Runnin from Custodial Parent

"Gini" wrote in message
news:ezQOi.3394$ai2.353@trndny05...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Gini" wrote in message
news:q0QOi.3391$ai2.3158@trndny05...

wrote
..................................

Here it is bitch. It's not like you can understand it.
==
Ummm. you forgot a couple things, like whe

The law clearly states that if you pay money directly to the CP it
is
considered a gift, unless you were married, then the check memo must
state CHILD SUPPORT.

and, the jurisdiction. Heh, you just pasted about 11kb useless text.
Does this mean you like me now?

If you throw enough crap up against a wall some of it is bound to stick.

The only problem is in all of that crap there was nothing about payments,
accounting, or disbursements of CS payments. And nothing detailing how
checks are to be made out or what needs to go on the memo line. And
there was nothing about how some payments can be classified as gifts or
the previous marital status of obligors.
==
You noticed that, too? :-)

I think she figured if she posted enough stuff, some of it would certainly
be on topic--or seem to be, anyway. chuckle

"DB" wrote in message
t...

"teachrmama" wrote in

As I have stated, all this and more HAS been done. You are far too
idealistic in this area. Truly.


Teach, she doesn't want to hear the truth because it doesn't fit her
agenda!

Seems so. Sad, really. She could learn a lot if she would just learn to
listen.

"child support owed by deadbeats" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Oct 9, 12:02 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
"child support owed by deadbeats" wrote in
glegroups.com...

On Oct 8, 9:33 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
"child support owed by deadbeats" wrote in
oglegroups.com...

snip for length







I gave options of what to do if one institution fails. I am sorry
you
are too much of a moron to comprehend what was written.

Take a step back, and please don't throw the word moron around so
easily.
Several of the posters you are communicating with are no longer even
in
the
child support system. Their children are grown and gone from
home--and
they
did everything you suggested and more during the decades they were
caught
up
in the system--to no avail. It sounds good on paper--but it does not
work
in reality because of how the family court system is set up. You
sound
very
idealistic right now. It would be nice if things really worked that
way--but they don't.

If both of the parents would communicate with each other BEFORE
getting the courts involved, there would be less need for the CSEA,
and judges to be involved. I notice a lot of bad mouthing on BOTH
sides going on. Wouldn't it be easier for both parties to get together
and work something out?

Sure it would. But why would the person most likely to benefit from
involving the courts (usually the woman) settle for less than all she
could
get? Why work it out if you can get more from not working it out?

I don't want them to raise the amount, in fact, I don't even want his
money. I know in the end, he will be on his death bed and have a
lifetime of regrets. I think it has more to do with revenge and hurt
feelings rather than what is important, which is the child.

It is nice that you feel that way. But there are far too many who do not
feel that way at all.

I am so

glad that my mom and dad taught me the value of a days worth of work,
because from what I have been reading, a lot of the NCP are mad
because the CP won't work and do thier share.

I could introduce you to a few--and they are adamant that they should be
supported by the NCP because, after all, they have the arduous task of
raising the child.

I'm not saying that all of the CP are in it for revenge, but I can see
why a lot of these NCP are feeling that they are getting ripped off.
If everyone would put the child above all, where would they all stand?

Those are the cases you do not see in court. It only takes one to create
a
disagreement. And if you will get more for disagreeing, why agree?

I'm not trying to say I'm better than the next person, but a parent
needs to work in order to show thier children how to make a living.
How will my son know how to be a man, and take responsibility if I
don't teach him?

Didn't you say you are married? Isn't his stepfather helping with that
task?

If the CP doesn't work, then child support should not be granted to
them. If the CP does hold down a job, and is paying thier share of the
childs financial responsibility, then the NCP should pay the child
support.

If the CP doesn't work, the child should go to the NCP.



- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My husband does help out, but I want to be involved in all aspects of
my son's life. I am his mother, he lived under my heart for 43 weeks.
I handle the study time, homework time, fun time, and all of the
discipline. I also work full time (70 hrs a week), and install cable
on my day off on Saturday morning's. When it comes to my son I am the
alpha dog, not my husband. We do thing a certain way in the household.
We both work, and buy groceries. I do not allow my husband to pay
child care for my son, or cloths. When we go out to a resturant, and
he is treating that is O.K, but I'm not going to slack off just
because there are two incomes now. I did it all on my ownbefore he
came along, and should he leave, I'll still be down to do it all on my
own, because I take care of my blood, of my kin.
I have pride in my child, and should I have to work my fingers to the
bone, you best know my son will be taken care of. The people who make
the comments saying that women will never be equal to men, well I must
say, speaking for myself, I have surpassed any man that thinks he can
do what I do. I don't need to be equal, I just need to be and do me.

That's all good. Sound like you are adamant about your son having the best.
But, as I'm sure you know, not all custodial parents are like you. And you
simply cannot deny the bad experiences many here on the group have been
through just because you would never act that way.

"teachrmama" wrote in

I have pride in my child, and should I have to work my fingers to the
bone, you best know my son will be taken care of. The people who make
the comments saying that women will never be equal to men, well I must
say, speaking for myself, I have surpassed any man that thinks he can
do what I do. I don't need to be equal, I just need to be and do me.

That's all good. Sound like you are adamant about your son having the
best. But, as I'm sure you know, not all custodial parents are like you.
And you simply cannot deny the bad experiences many here on the group have
been through just because you would never act that way.


It's like a badge of honor to be a single mom these days and they all want
recognition and a pat on the back for what used to be the norm for most
immigrants facing hard times.


My grandmother would have laughed at her!

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
snip follow thread

No, I don't, Chris.

Then you support forced parenthood. When a pregnant woman wants to
become
a
parent, but the man does not, only ONE can prevail. The side that you
take
determines which side gets forced. It's that simple.

Don't be an ass, Chris.

Ok.

You have been saying all along that a "man" can
just walk away after providing sperm because the result has nothing to
do
with him--

NEVER have I made any such claim.

it's what the woman does with the sperm creates the child. Now
you are up on your high horse, declaring that a woman who doesn't abort
a
child unwanted by the "father" is forcing parenthood on him.

Because it is true. Are you having difficulty with my use of the term
"parenthood" or "force"?

I have no difficulty understanding what you are saying--I simply do not
comprehend why you think you have the right to make such a demand.

Based upon YOUR claim, it simply follows that such right exists. Where is
the hangup in my explanation? Is my conclusion false because of a false
premise(s) or is my syllogism faulty (thus not guaranteeing the conclusion)?

Plainly put, the right of one to stop another from infringing on their
rights TRUMPS the offending right.

Perhaps,
in your next incarnation, you will be a woman who is walked out on by a
man
because you become pregnant and refuse to abort on demand. It would
certainly serve you right! (And, hopefully, the system will have changed
to
a more balanced, fair system by them, so you won't get CS)

And you accuse ME of being silly.

"child support owed by deadbeats" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 8, 1:41 pm, "Bob Whiteside" wrote:
"child support owed by deadbeats" wrote in
glegroups.com...

If both of the parents would communicate with each other BEFORE

getting the courts involved, there would be less need for the CSEA,
and judges to be involved. I notice a lot of bad mouthing on BOTH
sides going on. Wouldn't it be easier for both parties to get together
and work something out?

How about court sanctioned mandatory mediation? The parties sit down
and
work everything out. Then the parties go to a hearing to get the
agreement
approved by the court. Guess what - If one of the parties (read the
mom)
changes her mind about one of the issues the entire agreement becomes
null
and void. IOW - A bilatereral agreement can be derailed by a unilateral
decisions at the last minute.

How will my son know how to be a man, and take responsibility if I
don't teach him?

