A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Flunking for profit



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old July 3rd 07, 07:57 PM posted to alt.child-support
Werebat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Flunking for profit



Bob Whiteside wrote:

"Werebat" wrote in message
...


Bob Whiteside wrote:

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
news:rJWdnckkzbERFxzbnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@giganews .com...


"teachrmama" wrote in message
...


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...


"teachrmama" wrote in message
...


"Chris" wrote in message
. ..


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
news:UuSdnZKK25qy8R3bnZ2dnUVZ_vGinZ2d@gig anews.com...


"whatamess" wrote in message
news:1182808127.469299.48100@q75g2000hsh .googlegroups.com...


On Jun 25, 12:29 pm, John Meyer

wrote:


whatamess wrote:


On Jun 25, 9:01 am, John Meyer

wrote:


Chris wrote:


Just curious:
How many times can a mother encourage her children to

flunk


in


school in


order to prolong the free income from "child support"?

I don't know, but one thing's for certain, if you can get
actual

proof


that she's doing this, I'd be down there at the court

filing


for

a


change of custody because of child abuse.

Even if you get proof, I can assure you the courts will say

that


"it's


in the best
interest of the child" to continue to support him to ensure
he

gets


at


least
a high school education...

And also, there's a fine line between encouraging them to

fail,


and


being
so neglectful that they continue to fail...sadly, the

courts


will

see


a HUGE
line between these two as well...of course, all in the best
interest
of the
child.

You know what, you may be right. The courts may say all of
this
stuff
even if it is shown that the mother is passed out drunk when
the

kids


get off school and that they really shouldn't be yanked from

their


mother during the tender years. But you know what that is

preferable


to? It is preferable to the courts not having to say that

because


you
didn't bring it forward and the public being able to write

this


off
as
one-sided, typical selfish behavior.
So bring it forward, gather all the evidence, and if the

courts


rule


that way, post it all online along with their ruling. If you
don't

know


how to post up recordings of video calls I'll help and I'm

sure


there


are other people on this list who have the technical knowhow

to


do


so.
If you can't scan it, send it on to one of us and we'll do

it.


Scan


it


all, publish it all, and post it all, because if I am going

to


curse


the


darkness I'd like to leave an objective record that others

can


see.

So


Chris, if you have the records, post them on up and let the

world


decide.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -

I do agree with you John, I was simply stating what the courts

will


probably do...

I've always wondered how the courts would treat a child dropping
out
of

high


school and then enrolling in a community college program to get a

GED.


Does


anyone have any experience with that scenario and how it relates

to


the
CS
high school/age limits laws?

My guess is that the GED would qualify as completion of high

school.


Better
question is: What happens if the flunky drops out of high school

and


NEVER


gets a GED?

I can't say what the language is in every child support order, but

in


my


husband's it is "age 19 or completion of high school, whichever

comes


first."

If the order was modified after October 1997 there is a good chance
that
language has been modified to include the provisions of ORS 107.108,

the


adult child attending school law extending CS to age 21.

The order was issued in 2001

Then it should contain the post-1997 child attending school enforcement
language. What I meant to type was the idea an Oregon order entered or
modified after October 1997 should include the "current enforcement
language" provisions of ORS 107.108. Extending CS to age 21 has been a
function of law in Oregon since 1973.

A quick way to check this out is to look at the "obligation limit" or
other
language on the money judgment about support duration.

But she would have to be going to school, right? We expect her to

graduate


this next year, but she will probably opt to not attend college. So if

she


chooses not to attend any sort of post high school education, then


support

ends at 19, as per the order, right? That would be in 10 months,

including


the month of her birthday.


That's right on all accounts. But just in case, here is the


Administrative

Rule regarding post-secondary education support. This law changes a lot
because of the disputes between judges, DOJ, and CS Administration over
legislative intent and what the words in the law mean. A 2006 change


allows

CS to terminate and then be re-started prior to age 21 if the adult


child

decides later to attend school.


If my parents are married, and I'm 18, and they refuse to help me with
college, can I somehow get a court to force them to divorce so that I
can get money for school?



You already know the answer to that question. But there is a solution to
your scenario. If parents refuse to help a child under age 25 with college
support, the student has more federal low interest student loan options to
cover the parent's portion of the Expected Family Contribution and to
replace any need for a Parent Loan.


That's no solution! That's a LOAN, and I have to pay back a LOAN. I
want the freebie money! I want what's coming to me! This is
discrimination!


And, if the order is done in the "best interests of the child", and I'm
over 18, does that mean that 20 year olds are legally children in Oregon?



