AT A LOST FOR WORDS... BUT HERE'S A FEW!! :)

Let me see if I can make this a bit more clear about the state
enforcing child support. When a parent gets on support, the first
question the state has is "where is the other parent", in my case the
father didnt sign the birth certificate and never acknowledged
paternity, so the first action was to establish paternity... true
indeed they asked me to cooperate and the only way I could not
cooperate is if I feared for my childs safety... I informed the
caseworker only of the previous attack, but she said if there was no
police report it can not be used as valid reason not to cooperate and
honestly I didnt fear my childs safety over that isolated incident.
From there on they had my cooperation because I needed the support and
it would be cut off if I didnt. I apologize if I wasnt clear...I
didnt just sit back and let it happen, I had to cooperate and file the
petition. In general, michigan automatically does go after child
support once the father is determined due to the fact that this state
feels a child deserves the support of both parents.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ink.net...
"SunShyne" wrote in message
om...
You're right.. I guess I cant expect too much considering that I moved
so far away. I was immature as I stated before and instead of staying
and following legal actions, I ran. That's something I will have to
live with, sadly. The 1800 he sent was to me for our son. This
included the cost of our sons birth and some clothing. You are
absolutely right... I believe he should get credit for what he sent.
Like I previously said, I talked with the office after I posted this
and they informed me that he was told wrong. If I would have known
before all this, I could have confirmed with the court what he paid.
Unfortunately there was no communication during the time this was
going on.

The money issue... I actually didnt file for child support. When my
son was first born, I went through some financial difficulties so I
put my son on medicaid... if someone goes on assitance, the state
automatically seeks out the father and petitions for child support. I
dont have any control over that. Even if I would have never needed
assistance, once he was acknowledged as the father he would be put on
child support. It's just the law here.

Either the child support staff has "lied" to you too, or you just don't
understand that you authorized the state to file for child support.

When a parent places their child on Medicaid they are required to assign
their right to medical support over to the state and cooperate with the
state regarding establishing paternity. On Medicaid only cases the states
limit their participation to medical support reimbursement only. You must
have signed something to expand the state's authority to go after child
support too.

The states intentionally (IMO) confuse parents applying for medical support
by stating their service in a way that only people with some knowledge of
the system understand. The state most likely told you they were going to
provide full IV-D services (medical and child support, plus paternity, and
related enforcement) unless you opted to have them go after medical support
only. If you signed some document that stated the services in a backhanded
way like stated above, you authorized an expansion of your case to include
child support. Claiming it is automatic under the law and being done
without your approval is just not the case.

"SunShyne" wrote in message
om...
Let me see if I can make this a bit more clear about the state
enforcing child support. When a parent gets on support, the first
question the state has is "where is the other parent", in my case the
father didnt sign the birth certificate and never acknowledged
paternity, so the first action was to establish paternity... true
indeed they asked me to cooperate and the only way I could not
cooperate is if I feared for my childs safety... I informed the
caseworker only of the previous attack, but she said if there was no
police report it can not be used as valid reason not to cooperate and
honestly I didnt fear my childs safety over that isolated incident.
From there on they had my cooperation because I needed the support and
it would be cut off if I didnt. I apologize if I wasnt clear...I
didnt just sit back and let it happen, I had to cooperate and file the
petition. In general, michigan automatically does go after child
support once the father is determined due to the fact that this state
feels a child deserves the support of both parents.

Let me be more direct. If you applied for Medicaid-only support the state
would have limited their actions to securing a medical support order for
your son. That order could be in the form of a Medicaid repayment award or
having the father provide medical insurance coverage, in lieu of Medicaid,
depending on his circumstance.

What is confusing is how you seem to be using public assistance terms
interchangeably. For instance above you stated "when a parent goes on
support." That statement indicates you went on TANF, food stamps, job
training, day care, or other forms of welfare far greater than getting
Medicaid for your son.

You are correct the first step is help the state establish paternity. The
reason is they have to complete that step before they can get an order
established. From a prior post it sounds like they tried to trick the
putative father into signing a Joint Declaration of Paternity by using some
fraudulent financial coercion. He refused and forced the more formal DNA
testing to be done. You are also correct they question about issues of
child and parent safety. The state is required to protect your safety by
not disclosing addresses and phone numbers that would allow the other parent
to make harassing contacts.

And finally the statement "this state feels a child deserves the support of
both parents" is inconsistent with welfare law. Any person receiving public
assistance is deemed to be unable to provide child support and their CS
obligation is waived during the time the parent receives public assistance.
The state may be telling you that, but that is not an accurate statement.