A mother can never teach her child how to be a man. Mothers do not know
how
to teach a male child how to think like a man, act like a man, compete
like
a man, take risks like a man, show strength like a man, etc

That's where you are wrong. I am mom and dad, and my son will have all
the life lessons, and advice I can give him. I know there are some
things only a father figure can teach, but my husband does a pretty
good job, but don't down play the mothers roles just because you have
been wrong. Don't ever think that I as a mother can not teach my son
to think, act, compete, take risks, or compete like a GOOD man. That's
just your opinion, not a fact. It take more than testicles to raise a
boy into a man. As far as the other things go, I know about competing
(I played softball and field hockey in high school), and about taking
risks (I am an operations specialist in a mans line of business), and
you can tell me about strength when you are abe to endure the pain of
giving birth. Don't doubt that my son will be a good man when he is on
age.

I'm sure he will be when he becomes a "family" court judge. LOL

Sometimes all you need to do to raise a child into a good person is to
set an excellent example. Children follow the example set for them,
and I don't think that that is determined by the gender of the person
setting it. If you have a parent that is up to no good, does drugs,
lazes about, well; the child that sees this is more likely to mimic
that behavior.

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
snip follow thread

No, I don't, Chris.

Then you support forced parenthood. When a pregnant woman wants to
become
a
parent, but the man does not, only ONE can prevail. The side that
you
take
determines which side gets forced. It's that simple.

Don't be an ass, Chris.

Ok.

You have been saying all along that a "man" can
just walk away after providing sperm because the result has nothing to
do
with him--

NEVER have I made any such claim.

it's what the woman does with the sperm creates the child. Now
you are up on your high horse, declaring that a woman who doesn't
abort
a
child unwanted by the "father" is forcing parenthood on him.

Because it is true. Are you having difficulty with my use of the term
"parenthood" or "force"?

I have no difficulty understanding what you are saying--I simply do not
comprehend why you think you have the right to make such a demand.

Based upon YOUR claim, it simply follows that such right exists. Where is
the hangup in my explanation? Is my conclusion false because of a false
premise(s) or is my syllogism faulty (thus not guaranteeing the
conclusion)?

Plainly put, the right of one to stop another from infringing on their
rights TRUMPS the offending right.

You still have not explained how a person who can simply sign away any
rights to be a parent to a child is being forced to be a parent..

wrote:
On Oct 5, 12:24 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
child support owed by deadbeats wrote:





On Oct 2, 12:45 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
wrote:
"Chris" wrote:
wrote in message
On Sep 26, 6:43 pm, "DB" wrote:
"Very Determined!" wrote in
Which some one cross posted to talk.abortion. Any SOB that father a
child and refuses to support that child, should be fixed like a stray
dog.
That is an excellent idea!

Lets extend that to woman that can't afford to feed their own kids!

It wouldn't need to be extended to women, once the deadbeat *******s
are fixed, they can't make anymore children to abandon financially,
and there wouldn't be any women that couldn't support their kids.

Translation: So long as the lazy woman is extorting free cash from the
biological father of her children, SHE is supporting them.

It's thinking like this that is perpetuating generational welfare.

I don't know why you insist that women don't hold jobs.

Where did he say that?

I've worked
since I was 14 years old. People that don't pay child support are
lazy.

Do YOU pay child support? Or are you lazy?

You argue that only women file for child support,

Where did he say that?

and want child
support, but that is not true.

But it is true that most people who get "child" support are women.

It is true that the majority of custodial parents are the mothers, but
when you rant and rave about women trying to get free money, and need
to support the children all by themselves, you need to mention that
the same should go for the men who file child support.

You can't read very well since I didn't write anything like that.

It seems you
are fine when the man is on the other end of the check, but hate on
the female for getting child support.

It seems like you're an idiot.

Since I work, and take care of my child, I do not pay child support, I
just pay to support my child.

Don't care.

I do a good job of it too because I work
70 hours a week-so I am still going to have to say that the people
that do not pay thier child support are lazy.

You don't pay support for my children so you must be lazy too.

If they have an order of
child support against them it's because the kid(s) don't live with
them. There is no reason they can't work a job or two to get it done.

There's no reason that they should have to.

I don't share D.N.A with your children.

1) So what?
2) Yes, you do.

--
Ray Fischer

child support owed by deadbeats wrote:
On Oct 5, 12:37 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
child support owed by deadbeats wrote:

"Chris" wrote:
Classic mentality of the pro-child support group.......