The legal term for these students is an Adult Child Attending School. The
Oregon Supreme Court says CS is for the care and maintenance of minor
children. Support for an adult child attending school is to advance the
state's interest in having an educated populace and helping children of
divorce who are more vulnerable because their parents cannot agree on any
child rearing issues. The court assumes married parents can agree on all
child rearing issues so those students are not vulnerable.


An "adult child" eh? What's next, an "innocent criminal"?

- Ron ^*^

  #42  
Old July 3rd 07, 10:09 PM posted to alt.child-support
Bob Whiteside
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 981
Default Flunking for profit


"Werebat" wrote in message
...


Bob Whiteside wrote:

"Werebat" wrote in message
...


Bob Whiteside wrote:

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
news:rJWdnckkzbERFxzbnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@giganew s.com...


"teachrmama" wrote in message
...


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...


"teachrmama" wrote in message
...


"Chris" wrote in message
...


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
news:UuSdnZKK25qy8R3bnZ2dnUVZ_vGinZ2d@gi ganews.com...


"whatamess" wrote in message
news:1182808127.469299.48100@q75g2000hs h.googlegroups.com...


On Jun 25, 12:29 pm, John Meyer

wrote:


whatamess wrote:


On Jun 25, 9:01 am, John Meyer

wrote:


Chris wrote:


Just curious:
How many times can a mother encourage her children to

flunk


in


school in


order to prolong the free income from "child support"?

I don't know, but one thing's for certain, if you can get
actual

proof


that she's doing this, I'd be down there at the court

filing


for

a


change of custody because of child abuse.

Even if you get proof, I can assure you the courts will say

that


"it's


in the best
interest of the child" to continue to support him to ensure
he

gets


at


least
a high school education...

And also, there's a fine line between encouraging them to

fail,


and


being
so neglectful that they continue to fail...sadly, the

courts


will

see


a HUGE
line between these two as well...of course, all in the best
interest
of the
child.

You know what, you may be right. The courts may say all of
this
stuff
even if it is shown that the mother is passed out drunk when
the

kids


get off school and that they really shouldn't be yanked from

their


mother during the tender years. But you know what that is

preferable


to? It is preferable to the courts not having to say that

because


you
didn't bring it forward and the public being able to write

this


off
as
one-sided, typical selfish behavior.
So bring it forward, gather all the evidence, and if the

courts


rule


that way, post it all online along with their ruling. If you
don't

know


how to post up recordings of video calls I'll help and I'm

sure


there


are other people on this list who have the technical knowhow

to


do


so.
If you can't scan it, send it on to one of us and we'll do

it.


Scan


it


all, publish it all, and post it all, because if I am going

to


curse


the


darkness I'd like to leave an objective record that others

can


see.

So


Chris, if you have the records, post them on up and let the

world


decide.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -

I do agree with you John, I was simply stating what the courts

will


probably do...

I've always wondered how the courts would treat a child dropping
out
of

high


school and then enrolling in a community college program to get a

GED.


Does


anyone have any experience with that scenario and how it relates

to


the
CS
high school/age limits laws?

My guess is that the GED would qualify as completion of high

school.


Better
question is: What happens if the flunky drops out of high school

and


NEVER


gets a GED?

I can't say what the language is in every child support order, but

in


my


husband's it is "age 19 or completion of high school, whichever

comes


first."

If the order was modified after October 1997 there is a good chance
that
language has been modified to include the provisions of ORS
107.108,

the


adult child attending school law extending CS to age 21.

The order was issued in 2001

Then it should contain the post-1997 child attending school
enforcement
language. What I meant to type was the idea an Oregon order entered
or
modified after October 1997 should include the "current enforcement
language" provisions of ORS 107.108. Extending CS to age 21 has been
a
function of law in Oregon since 1973.

A quick way to check this out is to look at the "obligation limit" or
other
language on the money judgment about support duration.

But she would have to be going to school, right? We expect her to

graduate


this next year, but she will probably opt to not attend college. So if

she


chooses not to attend any sort of post high school education, then


support

ends at 19, as per the order, right? That would be in 10 months,

including


the month of her birthday.


That's right on all accounts. But just in case, here is the


Administrative

Rule regarding post-secondary education support. This law changes a lot
because of the disputes between judges, DOJ, and CS Administration over
legislative intent and what the words in the law mean. A 2006 change


allows

CS to terminate and then be re-started prior to age 21 if the adult


child

decides later to attend school.

If my parents are married, and I'm 18, and they refuse to help me with
college, can I somehow get a court to force them to divorce so that I
can get money for school?



You already know the answer to that question. But there is a solution to
your scenario. If parents refuse to help a child under age 25 with
college
support, the student has more federal low interest student loan options
to
cover the parent's portion of the Expected Family Contribution and to
replace any need for a Parent Loan.


