Change in SVO - Texas

Ahhh, but not too bored to read and reply...

Mel Gamble

Fighting for kids wrote:

Snore..zzzzzzzzzzzzz..

"Melvin Gamble" wrote in message
...
: : :

By hens like you two????

: : :

Mel Gamble

Fighting for kids wrote:

Ignore him. He obviously is threatened.

"angel235" wrote in message
om...
Mel - why do you resort to name-calling when you don't agree with what
someone is saying?

Simpleton.

"angel235" wrote in message
om...
You are using your position as a parent - plus a change in
laws/circumstances - to try to take more money from him.
No - there isn't any change in the laws just the circumstances.
The
original $$ was in no way adequate to pay for his portion of
raising
his son so I was
supplementing his inadequacies. Now he is able to take up his
own
slack and he should do so.

He is
threatening to use his position as a parent - plus a change in
laws/circumstances - to try and take more of his sons time
from
you.
Seems to me like both of you are using your son to fight over
time/money. If you want to show that you aren't, call his
bluff -
offer
him the extra time with no strings attached irregardless of
the
outcome
of any support debates.

My ex is a "Taker" and I'm sick of giving without getting the
same.
Is that too much to ask?? Why should I concede to EVERYTHING?
I
am,
clearly, the bigger person but you know, I sometimes feel that
he
should even attempt to take the high ground and he just doesn't.
It's
just draining.
And, if I called his bluff as you suggested, he again, would be
taking
(by my giving him more time) and in return, giving nothing. How
angelic am I supposed to be? Why don't I just let my ex have 5
days
a
week with my son and pay no money for his support at all? Does
this
seem fair???

By the way, if you are so burdened financially by all the time
you
have
to care for your son....why aren't you pleased that your ex
would
offer
to feed and house him more?

My son is no burden to me and the changes to schedules I make
benefit
him and his father and their time together.


Mel Gamble

There are many things that you are not. Since nobody intended to
threaten you, it's not surprising that you are not threatened. We did,
however, intend to enlighten you..., but it's also not surprising that
enlightened is also one of the things you've still managed to avoid
being....

Mel Gamble

angel235 wrote:

"Fighting for kids" adf wrote in message ...
Ignore him. He obviously is threatened.


Oh, that is quite obvious. But as I said I'm not threatened.

Still avoiding any responce to the subject matter, huh? Point for me...

Mel Gamble

angel235 wrote:

Hmmm.... Shall I tackle some of your other posts or have you answered
your own question to your satisfaction, goosey???

Be my guest.....
"Tackle" - is that some sort of male dominance by any chance????

FACTS are superior to the talking points. No surprise that you are a
stranger to such things.

Fighting for kids wrote:

Snore.. zz....

Melvin the Rambler,

On and on about how you are somehow superior to this person.. when we all
know thats not the case.

An intellectual debater would point out where I made such a claim...you
will not.

You arent listening to a word she is saying,
anything that comes out of anyones mouth that doesnt met your specified
criteria is wrong. Its old hat..

You write funny...

I see that pile of **** getting bigger and bigger by the minute... did you
bring your pooper scooper Melvin the Rambler??

Why can neither of you manage a reasoned rebuttal? OOOPSSS! Sorry,
"reasoned" just makes it too difficult - allow me to revise....Why can
neither of you manage even a lame rebuttal???

Mel Gamble

"Melvin Gamble" wrote in message
...
You need to get the newer version of the talking points....

angel235 wrote:

Melvin Gamble wrote in message
...
You are a perfect example to point at for those who argue...
that if raising your own children were such a costly undertaking,
women
would be begging fathers to take over the job.

If women were paid the same amount of money for the same job that men

That old wives tale has been debunked for years now....

are maybe they wouldn't have to ask for the money. However, the
bigger picture is that the women did not make these children by
themselves. Speaking strictly of my case, both of us chose to bring
our son into the world and be responsible for him. Just because we
didn't stay married doesn't mean that either of us should be absolved
of our responsibility of that decision.

Guess that means you don't have a reply to the point I made so
successfully...

Did you ever stop to think that if you called his bluff it would be
FOR
YOUR SON?

