wrote in message
ups.com...
John's a drunk. He doesn't just drink too much. Anyone who shows up to
court stinking of booze is a drunk. His ex-wife was correct in limiting
his parental involvement. Her mistake was getting with him in the first
place. I don't care how much money he was bringing in.

While I agree that John is an alcoholic, I don't agree that his STBX was in
the wrong for getting with him in the first place. He didn't drink as much
17 years ago. His drinking became a problem in the past couple years.

I agree with supervised visits for drunks and addicts. What's worse:
supervised visits with his kids or killing his kids (or someone else's)
'cause he was out drinking??

That's assuming that he drinks when he's with his kids, which he does not.
I think erring on the side of caution is a good thing and do agree with his
supervised visits.

If he's been paying his ex $2900/mth for 7 months, why is he so much in
arrears? That's over $20K in CS.

Because he has not paid it directly to the Friend of the Court. It was paid
directly to his STBX. I found out yesterday that he is approx $13,000 in
arrears, because he started sending his checks to the FOC, rather than
direct to the ex. In Michigan, if you don't pay your cs through the FOC, it
can and most likely will be considered a gift, not cs and you are
automatically in arrears.

P