Flunking for profit

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"whatamess" wrote in message
ups.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.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"whatamess" wrote in message
ups.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

"Bob Whiteside" wrote

"teachrmama" wrote
..........................

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.
==
Neither PA nor FL have CS beyond age 18 unless the child is still in high
school
with the expectation that he/she will graduate prior to age 19 in which
case, in FL., support
is extended to the May following the child's 18th birthday--or something to
that effect.
We had to pay till May for my SD but not for my SS because he was only in
10th grade
when he turned 18. Of course, he came to live with us to finish high school
so we supported
him anyway.

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"whatamess" wrote in message
ups.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.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"whatamess" wrote in message
ups.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.

"Gini" wrote in message
news:ytfgi.4563$ss5.886@trndny03...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote

"teachrmama" wrote
.........................

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.
==
Neither PA nor FL have CS beyond age 18 unless the child is still in high
school
with the expectation that he/she will graduate prior to age 19 in which
case, in FL., support
is extended to the May following the child's 18th birthday--or something
to
that effect.
We had to pay till May for my SD but not for my SS because he was only in
10th grade
when he turned 18. Of course, he came to live with us to finish high
school
so we supported
him anyway.

According to Policy Studies Inc. 46 states terminate CS at age 18 or 19.
Most states extend this deadline if the child is still in high school. Some
extend the age limit for disabilities or special needs. Only four states
extend CS to age 21 - District of Columbia, Indiana, Mississippi, and New
York. (I don't know why the numbers of states don't add up to 51 when DC is
included. I think PSI means 47 states terminate CS at age 18 or 19 with 4
terminating Cs at age 21.)

Only Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, and Oregon have post-secondary expense
guideline laws. Even PSI recognizes post-secondary support of adult
children attending school is not child support. In Oregon, we just pretend
it's child support and use all the CS enforcement mechanisms to collect,
disburse, and enforce the post-secondary education awards.

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"whatamess" wrote in message
ups.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.

http://dcs.state.or.us/oregon_admin_...s/055_5110.pdf

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"whatamess" wrote in message
ups.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.

http://dcs.state.or.us/oregon_admin_...s/055_5110.pdf

If "child support" is a state issue, ordered by the state, and enforced by
same, how can the federal government enforce it?

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"whatamess" wrote in message
ups.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."

I've seen it written "age 18 or completion of high school, whichever comes
LAST." Gee, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize which of the two
causes the poor schmuck to get screwed far worse.
Not to mention, since there is no way to know whether or not they have
graduated from high school, the payments could continue indefinitely! At
least in your case, you know for certain the date when you can stop paying.

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"whatamess" wrote in message
ups.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.


http://dcs.state.or.us/oregon_admin_...s/055_5110.pdf

If "child support" is a state issue, ordered by the state, and enforced by
same, how can the federal government enforce it?

Through international treaties, uniform interstate laws, and the fact they
pay 2/3 of the states' cost of setting up CS programs in compliance with
federal regulations.