A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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

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

what a concept......... (reply to all)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 23rd 03, 02:57 AM
The DaveŠ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default what a concept......... (reply to all)


"frazil" wrote
That was not my point at all. The equal chance for
an equal outcome does not guarantee that the result
will actually be an equal outcome. How each parents
manages their resources, and where they place their
priorities, is up to them. Outcome is never guaranteed.
The kids do have a reasonable expectation of relatively
similar living conditions and educational and
recreational opportunities with both parents.


I think the key word here is "their" resources. Your proposal
blurs that distinction. It seems under your proposal, and
please correct me if I'm wrong, that your 50/50 division of
resources would rob parents of the consequences of their
individual choices made prior to their marriage. IOW, if
a made choices in my life before I got married that results
in my earning $75,000 per year and I have a child with
someone that makes $25,000 per year, why should I have
to give them $25,000 per year. Even the CS formula
guidelines aren't that draconian.


It is somewhat blurry because the entire situation has been blurred by the
parental breakup to begin with. BECAUSE the two had kids together, they
are, and will always be, a family, at least to some minimal degree. That
may be not be a pleasant thoght to some. I know I certainly woudl prefer to
never see my ex again, but reality is that we are forever inextriciably tied
together because we had kids together.

Strictly enforced, I do know that my idea would not be fair to high wage
earners, but making a provision for that would be in order. Or, maybe
instead of 50/50, a standard level for a decent living be established, and I
don't mean merely the government's "poverty line". For example let's say a
*decent* living in a particular area or state would be $30,000/yr. One
person makes $75,000/yr and the other makes $25,000/yr. The person who
makes more would pay the other $5,000/yr to get them up to a *decent* income
level. In extreme low-income situations no money should change hands.

I see it as enhancing the consequences of their actions, but that is a
subjective opinion and I can see how one would see it the other way.

Also, I don't think the kids have any expectations. Society,
may have expectations of relatively similar living conditions
and educational and recreational opportunities, but I don't
think the kids do. But assuming they do, how does your
system achieve that, considering that many middle income
NCPs end up with a lower standard of living than middle
income CPs under current guidelines that demand much
less than the 50/50 split you advocate.


Consciously, kids don't, but they do notice differences between homes and
even their homes and their friend's homes. In an ideal world we can say
government and society has no business in how kids are raised, but putting
the genie back in the bottle is virtually impossible.

My concept does nothing to guarantee equal standards of living. Again,
outcome cannot be guaranteed or legislated. That's not the point.
Opportunity is the point.

I think the far better approach is to honestly determine how
much it costs to raise a child, and base any CS obligation
on that cost and the NCPs ability to pay.


Technically, I agree with you 100%. "Cost" only should be split. But, how
much does it "cost"? Ask 100,000 people and get 100,000 different answers.
In an effort to be as fair as possible, I think you'd still end up with an
average. Also, how do you judge "ability to pay"?

In my own experience, granted this is just my experience,
in the first 5 years post-divorce and paying CS, my standard
of living was significantly below that of my ex, the CP. And I
payed the guideline amount which is significantly less than
what your 50/50 system would require of me.


I would suspect that there's more to the story. Possibly your ex re-married
someone with a good income? Did the guidline amounts leave you with less
than her? Were you saddled with the majority of the bills to pay off while
she got to start over?

I agree with your goal of trying to minimize the disparity of
living conditions between CP and NCP, but your system
would result in greater disparity than the current system
which typically only demands about 17 percent of income
from the NCP.


That is my goal. Just floating ideas to try and achieve it.


  #2  
Old June 23rd 03, 02:57 AM
The DaveŠ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default what a concept......... (reply to all)

"frazil" wrote
I think it really sucks for the middle class. If you're rich
you can afford a good attorney and afford whatever CS
is required. If you're truly poor the courts can't, and won't,
make you pay what you don't have. But if your in the
middle, you most likely will get screwed to the wall. It
really sucks to be rich enough not to qualified for free
legal assistance, yet poor enough to not be able to
afford what the guideline formula dictates.


I plucked this out because I think it is a very telling statement, and very
true. Not just in CS, but in the how the legal system deals with society,
in general. Rich? You can afford whatever happens. Poor? Many things get
done for you or waived, etc. Middle class? Forget it.


  #3  
Old June 23rd 03, 03:27 AM
The DaveŠ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default what a concept......... (reply to all)

"Tracy" wrote
Yes, and I wouldn't call the mother "decent" - nor
does she care for her kids. Please read what I
wrote. She ignores the older boys and only pays
attention to the daughter (youngest child). The
daughter is showing signs that she is in pain
over this, but isn't talking right now. The mother is
living with a man (and his mother) who does drugs,
isn't working, plus this mother ran around warning
other parents to keep their daughters away from
him. That he was a danger to little girls and
shouldn't be trusted. Now she is living with
him - go figure!


I wouldn't call her "decent", either.

I strongly believe she should not receive custody
of the children for two reasons. 1) her immoral
behavior that destroyed the family (killed the kids
emotionally), and 2) two of the three kids do not
want to live with her. I don't believe in splitting up
children. Therefore, they should remain with dad...
that is where they want to be.