"SunShyne" wrote in message
om...
Let me see if I can make this a bit more clear about the state
enforcing child support. When a parent gets on support, the first
question the state has is "where is the other parent", in my case the
father didnt sign the birth certificate and never acknowledged
paternity, so the first action was to establish paternity... true
indeed they asked me to cooperate and the only way I could not
cooperate is if I feared for my childs safety... I informed the
caseworker only of the previous attack, but she said if there was no
police report it can not be used as valid reason not to cooperate and
honestly I didnt fear my childs safety over that isolated incident.
From there on they had my cooperation because I needed the support and
it would be cut off if I didnt. I apologize if I wasnt clear...I
didnt just sit back and let it happen, I had to cooperate and file the
petition. In general, michigan automatically does go after child
support once the father is determined due to the fact that this state
feels a child deserves the support of both parents.

Let me be more direct. If you applied for Medicaid-only support the state
would have limited their actions to securing a medical support order for
your son. That order could be in the form of a Medicaid repayment award or
having the father provide medical insurance coverage, in lieu of Medicaid,
depending on his circumstance.

What is confusing is how you seem to be using public assistance terms
interchangeably. For instance above you stated "when a parent goes on
support." That statement indicates you went on TANF, food stamps, job
training, day care, or other forms of welfare far greater than getting
Medicaid for your son.

You are correct the first step is help the state establish paternity. The
reason is they have to complete that step before they can get an order
established. From a prior post it sounds like they tried to trick the
putative father into signing a Joint Declaration of Paternity by using some
fraudulent financial coercion. He refused and forced the more formal DNA
testing to be done. You are also correct they question about issues of
child and parent safety. The state is required to protect your safety by
not disclosing addresses and phone numbers that would allow the other parent
to make harassing contacts.

And finally the statement "this state feels a child deserves the support of
both parents" is inconsistent with welfare law. Any person receiving public
assistance is deemed to be unable to provide child support and their CS
obligation is waived during the time the parent receives public assistance.
The state may be telling you that, but that is not an accurate statement.

Kenneth,
I didnt say I feared for my child safety. The state informed me that
the only way I could refuse cooperation was if I feared for his
safety, which I didnt because it was only one isolated incident where
there was violence.


"Kenneth S." wrote in message ...
The following is a small point, but it's a significant one. The poster
below says Michigan "feels a child deserves the support of both
parents." That may be what state officials SAY. The truth is
otherwise.

Consider the following:
(1) If governments think that children deserve the support of both
parents, why don't they do more to preserve two-parent families? Why do
they provide arrangements that amount to incentives for mother-initiated
divorce or for illegitimacy?
(2) If governments think that children deserve the support of both
parents, why do they force fathers to pay money to mothers, and let the
mothers spend the money any way they like?

There are many other similar questions. The truth of the matter is
that--as frequently happens--the interests of children are used to
camouflage the real, unacknowledged, and much more sordid, motivation
behind some government policy. "It's for the kids" is the battle cry of
every special interest group and government bureaucracy that has some
selfish interest that it can link, however tenuously, to children.

In the CS example, "child support" isn't for children. As you can see
when anyone proposes changes to CS or custody arrangements, the primary
purpose is to enlarge the options available to mothers. CS is a subsidy
for fatherless families. It's a way of making fathers pay for decisions
that nearly always are made by mothers.

Note how "SunShyne" shelters behind her child. She did what she did
because, she says, she feared for her child's safety.



SunShyne wrote:

Let me see if I can make this a bit more clear about the state
enforcing child support. When a parent gets on support, the first
question the state has is "where is the other parent", in my case the
father didnt sign the birth certificate and never acknowledged
paternity, so the first action was to establish paternity... true
indeed they asked me to cooperate and the only way I could not
cooperate is if I feared for my childs safety... I informed the
caseworker only of the previous attack, but she said if there was no
police report it can not be used as valid reason not to cooperate and
honestly I didnt fear my childs safety over that isolated incident.
From there on they had my cooperation because I needed the support and
it would be cut off if I didnt. I apologize if I wasnt clear...I
didnt just sit back and let it happen, I had to cooperate and file the
petition. In general, michigan automatically does go after child
support once the father is determined due to the fact that this state
feels a child deserves the support of both parents.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ink.net...
"SunShyne" wrote in message
om...
You're right.. I guess I cant expect too much considering that I moved
so far away. I was immature as I stated before and instead of staying
and following legal actions, I ran. That's something I will have to
live with, sadly. The 1800 he sent was to me for our son. This
included the cost of our sons birth and some clothing. You are
absolutely right... I believe he should get credit for what he sent.
Like I previously said, I talked with the office after I posted this
and they informed me that he was told wrong. If I would have known
before all this, I could have confirmed with the court what he paid.
Unfortunately there was no communication during the time this was
going on.