I have one child, and deadbeat has a trotal of 4. He has had a woman
pregnant every year since 2004.

Sounds like there are four really stupid women.

I tell the truth, and you call me a
liar! It's not a story, it's a fact! Are you so far in your own ass
that you can't believe a man is capable of making more that one child?

You respond to things people don't write.

All of you deadbeats

As opposed to all of you whores?

You called me a liar, regardless of how you played the words!

Because you are a liar. You accused me of beaing a deadbeat.

Yolu
refered to my situation as a "story"! Call me a whore if it makes you
sleep better.

What a pathetic and whiny hypocrite you are.

--
Ray Fischer

On Oct 9, 9:11 pm, "Chris" wrote:
"child support owed by deadbeats" wrote in ooglegroups.com...





On Oct 9, 2:48 am, "Chris" wrote:
"teachrmama" wrote in message

...

"child support owed by deadbeats" wrote in
message
ups.com...
On Oct 8, 9:33 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
"child support owed by deadbeats" wrote in
oglegroups.com...

snip for length

I gave options of what to do if one institution fails. I am sorry
you
are too much of a moron to comprehend what was written.

Take a step back, and please don't throw the word moron around so
easily.
Several of the posters you are communicating with are no longer
even in
the
child support system. Their children are grown and gone from
home--and
they
did everything you suggested and more during the decades they were
caught
up
in the system--to no avail. It sounds good on paper--but it does
not
work
in reality because of how the family court system is set up. You
sound
very
idealistic right now. It would be nice if things really worked
that
way--but they don't.

If both of the parents would communicate with each other BEFORE
getting the courts involved, there would be less need for the CSEA,
and judges to be involved. I notice a lot of bad mouthing on BOTH
sides going on. Wouldn't it be easier for both parties to get
together
and work something out?

Sure it would. But why would the person most likely to benefit from
involving the courts (usually the woman) settle for less than all she
could
get? Why work it out if you can get more from not working it out?

I don't want them to raise the amount, in fact, I don't even want
his
money. I know in the end, he will be on his death bed and have a
lifetime of regrets. I think it has more to do with revenge and hurt
feelings rather than what is important, which is the child.

It is nice that you feel that way. But there are far too many who do
not
feel that way at all.

I am so
glad that my mom and dad taught me the value of a days worth of
work,
because from what I have been reading, a lot of the NCP are mad
because the CP won't work and do thier share.

I could introduce you to a few--and they are adamant that they should
be
supported by the NCP because, after all, they have the arduous task of
raising the child.

I'm not saying that all of the CP are in it for revenge, but I can
see
why a lot of these NCP are feeling that they are getting ripped off.
If everyone would put the child above all, where would they all
stand?

Those are the cases you do not see in court. It only takes one to
create
a
disagreement. And if you will get more for disagreeing, why agree?

I'm not trying to say I'm better than the next person, but aparent
needs to work in order to show thier children how to make a living.
How will my son know how to be a man, and take responsibility if I
don't teach him?

Didn't you say you are married? Isn't his stepfather helping with
that
task?

If the CP doesn't work, then child support should not be granted to
them. If the CP does hold down a job, and is paying thier share of
the
childs financial responsibility, then the NCP should pay the child
support.

If the CP doesn't work, the child should go to the NCP.

Whether the CP works or not is irrelevant. The child should EQUALLY be
with
the CP (code acronym for "mother) and the NCP (code acronym for
"father).
But can't have that, because then it would be
................................. FAIR.

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
My brother is a CP, so do not say CP is mother, that is not correct.
His kids mom took him for child support, but he was able to prove he
was a far more fit arent in thier case. Are you saying that the CP is
always a woman, because that is a woman-hater comment.

I taught my dog how to meow. But generally speaking, dogs bark.



If these women are so bad as you all say, why can't it be proven in
the courts?

It not only is proven in the courts, it's also proven everywhere. You do
know that not recognizing proof makes it no less so, right?



- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What you SAY and what is are two different things. I see no proof that
these women don't take care of the children, but I do see proof of
those on here that do not want to take care of the children.