That's no solution! That's a LOAN, and I have to pay back a LOAN. I want
the freebie money! I want what's coming to me! This is discrimination!


Actually, and this is counter-intuitive, the discrimination is against the
adult child getting the CS. The CS is treated as an income add-on which
drives up the Expected Family Contribution for the student's out-of-pocket
costs not covered by student loans. And as the income for the child and
parent combined including CS exceeds the state scale levels, the child loses
the ability to be eligible for state opportunity grants in aid which also
drives up the out-of-pocket costs for the child attending school. And to
make it even worse, the child's parent gets the Education Tax Credits even
if they pay zero dollars toward the child's tuition.

So on the surface, while it looks like there is freebie money, the opposite
is true. A college education for a child of divorce is more than for a
child in an intact family.

  #43  
Old July 4th 07, 07:14 PM posted to alt.child-support
Bob Whiteside
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 981
Default Flunking for profit


"Chris" wrote in message
...


When the federal government enforces state laws,


Got an example of a state law enforced by the federal government?


When the U.S. Treasury Department gives one's tax return money to a state,
I
would say that is an example of a state law enforced by the federal
government; wouldn't you?


It's the other way around. That is an example of the state using 42 U.S.C.
664, Collection of Past Due Support From Federal Tax Refunds.



and such laws vary from
state to state,


Got an example of where state CS law varies from the federal standards
for
CS operations?


No; but I have an example of where CS law varies from state to state.


I agree. But my point is federal law lays out the minimum standards for
child support operations. States can establish CS law any way they desire,
but their laws have to meet the federal minimum standards. My example about
paternity establishments below is a good example. Some state set their
paternity law at the federal minimum standard. Others go beyond the federal
standard, but they always meet the minimum requirements.



then they are not the same.

While the details in the state laws may vary, they are based on minimum
standards set by the federal government. Here's an example I posted the
other day - Federal law says the statute of limitations on paternity
establishments can be no fewer than 18 years. Some states adopt the 18
years as their standard. Other states set higher age limits. Still
other
states create paternity law with no age limitation.





  #44  
Old July 4th 07, 07:31 PM posted to alt.child-support
Bob Whiteside
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 981
Default Flunking for profit


"Chris" wrote in message
...


If my parents are married, and I'm 18, and they refuse to help me with
college, can I somehow get a court to force them to divorce so that I
can get money for school?


You already know the answer to that question. But there is a solution to
your scenario. If parents refuse to help a child under age 25 with

college
support, the student has more federal low interest student loan options
to
cover the parent's portion of the Expected Family Contribution and to
replace any need for a Parent Loan.


And, if the order is done in the "best interests of the child", and I'm
over 18, does that mean that 20 year olds are legally children in

Oregon?

The legal term for these students is an Adult Child Attending School.


Thus, the answer to the question is "yes".


The answer is "No." The age of majority is 18 in Oregon for everyone. Once
a child reaches 18 they are considered an adult under the law whether their
parents are divorced, separated, or never married. They become a party to
the support order, have legal rights and responsibilities, get the support
paid directly to them, and have the option to get a support order against
both parents. Also their tax law status as an exemption changes at age 18.
They are no longer automatically a dependent for the primary care parent
because they are no longer a minor child under the care of a custodial
parent.


The
Oregon Supreme Court says CS is for the care and maintenance of minor
children. Support for an adult child attending school is to advance the
state's interest in having an educated populace and helping children of
divorce who are more vulnerable because their parents cannot agree on any
child rearing issues. The court assumes married parents can agree on
all
child rearing issues so those students are not vulnerable.





  #45  
Old July 6th 07, 05:34 AM posted to alt.child-support
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Flunking for profit


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


If my parents are married, and I'm 18, and they refuse to help me

with
college, can I somehow get a court to force them to divorce so that I
can get money for school?

You already know the answer to that question. But there is a solution

to
your scenario. If parents refuse to help a child under age 25 with

college
support, the student has more federal low interest student loan options
to
cover the parent's portion of the Expected Family Contribution and to
replace any need for a Parent Loan.


And, if the order is done in the "best interests of the child", and

I'm
over 18, does that mean that 20 year olds are legally children in

Oregon?

The legal term for these students is an Adult Child Attending School.


Thus, the answer to the question is "yes".


The answer is "No." The age of majority is 18 in Oregon for everyone.


He didn't say "age of majority"; he said "legally children". The keyword
(subject) in your above legal term is "child" which makes the answer to his
question "yes".