The money issue... I actually didnt file for child support. When my
son was first born, I went through some financial difficulties so I
put my son on medicaid... if someone goes on assitance, the state
automatically seeks out the father and petitions for child support. I
dont have any control over that. Even if I would have never needed
assistance, once he was acknowledged as the father he would be put on
child support. It's just the law here.

Either the child support staff has "lied" to you too, or you just don't
understand that you authorized the state to file for child support.

When a parent places their child on Medicaid they are required to assign
their right to medical support over to the state and cooperate with the
state regarding establishing paternity. On Medicaid only cases the states
limit their participation to medical support reimbursement only. You must
have signed something to expand the state's authority to go after child
support too.

The states intentionally (IMO) confuse parents applying for medical support
by stating their service in a way that only people with some knowledge of
the system understand. The state most likely told you they were going to
provide full IV-D services (medical and child support, plus paternity, and
related enforcement) unless you opted to have them go after medical support
only. If you signed some document that stated the services in a backhanded
way like stated above, you authorized an expansion of your case to include
child support. Claiming it is automatic under the law and being done
without your approval is just not the case.

Kenneth,
I didnt say I feared for my child safety. The state informed me that
the only way I could refuse cooperation was if I feared for his
safety, which I didnt because it was only one isolated incident where
there was violence.


"Kenneth S." wrote in message ...
The following is a small point, but it's a significant one. The poster
below says Michigan "feels a child deserves the support of both
parents." That may be what state officials SAY. The truth is
otherwise.

Consider the following:
(1) If governments think that children deserve the support of both
parents, why don't they do more to preserve two-parent families? Why do
they provide arrangements that amount to incentives for mother-initiated
divorce or for illegitimacy?
(2) If governments think that children deserve the support of both
parents, why do they force fathers to pay money to mothers, and let the
mothers spend the money any way they like?

There are many other similar questions. The truth of the matter is
that--as frequently happens--the interests of children are used to
camouflage the real, unacknowledged, and much more sordid, motivation
behind some government policy. "It's for the kids" is the battle cry of
every special interest group and government bureaucracy that has some
selfish interest that it can link, however tenuously, to children.

In the CS example, "child support" isn't for children. As you can see
when anyone proposes changes to CS or custody arrangements, the primary
purpose is to enlarge the options available to mothers. CS is a subsidy
for fatherless families. It's a way of making fathers pay for decisions
that nearly always are made by mothers.

Note how "SunShyne" shelters behind her child. She did what she did
because, she says, she feared for her child's safety.



SunShyne wrote:

Let me see if I can make this a bit more clear about the state
enforcing child support. When a parent gets on support, the first
question the state has is "where is the other parent", in my case the
father didnt sign the birth certificate and never acknowledged
paternity, so the first action was to establish paternity... true
indeed they asked me to cooperate and the only way I could not
cooperate is if I feared for my childs safety... I informed the
caseworker only of the previous attack, but she said if there was no
police report it can not be used as valid reason not to cooperate and
honestly I didnt fear my childs safety over that isolated incident.
From there on they had my cooperation because I needed the support and
it would be cut off if I didnt. I apologize if I wasnt clear...I
didnt just sit back and let it happen, I had to cooperate and file the
petition. In general, michigan automatically does go after child
support once the father is determined due to the fact that this state
feels a child deserves the support of both parents.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ink.net...
"SunShyne" wrote in message
om...
You're right.. I guess I cant expect too much considering that I moved
so far away. I was immature as I stated before and instead of staying
and following legal actions, I ran. That's something I will have to
live with, sadly. The 1800 he sent was to me for our son. This
included the cost of our sons birth and some clothing. You are
absolutely right... I believe he should get credit for what he sent.
Like I previously said, I talked with the office after I posted this
and they informed me that he was told wrong. If I would have known
before all this, I could have confirmed with the court what he paid.
Unfortunately there was no communication during the time this was
going on.

