under four thousand a month (dropped to just under three thousand when they moved to a lower COL and more dad-friendly state two years ago). I think she works part time now at minimum wage.


So she got to sit at home and not work for years while about 35% of my salary went to support her lifestyle. Wasn't allowed to ask how she could afford her phone, food, hygiene products, doctor's visits, her share of the rent, utilities, cable … gym membership, hair, nails, tanning salon … with no income.


Of course I pay every month, on time, but OP I will add a comment to your original post - why doesn't the mother have to provide accountability for the disbursement of the child support funds ? I'd be a lot less bitter if I was provided a breakdown of "where all the money went". Since I am not permitted to ask for this, I continue to pay her and her now husband's entire rent, all the utilities and food and stuff, and hope that some of it is for my kids. And she still expects me to pay 100% of their medical, dental, vision, and braces, and things they need like winter coats, musical instruments for band, yearbooks …


Of course I provide them with what they need. I'm blessed to have a job that provides about average coverage plans (high deductible, high cap, high co-pay). It's still a stretch until I hit that damned deductible (by March/April).


Ah well, my eldest is now 18, and my next turns 18 in exactly a year. Four more years and I'll be done.


And I did loan her $4K so they could move to a nicer rental house (since security deposit would be held up a month) to move and paint and because her new husband needed surgery and would need to be off work a month. Probably won't get it back anytime soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2019, 05:55 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,737 posts, read 25,902,439 times
Reputation: 33814
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
I recently got involved with child support services. I was told specifically their job was to collect CS and true technically they dont represent me personally. Their lawyers take care of all the legalities, writing up the complaint, serving the summons, filing the paperwork, pleading the case. At no cost to me. I am not on welfare. I can hire my own attorney but I dont have to as CS will prosecute for CS at no cost to me in order for me to get CS as opposed to paying 2500 for an attorney.
You may not of heard of it but I am going thru it right now.
You're lucky because several years ago when I needed help collecting support from my ex they did everything they could to avoid helping me. They told me that their priority was AFDC cases . When they finally put the case into their system it didn't do much good because every time I would find out a new address or employer for him they wouldn't even pursue it.

But as far as I know their job is collection and for non welfare recipients they don't help you get a support order to they?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2019, 06:48 PM
 
Location: SE Asia
16,237 posts, read 5,823,430 times
Reputation: 9117
Quote:
Originally Posted by kell490 View Post
I have no sympathy for anyone who chooses to have a child then complains about paying for that child.
Most of us dont and aren't complaining about paying for the child. We are questioning the system that for many has been extremely lopsided. I said it before and I will again. The system creates dead beat dads. They base the support on gross income , meaning before taxes. That isn't realistic nor fair. There are no checks in place to ensure the support is used for the children. That is what many of us complain about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2019, 08:11 PM
 
Location: Arizona
12,852 posts, read 7,043,247 times
Reputation: 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by phinneas j. whoopee View Post
What if the woman claims she was taking birth control, the man took her to planned parenthood clinics regularly and paid for the prescriptions, and she ends up pregnant because she never took them?
What if they are married but the woman is having an affair? In the state of CA "presumptive paternity" assumes the child is his anyway.
What if they divorce and to spite the man and deny any role of the man in the childs life the mother moves thousands of miles away?
What if the woman is defrauding welfare by not declaring shes living with a man who supports her?

In these situations is paying child support fair?
All the above apply in my case.

My point is No one forced you to have sex with her? If you want to be 100% sure never have kids don't have intercourse with a woman, or get a vasectomy most insurance pays for it still cost no more then $1000. Well worth the money to make sure you never have any problems with child support.

I don't mean this in a way that I'm against people having children. Men need to think about what they are risking. Our society has made having sex a recreation activity and men need to think more about what the risking this is why in the last 50 years we see divorce sky rocket, and single mothers raising kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2019, 02:12 AM
 
1,485 posts, read 946,938 times
Reputation: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger View Post
Sorry, I have no sympathy for men who brought children into this world and are trying to avoid paying their share. It doesn't matter what the woman is paying, a man looks out for his children if he wants to call himself a man.
Umm... Just a little biology lesson here. Technically it's the female the brings the child into the world.

Also, if it takes 2 to "tango". The financial responsibility should be shared 50-50.
But in reality it's the father who is demonized while the mother drags him into court trying to wring him dry financially so that she can live more comfortable than the child.

Yes, it has to be said, "child" support is often mother support or welfare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2019, 02:33 AM
 
4,408 posts, read 3,421,896 times
Reputation: 14173
These questions (complaints) come up a lot, yet I never see anyone asking what’s fair to the child. It must suck to have to move stuff between residences every week, leave neighborhood friends for the weekend, etc etc. through no fault of their own. Maybe the courts should force the parents to switch houses instead of the kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2019, 05:37 AM
 
Location: Finland
6,423 posts, read 7,206,383 times
Reputation: 10435
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
That doesn't make much sense. If the non-custodial parent can't pay enough child support, then the custodial parent would apply for welfare benefits. CPS doesn't take kids away from their parents because the parents are poor.
Applying for benefits they are entitled to is part of supporting them but I was under the impression that in the US there is a 5 year limit for welfare, isn't there? So eventually the mum will have to provide somehow else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2019, 05:45 AM
 
14,294 posts, read 13,125,843 times
Reputation: 17797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rkstar71 View Post
Umm... Just a little biology lesson here. Technically it's the female the brings the child into the world.

Also, if it takes 2 to "tango". The financial responsibility should be shared 50-50.
But in reality it's the father who is demonized while the mother drags him into court trying to wring him dry financially so that she can live more comfortable than the child.

Yes, it has to be said, "child" support is often mother support or welfare.
This is where the "personal responsibility" of the conservative crowd is tossed out the window. They are perfectly happy to **** a woman on welfare. But when a child results, hells no.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top