Once
a child reaches 18 they are considered an adult under the law whether

their
parents are divorced, separated, or never married. They become a party to
the support order, have legal rights and responsibilities, get the support
paid directly to them, and have the option to get a support order against
both parents. Also their tax law status as an exemption changes at age

18.
They are no longer automatically a dependent for the primary care parent
because they are no longer a minor child under the care of a custodial
parent.


The
Oregon Supreme Court says CS is for the care and maintenance of minor
children. Support for an adult child attending school is to advance

the
state's interest in having an educated populace and helping children of
divorce who are more vulnerable because their parents cannot agree on

any
child rearing issues. The court assumes married parents can agree on
all
child rearing issues so those students are not vulnerable.







  #46  
Old July 6th 07, 07:14 AM posted to alt.child-support
Bob Whiteside
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 981
Default Flunking for profit


"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


If my parents are married, and I'm 18, and they refuse to help me

with
college, can I somehow get a court to force them to divorce so that
I
can get money for school?

You already know the answer to that question. But there is a solution

to
your scenario. If parents refuse to help a child under age 25 with
college
support, the student has more federal low interest student loan
options
to
cover the parent's portion of the Expected Family Contribution and to
replace any need for a Parent Loan.


And, if the order is done in the "best interests of the child", and

I'm
over 18, does that mean that 20 year olds are legally children in
Oregon?

The legal term for these students is an Adult Child Attending School.

Thus, the answer to the question is "yes".


The answer is "No." The age of majority is 18 in Oregon for everyone.


He didn't say "age of majority"; he said "legally children". The keyword
(subject) in your above legal term is "child" which makes the answer to
his
question "yes".


1. Are you your mother's child?
2. What is your age?
3. Are you still "legally a child" or are you her child by birth?
4. Figure it out.

  #47  
Old July 9th 07, 06:59 PM posted to alt.child-support
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Flunking for profit


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


When the federal government enforces state laws,

Got an example of a state law enforced by the federal government?


When the U.S. Treasury Department gives one's tax return money to a

state,
I
would say that is an example of a state law enforced by the federal
government; wouldn't you?


It's the other way around.


No it's not. The state has a law saying they will get your money. The
federal government enforces that law by giving your money to the state.

That is an example of the state using 42 U.S.C.
664, Collection of Past Due Support From Federal Tax Refunds.



and such laws vary from
state to state,

Got an example of where state CS law varies from the federal standards
for
CS operations?


No; but I have an example of where CS law varies from state to state.


I agree. But my point is federal law lays out the minimum standards for
child support operations. States can establish CS law any way they

desire,
but their laws have to meet the federal minimum standards. My example

about
paternity establishments below is a good example. Some state set their
paternity law at the federal minimum standard. Others go beyond the

federal
standard, but they always meet the minimum requirements.



then they are not the same.

While the details in the state laws may vary, they are based on minimum
standards set by the federal government. Here's an example I posted

the
other day - Federal law says the statute of limitations on paternity
establishments can be no fewer than 18 years. Some states adopt the 18
years as their standard. Other states set higher age limits. Still
other
states create paternity law with no age limitation.








  #48  
Old July 9th 07, 07:00 PM posted to alt.child-support
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Flunking for profit


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


If my parents are married, and I'm 18, and they refuse to help me

with
college, can I somehow get a court to force them to divorce so

that
I
can get money for school?

You already know the answer to that question. But there is a

solution
to
your scenario. If parents refuse to help a child under age 25 with
college
support, the student has more federal low interest student loan
options
to
cover the parent's portion of the Expected Family Contribution and

to
replace any need for a Parent Loan.


And, if the order is done in the "best interests of the child",

and
I'm
over 18, does that mean that 20 year olds are legally children in
Oregon?

The legal term for these students is an Adult Child Attending

School.

Thus, the answer to the question is "yes".

The answer is "No." The age of majority is 18 in Oregon for everyone.


He didn't say "age of majority"; he said "legally children". The keyword
(subject) in your above legal term is "child" which makes the answer to
his
question "yes".


1. Are you your mother's child?


Yes.

2. What is your age?


20.

3. Are you still "legally a child" or are you her child by birth?


According to your above legal term, BOTH!

4. Figure it out.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Plug-In Profit Site brian Single Parents 0 January 24th 07 12:13 AM
Plug-In Profit Site brian Solutions 0 January 23rd 07 11:51 PM
Plug-In Profit Site brian Child Support 0 January 23rd 07 10:52 PM
selling Childeren four Fun & Profit the14thdisciple Foster Parents 2 November 13th 06 10:44 AM
For Your Health or Their Profit? Jan Drew Kids Health 3 November 5th 06 03:20 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.