The money issue... I actually didnt file for child support. When my
son was first born, I went through some financial difficulties so I
put my son on medicaid... if someone goes on assitance, the state
automatically seeks out the father and petitions for child support. I
dont have any control over that. Even if I would have never needed
assistance, once he was acknowledged as the father he would be put on
child support. It's just the law here.

Either the child support staff has "lied" to you too, or you just don't
understand that you authorized the state to file for child support.

When a parent places their child on Medicaid they are required to assign
their right to medical support over to the state and cooperate with the
state regarding establishing paternity. On Medicaid only cases the states
limit their participation to medical support reimbursement only. You must
have signed something to expand the state's authority to go after child
support too.

The states intentionally (IMO) confuse parents applying for medical support
by stating their service in a way that only people with some knowledge of
the system understand. The state most likely told you they were going to
provide full IV-D services (medical and child support, plus paternity, and
related enforcement) unless you opted to have them go after medical support
only. If you signed some document that stated the services in a backhanded
way like stated above, you authorized an expansion of your case to include
child support. Claiming it is automatic under the law and being done
without your approval is just not the case.

--
The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth,
and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man,
but only to have the law of nature for his rule.
-Samuel Adams


"SunShyne" wrote in message
om...
This is a very good point. I'm sorry that I didnt go into depth
enough with the things I said. I moved away from GA only after the
father physically attacked me... I was dumb, really dumb and instead
of taking legal action, I ran. Dont get me wrong, he's not an abusive
man, that was the first and last time he raised his hand to me... but
I see now that it was the frustration and complications of my
pregnancy that caused him to react that way. I wish I could have been
mature enough to see that at that time. You're right.. it did come
down to being solely my choice of whether to bring this child into the
world or not, but I consulted with the father because it's not just my
child and he wanted to keep the child just as much as I did. But
thankyou so much for your response, this is exactly what I came here
for.

"Paul Fritz" wrote in message
...
Let's see, you moved your child away from one of its parents before it
was
born at a distance that no meaningful relationship could be established.
You had the sole and unilateral choice of whether to bring a child into
the
world, and now you want child support from him.........greedy is not the
word for it.......selfish is the starting point. Why don't you take
responsibility for the sole and unilateral choices you made.

BTW, you are not lost, but you certainly have abused your son.

"SunShyne" wrote in message
om...
I hope someone has heard of this before. My sons father lives in GA
and always has. I used to live there but when I got pregnant I moved
back to my home of MI after unsuccessful attempts of making a
relationship(never-married) work with the father. We are approaching
the second year of his life and the father has been almost
non-existent. He has seen our son only twice and has sent him a total
of $1800.00 over the 2 years of his life. We are now approaching the
end of a interstate child support enforcement that has taken a year
and a half to finish. Unfortunately, when the father asked the
assistant DA if he would be credited for the amount he sent me before
the order was placed, they said no. So when he asked the DA what he
should do... he was informed that if he petitioned for a paternity
test, they would not make him pay from the time our son was born, only
from here on. I'm at an awe that someone working for the best interest
of children would advice a deadbeat dad on how to work the system.
Does anyone have any advice on this??? I'm so lost!!!

Side note: Before anyone attacks me by saying I'm being greedy or
money hungry... please understand I have a well paying job that allows
me and my son to live well above the comfort level, so money is the
last thing I'm hurting for. I'm just sad about the whole situation
and I'm curious to know if anyone has heard of this before.
....the plot thickens...How will it twist next post?!? Tune in to find out!

--
The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth,
and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man,
but only to have the law of nature for his rule.
-Samuel Adams


"SunShyne" wrote in message
om...
This is a very good point. I'm sorry that I didnt go into depth
enough with the things I said. I moved away from GA only after the
father physically attacked me... I was dumb, really dumb and instead
of taking legal action, I ran. Dont get me wrong, he's not an abusive
man, that was the first and last time he raised his hand to me... but
I see now that it was the frustration and complications of my
pregnancy that caused him to react that way. I wish I could have been
mature enough to see that at that time. You're right.. it did come
down to being solely my choice of whether to bring this child into the
world or not, but I consulted with the father because it's not just my
child and he wanted to keep the child just as much as I did. But
thankyou so much for your response, this is exactly what I came here
for.

"Paul Fritz" wrote in message
...
Let's see, you moved your child away from one of its parents before it
was
born at a distance that no meaningful relationship could be established.
You had the sole and unilateral choice of whether to bring a child into
the
world, and now you want child support from him.........greedy is not the
word for it.......selfish is the starting point. Why don't you take
responsibility for the sole and unilateral choices you made.