I can HONESTLY say that my son (so far) has never expressed his desire
to spend more time with his father. The only desire he occassionally
has is to talk to him and I'm right there handing him the phone and
dialing his dad's number. And BTW - his father, who has only a cell
phone (no home phone) and a work phone with caller ID - frequently
doesn't answer his phone. And since you will probably assume that
it's me he doesn't want to talk to, I'll go ahead and let you know
that our (my Ex and I)means of communicating is via email or at
exchanges and we've agreed to not fight in front of our son.
I know that in the future my son may indeed ask to spend more time
with his dad and FOR THAT reason I will be happy to let him do so.

Please excuse any laughing you may hear.....

I
have no such obligation to do things to make my Ex happy anymore -

Regardless of those pesky laws...

we're divorced. But I will do things to accommodate my son's needs
when the time comes.

Statistics indicate you are already damaging your son by failing to meet
his need for more time with his father. But then, you probably consider
yourself an anomally rather than an abomination....

Why not let your ex have 5 days and pay nothing???? Why not
indeed? Why not? Does it seem fair? Does it seem fair to whom?
Fair
to your son and ex? Maybe more fair than the limited time they have
now. Fair to you? Financially, yes - your ex would be responsible
for
over half of your son's living expenses and you would be responsible
for
less than half - what's your problem with that? Fair time-wise?
Hmmmmm, you'd have your son for more of the time than your ex does
now -
you tell us how fair that would be.....

Who is being shortchanged? My son? No - see above.

So, you wouldn't send your son to school unless he asked to go??? How
old is your son that he already knows what's good for him and what
isn't???

My ex? Maybe,
but if he wanted quality time with his son then why does he
consistently include others in his visits with his son? Why doesn't
he covet the time he has with his son so dearly that he wouldn't dream
of sharing him with someone else?

Your son should, of course, not be exposed to the life his father really
lives. Funny how some mothers derisively use the term "Disneyland
Daddy" to describe a father who doesn't treat his kids like they were
part of a real family, and then you put down your son's father for the
opposite. Guess it's just "damned if you do, damned if you don't" isn't
it....?

By the way, if you are so burdened financially by all the time you
have
to care for your son....why aren't you pleased that your ex would
offer
to feed and house him more?

My son is no burden to me

Geeee, wouldn't have guessed that from your posts....

My ex is the burden not my son.

That makes no sense at all. Not surprised.

and the changes to schedules I make benefit
him and his father and their time together.

So what was it again that you're moaning about?????

If you've forgotten why don't you take the time to reread previous
posts - it sounds like you have a lot of free time on your hands.

It sounds like you're saying "no problem" about the very same things
you've been bitching about.....

Mel Gamble


Mel Gamble

Mel Gamble

Aww, if only you knew... But then, to which ex-wife are you referring?

angel235 wrote:

Mel, I have some good news for you. I (probably like your
ex-wife)have grown bored with you and I'm moving on to better things.
I've been amused by the tet-a-tete with you but I know you'll never
agree with my side of things and I most certainly will not agree with
your side of things. So after I send this post, you will no longer
get a reponse from me (again, probably like you got from your ex-wife
when you were in bed with her!)

Promises, promises...(yes, promises are all I got from one of the ex's)

And most here will agree that an attack on a poster's sexual prowess is
universally recognized as an admission of defeat...thank you : )

Mel Gamble

Sionara!!

And when the story gets too weak...

angel235 wrote:

It sounds like you're in a tough position, Angel. But, remember, you
are seeing your son's father through the eyes of *your* experience.
Your son sees him completely differently. What you perceive may not be
at all what he perceives.

You are absolutely right. That's why I previously stated that it most
certainly won't be me who will reveal to my son what his father's true
colors are, it will be the dad himself who does that. Children are
much more perceptive then most people realize; they have BS detectors
that are far more intuitive then most adults. I just have to sit back
and let his dad hang himself and be there for my son when he's faced
with all the disappointments.

What if he could take the same position and say since the CS order was
not
updated when the CS guidelines were reviewed you as the CP have lost the
ability to get an increase in CS?

Well, I suppose in your (male) perfect world things would work that
way but you know what - the white male america does not have the
control that he used to before slavery was outlawed and women were
given the power to vote. You're a sore loser.

How can I be a sore loser? My children respect me, we have a great
relationship, and I don't have to pay state mandated CS.

