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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message nk.net... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message news "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message news "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08... "Pete" wrote in message news On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children. This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2 hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal. The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new family. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives. This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the welfare of the children of New York. She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the mental state of the leech). Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you. Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a babysitter? Is that really how you view your time with your children? Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions by fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the father's time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules initiated by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children or free babysitting time. If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free babysitting time", I'd certainly question their perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children - babysitting is what you do for other people's children. You are right. Babysitters get paid for performing the service. Fathers pay to perform it. Fathers aren't babysitting their own children. They're parenting. Come on, Moon. You know exactly what they are saying. When Mom has something she wants to do and does not want to pay a babysitter, she calls Dad and "graciously offers" Dad more time with the kids. MOM gets free babysitting--Dad gets "parenting time." So, yes, *Mom* does get free babysitting--and Dad, although being *used* by Mom--gets a little extra parenting time. Will most dads be grateful for time with their kids? Yes. But they are under no delusion that Mom was being generous--they know they are being used. But being with the kids is more important than calling her on her horse hock. -- NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message nk.net... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message news "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message news "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08... "Pete" wrote in message news On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children. This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2 hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal. The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new family. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives. This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the welfare of the children of New York. She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the mental state of the leech). Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you. Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a babysitter? Is that really how you view your time with your children? Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions by fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the father's time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules initiated by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children or free babysitting time. If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free babysitting time", I'd certainly question their perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children - babysitting is what you do for other people's children. You are right. Babysitters get paid for performing the service. Fathers pay to perform it. Fathers aren't babysitting their own children. They're parenting. You are right again. When mothers demand fathers parent beyond a court's visitation order and the moms are just giving the dads additional parenting opportunities. And I am sure you will agree, fathers should never be given credit for this additional parenting time by reducing CS for their increased time spent with their children. Since basic CS orders do not take into consideration father parenting time or the costs of visitation, fathers should just suck it up and take on even more parenting and visitation time, right? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
... "Chris" wrote in message news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08... "Pete" wrote in message news On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children. This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2 hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal. The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new family. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives. This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the welfare of the children of New York. She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the mental state of the leech). Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you. Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a babysitter? Is that really how you view your time with your children? Yeah, right. And these remarks from the only person claiming to know that men can control their, what was it again? Men can control their fertility, was it? Yeah, you're a real brain trust Moonie. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
"teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message nk.net... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message news "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message news "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08... "Pete" wrote in message news On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children. This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2 hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal. The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new family. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives. This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the welfare of the children of New York. She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the mental state of the leech). Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you. Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a babysitter? Is that really how you view your time with your children? Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions by fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the father's time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules initiated by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children or free babysitting time. If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free babysitting time", I'd certainly question their perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children - babysitting is what you do for other people's children. You are right. Babysitters get paid for performing the service. Fathers pay to perform it. Fathers aren't babysitting their own children. They're parenting. Come on, Moon. You know exactly what they are saying. Yes, I do - they view themselves as babysitters of their own children, which baffles me - it sets up a situation where they can continue to slam mom, and mom can never do it to dad's satisfaction. If Mom goes out, and hires a sitter, so as to NOT be 'using dad as a free babysitter', then dad raises hell because how DARE mom 'dump' the kids with someone else when there's a perfectly good PARENT (dad) with whom the kids can spend time. Yet when mom gives dad first right of refusal, and wants the kids to go with dad (which is theoretically better than dumping them with a sitter, according to dear old dad) then dad pitches a bitch that mom's just using him as a free babysitter. Dad has clearly set mom up to be the evil person, no matter HOW mom tries to handle it. That's what I object to. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ink.net... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message nk.net... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message news "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message news "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08... "Pete" wrote in message news On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children. This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2 hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal. The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new family. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives. This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the welfare of the children of New York. She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the mental state of the leech). Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you. Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a babysitter? Is that really how you view your time with your children? Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions by fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the father's time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules initiated by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children or free babysitting time. If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free babysitting time", I'd certainly question their perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children - babysitting is what you do for other people's children. You are right. Babysitters get paid for performing the service. Fathers pay to perform it. Fathers aren't babysitting their own children. They're parenting. You are right again. When mothers demand fathers parent beyond a court's visitation order and the moms are just giving the dads additional parenting opportunities. And I am sure you will agree, fathers should never be given credit for this additional parenting time by reducing CS for their increased time spent with their children. How much do you think dad's CS should be reduced because he had the kids for 1 additional night? Sure sounds like you're the one demanding to be paid for parenting your own children - but wait, that's what you accuse the MOMs of doing, isn't it? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