BTW, you are not lost, but you certainly have abused your son.

"SunShyne" wrote in message
om...
I hope someone has heard of this before. My sons father lives in GA
and always has. I used to live there but when I got pregnant I moved
back to my home of MI after unsuccessful attempts of making a
relationship(never-married) work with the father. We are approaching
the second year of his life and the father has been almost
non-existent. He has seen our son only twice and has sent him a total
of $1800.00 over the 2 years of his life. We are now approaching the
end of a interstate child support enforcement that has taken a year
and a half to finish. Unfortunately, when the father asked the
assistant DA if he would be credited for the amount he sent me before
the order was placed, they said no. So when he asked the DA what he
should do... he was informed that if he petitioned for a paternity
test, they would not make him pay from the time our son was born, only
from here on. I'm at an awe that someone working for the best interest
of children would advice a deadbeat dad on how to work the system.
Does anyone have any advice on this??? I'm so lost!!!

Side note: Before anyone attacks me by saying I'm being greedy or
money hungry... please understand I have a well paying job that allows
me and my son to live well above the comfort level, so money is the
last thing I'm hurting for. I'm just sad about the whole situation
and I'm curious to know if anyone has heard of this before.
....the plot thickens...How will it twist next post?!? Tune in to find out!

SunShyne wrote:

I hope someone has heard of this before. My sons father lives in GA
and always has. I used to live there but when I got pregnant I moved
back to my home of MI after unsuccessful attempts of making a
relationship(never-married) work with the father. We are approaching
the second year of his life and the father has been almost
non-existent. He has seen our son only twice and has sent him a total
of $1800.00 over the 2 years of his life. We are now approaching the
end of a interstate child support enforcement that has taken a year
and a half to finish. Unfortunately, when the father asked the
assistant DA if he would be credited for the amount he sent me before
the order was placed, they said no. So when he asked the DA what he
should do... he was informed that if he petitioned for a paternity
test, they would not make him pay from the time our son was born, only
from here on. I'm at an awe that someone working for the best interest
of children would advice a deadbeat dad on how to work the system.
Does anyone have any advice on this??? I'm so lost!!!

Side note: Before anyone attacks me by saying I'm being greedy or
money hungry... please understand I have a well paying job that allows
me and my son to live well above the comfort level, so money is the
last thing I'm hurting for. I'm just sad about the whole situation
and I'm curious to know if anyone has heard of this before.

OK, the relationship didn't work; I can accept that. However,
you're hardly in a position to complain about the man not seeing
his child when you moved thousands of miles away from him! BTW,
if you don't need the money, why in God's green earth are you
exercised about when, or how much, the man pays? Why don't you
encourage the man to voluntarily support his son, and spend some
of that money paying for the boy to visit him, or vice-versa so
that they can establish a solid relationship?

Chris Owens


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

SunShyne wrote:

I hope someone has heard of this before. My sons father lives in GA
and always has. I used to live there but when I got pregnant I moved
back to my home of MI after unsuccessful attempts of making a
relationship(never-married) work with the father. We are approaching
the second year of his life and the father has been almost
non-existent. He has seen our son only twice and has sent him a total
of $1800.00 over the 2 years of his life. We are now approaching the
end of a interstate child support enforcement that has taken a year
and a half to finish. Unfortunately, when the father asked the
assistant DA if he would be credited for the amount he sent me before
the order was placed, they said no. So when he asked the DA what he
should do... he was informed that if he petitioned for a paternity
test, they would not make him pay from the time our son was born, only
from here on. I'm at an awe that someone working for the best interest
of children would advice a deadbeat dad on how to work the system.
Does anyone have any advice on this??? I'm so lost!!!

Side note: Before anyone attacks me by saying I'm being greedy or
money hungry... please understand I have a well paying job that allows
me and my son to live well above the comfort level, so money is the
last thing I'm hurting for. I'm just sad about the whole situation
and I'm curious to know if anyone has heard of this before.

OK, the relationship didn't work; I can accept that. However,
you're hardly in a position to complain about the man not seeing
his child when you moved thousands of miles away from him! BTW,
if you don't need the money, why in God's green earth are you
exercised about when, or how much, the man pays? Why don't you
encourage the man to voluntarily support his son, and spend some
of that money paying for the boy to visit him, or vice-versa so
that they can establish a solid relationship?

Chris Owens


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----