Change in SVO - Texas

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

"angel235" wrote in
...................................
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???
==
Absolutely not. If he has the child 5 days a week, you should be paying him
support.
==
==

See this is funny. If you are on the cronies side then everything you do is
fine, but if you arent they attack like a swam.

There are selfish people in this world, and frankly everything angel235 has
done sounds like she has bent over backwards to allow her son and father to
have a relationship. She has changed her schedules and made special
accomodations for her sons benefits but the father wont do the same in
return. He likes to feel that he has control over her and his son.

All the "males are victims group" are crying because
1. They are cheap
2. Dont want to take responsibility for their actions
3. They cant control the "women" any longer and that makes them upset.

Simple.

"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

"angel235" wrote in message
m...
You are taking the only thing he has remaining after the divorce -
visitation leverage.

That's a load of crap. I interpret what you're saying as he has
nothing left that he can use to control of the situation to have it
work in his favor. I know it's hard to get used to it but get used to
it.

I guess this means input that doesn't fit the template of what you want to
hear will be attacked. You really didn't want "thoughts and advice" did
you - you are looking for sympathy and agreement.


Plus you are taking a position that is totally
unreasonable, i.e. since he didn't attempt to update the visitation
order
several years ago, he lost his chance to update it.

I didn't make the rules.

You're not the first one to come in here and hide behind the state being the
surrogate husband protecting you from your child's father. What you are
ignoring is the "rules" change and court orders can be modified over time to
adjust the order's terms as the state laws change.


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. But it sounds like
you are a racist who plays the race card to advance your vicitm status.

And to answer your question above, I guess I would just have to live
with it. Period.

The question you have to answer is - Why do you feel so threatened by a
request from your children's father to increase his time with the
children?

I assure you I feel no threat of any kind from my ex.

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.

WOOOOPS!!!!!!....

angel235 wrote:

You are taking the only thing he has remaining after the divorce -
visitation leverage.

That's a load of crap. I interpret what you're saying as he has
nothing left that he can use to control of the situation to have it
work in his favor. I know it's hard to get used to it but get used to
it.

Plus you are taking a position that is totally
unreasonable, i.e. since he didn't attempt to update the visitation order
several years ago, he lost his chance to update it.

I didn't make the rules.

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

....guess we know where this one's coming from:

************************************************** *********************
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.
************************************************** *********************

Don't look for any reasoned thinking from her, just dogma and hatred.

Mel Gamble

And to answer your question above, I guess I would just have to live
with it. Period.

The question you have to answer is - Why do you feel so threatened by a
request from your children's father to increase his time with the children?

I assure you I feel no threat of any kind from my ex.

You are a perfect example to point at for those who argue...

angel235 wrote:

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???

that if raising your own children were such a costly undertaking, women
would be begging fathers to take over the job.

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

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....

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?????

Mel Gamble

Mel Gamble

Fighting for kids wrote:

See this is funny. If you are on the cronies side then everything you do is
fine, but if you arent they attack like a swam.

There are selfish people in this world, and frankly everything angel235 has
done sounds like she has bent over backwards to allow her son and father to
have a relationship. She has changed her schedules and made special
accomodations for her sons benefits but the father wont do the same in
return. He likes to feel that he has control over her and his son.

All the "males are victims group" are crying because
1. They are cheap
2. Dont want to take responsibility for their actions
3. They cant control the "women" any longer and that makes them upset.

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

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message k.net...
"angel235" wrote in message
m...
You are taking the only thing he has remaining after the divorce -
visitation leverage.

That's a load of crap. I interpret what you're saying as he has
nothing left that he can use to control of the situation to have it
work in his favor. I know it's hard to get used to it but get used to
it.

I guess this means input that doesn't fit the template of what you want to
hear will be attacked. You really didn't want "thoughts and advice" did
you - you are looking for sympathy and agreement.

I never said I was going to agree with what thoughts and advice I
recieved. And as far as attacks go I don't believe I threw the first
"punch" but I'm sure as hell going to defend myself and my positions.
If all I wanted was sympathy and agreement I'd have gone to a
like-minded NG full of sinle parent families. (Note I said single
parent and not single moms.)


Plus you are taking a position that is totally
unreasonable, i.e. since he didn't attempt to update the visitation
order
several years ago, he lost his chance to update it.

I didn't make the rules.

You're not the first one to come in here and hide behind the state being the
surrogate husband protecting you from your child's father. What you are
ignoring is the "rules" change and court orders can be modified over time to
adjust the order's terms as the state laws change.

I've observed first hand what goes on on these particular NG's. I'm
not a surrogate father, I'm a determined, persistant mother who has to
take up the slack for my son's male parent because he won't step up to
the plate. He is the father of my son and like every mother I want
the very best for my son. Unfortunately, what we got was his father
which clearly demonstrates that the world is full of good and bad and
my son will have to learn to deal with negatives all throughout his
life. I'm just sorry that he has to start dealing with
disappointments in life so early. Well actually, that's not true -
all of this stuff has been successfully sheielded from him by my Ex
and me. But I know that every time I hold my tongue in front of my
son I keep telling myself that it won't be me who opens my sons eyes
to what his father is - it will be his father who does that.


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!

But it sounds like
you are a racist who plays the race card to advance your vicitm status.

I'm not a racist I'm a realist who has grown up in a male-dominated
world.
But the tides are turning....

And to answer your question above, I guess I would just have to live
with it. Period.

The question you have to answer is - Why do you feel so threatened by a
request from your children's father to increase his time with the
children?

I assure you I feel no threat of any kind from my ex.

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. 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? 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. 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.

Melvin Gamble wrote in message ...
WOOOOPS!!!!!!....

angel235 wrote:

You are taking the only thing he has remaining after the divorce -
visitation leverage.

That's a load of crap. I interpret what you're saying as he has
nothing left that he can use to control of the situation to have it
work in his favor. I know it's hard to get used to it but get used to
it.

Plus you are taking a position that is totally
unreasonable, i.e. since he didn't attempt to update the visitation order
several years ago, he lost his chance to update it.

I didn't make the rules.

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

...guess we know where this one's coming from:

************************************************** *********************
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.
************************************************** *********************

Don't look for any reasoned thinking from her, just dogma and hatred.

Mel Gamble


Mel - instead of trying to stonewall the conversation with labels why
don't you prove me wrong?

"Gini" wrote in message ...
"angel235" wrote in
..................................
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???
==
Absolutely not. If he has the child 5 days a week, you should be paying him
support.
==
==

I agree.