How much do you think dad's CS should be reduced because he had the
kids for 1 additional night? About 80%. It should be a simpler equation. When the children are with the father, the father pays 100% of the child support for that time. When they are with the Mother, the mother should pay 100% of the child support at that time. That fixes everything. Each parent now has to balence time spent raising the children with the time spent earning the bread to do so. And this creates a disinsentive for anyone to dump children anywhere. Everyone must make staried eye evaluations of their economic situation, get a job, and to develop their careers if they want to live decently. Imagine that. Ruben |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
"mrbrklyn" wrote in message oups.com... How much do you think dad's CS should be reduced because he had the kids for 1 additional night? About 80%. It should be a simpler equation. When the children are with the father, the father pays 100% of the child support for that time. When they are with the Mother, the mother should pay 100% of the child support at that time. So my ex, who decided 3 years ago to stop seeing the children, should be rewarded for this selfishness? You sure you want to promote that idea? That fixes everything. Not quite. Each parent now has to balence time spent raising the children with the time spent earning the bread to do so. And this creates a disinsentive for anyone to dump children anywhere. Not at all - it creates a HUGE incentive to abamdon the children entirely, so as to pay ZERO child support. Everyone must make staried eye evaluations of their economic situation, get a job, and to develop their careers if they want to live decently. And abandon their children to avoid having to support them. Got it. Imagine that. Ruben |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ink.net... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message nk.net... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message news "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message news "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08... "Pete" wrote in message news On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children. This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2 hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal. The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new family. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives. This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the welfare of the children of New York. She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the mental state of the leech). Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you. Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a babysitter? Is that really how you view your time with your children? Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions by fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the father's time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules initiated by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children or free babysitting time. If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free babysitting time", I'd certainly question their perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children - babysitting is what you do for other people's children. You are right. Babysitters get paid for performing the service. Fathers pay to perform it. Fathers aren't babysitting their own children. They're parenting. You are right again. When mothers demand fathers parent beyond a court's visitation order and the moms are just giving the dads additional parenting opportunities. And I am sure you will agree, fathers should never be given credit for this additional parenting time by reducing CS for their increased time spent with their children. How much do you think dad's CS should be reduced because he had the kids for 1 additional night? Sure sounds like you're the one demanding to be paid for parenting your own children - but wait, that's what you accuse the MOMs of doing, isn't it? 1/30th of his CS obligation, or an amount equivalent to what mom would have to pay for an overnight sitter, whichever is greater plus any extra costs like transportation. As you may not be able to see this topic from the father's perspective, the scenario we are discussing is not about 4-5 hours while mom goes out for the evening. It is typically when mom goes away for an overnight or a weekend. I'm so far removed from paying babysitters I have no idea what the current going rates are. But I do recall many years ago paying $3 per hour for two children and a flat rate of at least $30 for an overnight sitter. If mom is to be compensated to care for the children while in her custody, fathers should get the same treatment when they perform extra visitation time. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
Moon Shyne wrote: "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message nk.net... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message news "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message news "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08... "Pete" wrote in message news7pl22d8rh10d3vscdknq8m8mdqg46s51e@4a x.com... On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children. This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2 hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal. The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new family. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives. This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the welfare of the children of New York. She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the mental state of the leech). Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you. Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a babysitter? Is that really how you view your time with your children? Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions by fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the father's time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules initiated by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children or free babysitting time. If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free babysitting time", I'd certainly question their perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children - babysitting is what you do for other people's children. You are right. Babysitters get paid for performing the service. Fathers pay to perform it. Fathers aren't babysitting their own children. They're parenting. Come on, Moon. You know exactly what they are saying. Yes, I do - they view themselves as babysitters of their own children, which baffles me - it sets up a situation where they can continue to slam mom, and mom can never do it to dad's satisfaction. If Mom goes out, and hires a sitter, so as to NOT be 'using dad as a free babysitter', then dad raises hell because how DARE mom 'dump' the kids with someone else when there's a perfectly good PARENT (dad) with whom the kids can spend time. Yet when mom gives dad first right of refusal, and wants the kids to go with dad (which is theoretically better than dumping them with a sitter, according to dear old dad) then dad pitches a bitch that mom's just using him as a free babysitter. Dad has clearly set mom up to be the evil person, no matter HOW mom tries to handle it. That's what I object to. There is a third option, and that is for Mom to ask Dad to take the kids for a while and then give him back some of the money he entrusted to her to use for the care of said kids. After all, she doesn't view her CS checks as being "paid to watch her kids", now, does she? - Ron ^*^ |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter
Moon Shyne wrote: "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message nk.net... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message news "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message news "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08... "Pete" wrote in message news7pl22d8rh10d3vscdknq8m8mdqg46s51e@4ax. com... On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote: It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children. This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2 hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal. The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new family. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives. This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the welfare of the children of New York. She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the mental state of the leech). Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you. Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a babysitter? Is that really how you view your time with your children? Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions by fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the father's time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules initiated by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children or free babysitting time. If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free babysitting time", I'd certainly question their perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children - babysitting is what you do for other people's children. You are right. Babysitters get paid for performing the service. Fathers pay to perform it. Fathers aren't babysitting their own children. They're parenting. Right. And when CP mothers parent, money is given to them. Right? - Ron ^*^ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Kid is fussy | A Carter | Single Parents | 56 | October 14th 05 06:48 PM |
Washington Times - Custody's High Stakes | Dusty | Child Support | 3 | July 13th 05 02:39 AM |
Father Gets Child Custody in LaMusga Move-Away Case | Dusty | Child Support | 0 | May 2nd 04 09:15 PM |
Statistics for Sheila | Bobbi | Child Support | 11 | March 3rd 04 03:35 PM |
The Determination of Child Custody in the USA | Fighting for kids | Child Support | 21 | November 17th 03 01:35 AM |