In the case you present, I would agree.

These kids are having more of a difficult time
dealing with the fact that their mother left their
father for a man she claimed was a monster, she
smokes, she drinks heavily, she's out in left field,
has done a total 180 degree turn, etc... I mean
look at it this way - her own family has turned
their backs on this woman for doing what she did,
and she did not care how it impacted those
children - her family - and even her own life.

The kids are better off with their father until their
mother can get her act together. This is a mother
who doesn't want them. She walked away from
them, but now is hinting at custody of just the
daughter. I say 'no way'!


I agree with Frazil, they're better off with the dad, period.

I'll tell you what Dave... I'm dating the man right
now. It is a 45 minutes drive to his home during
good traffic, more than an hour during heavy traffic.
The man has my attention. I don't drive that far for
just anyone, and have stopped dating several
others because he is that good of a man. His
daughter kept hugging me and wanted to just
spend time with an adult female talking. She
wants a mother. Dad and I have "jokingly"
spoke of moving in together. But I'll tell you right
now... for the sake of those kids and that family,
I'd step aside in a heart beat and wish that family
well if dad came to me told me his ex came to her
senses and he will take her back. At one time she
wanted to "come home", but he told her 'no'. He
doesn't trust her. How can he? She has changed
dramatically. Anyways, his house (the one he built)
is up for sale. Once it sales he is either moving
up here or building another house on his mother's
land. He's a hard working laborer, and those kids
need a mother. They don't have a mother right now.
Not really...


I'd say they have a mother, but not a mom. Just a little wordplay I like to
use.


  #4  
Old June 23rd 03, 06:40 PM
The DaveŠ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default what a concept......... (reply to all)

"Tracy" wrote
I never meant to imply they would be better off with
the mother. They are better off with their father. Once
their mother gets her act together then *maybe* they
could consider equal parenting time. But that time
will never come! I met *her* father last night. He
came out and told me *he* didn't divorce him... get
the picture? Dad is selling his home. He is moving.
The boys want nothing to do with their mother, and
the daughter wants to stay with her father.


Ok, I need a clarification here. Are you saying you met your boyfriend's
ex-wife's father? And that he still maintains a positive relationship with
your boyfriend?

After my ex-wife and I split, I had a better relationship with her mother
and brother than she did for about a year and a half. Now, they've all made
amends, but I still get alomg with them just fine.


  #5  
Old June 23rd 03, 07:07 PM
Tracy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default what a concept......... (reply to all)

"The DaveŠ" wrote in message
s.com...
"Tracy" wrote
I never meant to imply they would be better off with
the mother. They are better off with their father. Once
their mother gets her act together then *maybe* they
could consider equal parenting time. But that time
will never come! I met *her* father last night. He
came out and told me *he* didn't divorce him... get
the picture? Dad is selling his home. He is moving.
The boys want nothing to do with their mother, and
the daughter wants to stay with her father.


Ok, I need a clarification here. Are you saying you met your boyfriend's
ex-wife's father? And that he still maintains a positive relationship

with
your boyfriend?


Yes. Her family won't have anything to do with her. They can't believe she
left my boyfriend - period.

This is the story... after more than 21 years of marriage my boyfriend's
[then] wife informs him she is in love with another man, but still "loves"
him too. She had been having an affair with this other man for a few
months. This other man is her Aunt's boyfriend! The other man is much
younger than the Aunt, but much older than the wife. This other man is scum
(per the wife's word), and all in the family would agree. My boyfriend is a
hard working man who supported his family all those years. He is what most
decent women want in a husband. He would never cheat on his wife, or anyone
he is committed to. He doesn't lie. He's very honest. He has great morals
and a loving heart. He's not controlling or abusive. His ex even stated to
him, and some of the closest family members, that she does not deserve him.
She calls herself a "rebel without a cause". She rebelled against
everything that was right - including her family. Her family viewed him as
their own because of his strong moral beliefs and how he treated her. They
still do view him as family. He didn't break up that family. He did
nothing to her to deserve what she did.

I've met quite a few members of her family, and I'll be attending a wedding
on July 4th with him. Someone in her family is getting married and we're
going together. Afterwards we're going to catch some fireworks. We're
planning on him meeting my family and me his direct family shortly.


After my ex-wife and I split, I had a better relationship with her mother
and brother than she did for about a year and a half. Now, they've all

made
amends, but I still get alomg with them just fine.


I don't know if their closeness will last forever, but I can say my
boyfriend is friends with her father. Not to mention there's a bond due to
history... my boyfriend was a logger originally. So was her father, and
others in her family. So there's this level of respect that can't be broken
easily.


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FAO Ericka (or anyone else who might know) - reply hierophant Pregnancy 4 March 30th 04 06:40 PM
PPAC, vaccinations and chiro bouncer Bob (Bob Dubin, Diplomate, American Board of Chiropractic Censorship) Todd Gastaldo Pregnancy 1 September 6th 03 08:55 PM
A 2003 reply to Gastaldo's 1997 letter to MOTHERING... Todd Gastaldo Pregnancy 0 July 25th 03 05:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Š2004-2018 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.