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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 |