Good for you. I don't know your situation is but it sounds like your
pretty proud of the fact that your successfully circumvented having to
take responsibility for the children that you helped bring into this
world. Bravo!

You're quite wrong about Bob's responsibility to his children, Angel.
The fact is, the majority of men on this newsgroup not only pay child
support faithfully, but fight for as much contact with their children
as they can possibly get. Just because certain posters claim that all
the fathers here are trying to avoid their respinsibilities does not
mean it is true. The fact that they are questioning you on the
scenario you presented is a good indication of how they have been
treated by the system--and their ongoing commitment to each father's
right to be a father. It has nothing to do with shirking
responsibility.

If I'm wrong I'm certainly big enough to admit and apologize. Bob, If
I misspoke about your situation, then I apologize.

snip


So substitute the words "concerned" or "challenged" or "resistant" in the
question about why you are against giving the children's father more time
with the children.

Ok - I don't think he should have any additional time with his son
because the time he does have with him he always (ok - not always but
90% of the visits he has) he consistently has to include other people
in these visits. And the other people end up taking time with my son
while my Ex is doing other things. There's no quality one-on-one time
with my son. For instance - my ex is in bad standing with his family
(although they love him as a family member they know what a FU he is)
and he uses his son to get the positive attention from his family he
so craves.

Does your son enjoy these times with his father's family? Are they a
positive influence in his life? Would he have any contact with them
if his father didn't take him there?

Sometimes yes and sometimes no. If you consider hyprocracy and
constantly playing the "victim" card then he does get plenty of that
with the family. His family (the Ex's) _never_ makes any effort to
take an active part in the lives of any of their own children or the
grandchildren. They feel it is completely up to the rest of the
family to cater to them and to put forth all the effort to maintain
relationships with them. It's dysfunction with a capital "D" and I
would prefer that my son's visitation with them are limited because
their is constant turmoil, numerous confrontations (in front of the
grandchildren) and frenquent shouting matches that have frightened my
son on several occassions.


He has no other interaction with his family at other
times. He tells his son he's going to take him to a movie and then I
find out they went to see Seabiscuit and the girlfriend went. Do you
think that a 6 year old is really the motivation for going to that
particular movie?

Did it upset your son?

No, it did not upset him but he did express that he was quite bored.

For the sixth year in a row I throw my son's
bithday party totally at my expense and invite the his whole family
and his girlfriend. They show up, eat the food, put on their "I'm
such an awesome parent" persona but none of them brought presents for
my sons birthday. Instead they make my son wait an entire week to get
his birthday gifts so that the girlfriend can throw her own party in
my sons honor. So - you tell me who's being put first in my Ex's
mind? Do these examples constitute child abuse of something hideous
like that? Absolutely not. But actions do speak louder than words.
I could go on and on with examples but it would be pointless.

And does your son complain about these things? They certainly look
neglectful from your perspective--but what is his take on the matter?

He notices them, he mentions them but at this point I don't think it
bothers him _that_ much. I have to say he's quite a resiliant,
good-natured boy, but year after year when things like these keep
happening and become more and more obvious he's gonna pick up on it.
He definately didn't understand why I didn't come to the party that
the GF threw.


I have
a boyfriend of almost 3 years and I _very rarely_ include him in
activities with my son and I. I have 7 days a week to see my
boyfriend but unlike my Ex I choose to not take away time with son to
see the BF I wait until my son is with my Ex to do so. My bonding
time with my son is precious and even though he lives with me I
treasure time we spend together and I want him to know that when we're
together I'm 100% focused on him. I would never dream of using my son
to look like a better guy but then again, I don't have too.

Well, that's good. But do make sure to take time for yourself, too.
It is important for your son to see you as something other than just
his mom. He needs to understand that you are an individual in your
own right.

I absolutely do take time for myself, I just value my time so much
when I'm with him and very rarely want to share him with someone else.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not obsessed with my son.

************************************************** ********************
I invite my sweetie over _occassionally_ when my son is with me and they get along great!
************************************************** ********************

....it changes. How convenient...

Mel Gamble

They play video games, kick the soccer ball around and he even
taught my son to ride his bike without the training wheels. We spend
alot of time with my family and since my family is small I try to
demonstrate to my son that friendships are very important and should
be treasured and that "family" is not just who you share a bloodline
with.