Would exwife being on SSI keep her from having to pay child support?

On Aug 27, 7:25 pm, "Gini" wrote:
Just to be clear from up above I stated how much I make and its very
conservative. My point was more to point out that she WILL NOT work
and would rather our tax dollars support her and whatever illigitment
children she has. The point is to make do SOMETHING and not let her
squeek by doing nothing.

"whatamess" wrote
..................

I love your quote "Her new baby baby is well supported by a father
who has a job"...so, why is it that you don't do the same? hmmm...
Do you not have a job?

==
Heh. Good point. The new baby's dad supports him/her well so she doesn't
have to :-).
Maybe that $25. a month this dad is after is worth all the begging and
clawing after all.
Gives me a headache just thinking about working so hard for that pittance.
Bet those kids are
damn impressed, too.

Why would you think that they are involved in this conversation in any
way? This is between the two of us and not the kids, come on. My
kids have tons of great memories and have more everyday. Child
support and great memories for my child have nothing to do with one
another.

As for her she can squirm all she wants, I won't loose sleep at all


On Aug 28, 12:13 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
"SingleDad" wrote in message

ps.com...

I am not trying to physically force her to be responsible, I am
looking for her to honor our agreement and be financially responsible
for her children. Why should I move on? Isn't my responsibility to
get the most for my children?

Do you really think that your responsibility is to "get the most" for your
children? Or is it to provide them with a happy, peaceful childhood full of
wonderful memories? Why put them in the middle of mom vs dad fight? She
obviously has no intention of being cooperative. Do you think that the few
dollars you may eventually get from her will be worth the upheaval and
stress that the fight will cause?

If it were the other way around I bet I

would be pursued to the end of the earth to take financial
responsibility for my children.

You're right--you would. Which is equally sad. Far better NOT to be
involved with such a system.

Just because SSI is not included in

her income, I don't see why that should negate the possibility of her
paying child support. From what I understand FOC feels the same way.
I feel that both me and my children are being taken advantage of yet
again. I'm tired of her weaziling out of everything, at some point
she needs to be held accountable.

And she may never be. Some people manage to skate their entire lives.
Don't let her untrustworthiness and lack of responsibility be a motivating
factor in your life. Show your children how mature adults behave. If that
means just walking away from her and letting her "weasle out" one more time,
so be it. Your kids are far more important than your ex needing a lesson in
responsibility.



On Aug 27, 12:28 pm, "Gini" wrote:
"SingleDad" wrote
....................

So there she is working the government system trying to avoid
responsibilities, living with her boyfriend, collecting SSI disability
benefits, all the while being completely capable of working. Should I
try and collect the child support and risk a BS fight with her and
more grief.

==
No. SSI does not count as income for CS calculation.
==

.... is it even worth sending in my lawyer?

==
Absolutely not.
==
My goal is to make her be minimally responsible for the kids she has.

==
CS does not buy responsibility no matter how much money you can squeeze
out
of her
which in this case is zero. Hold your head up and move on. Forget about
her
and enjoy your kids. See
the entire thread: Michigan Child Support.
==
==

Hard to follow your reply, but someone above put it correctly. She is
stealing, and top of that she is violating a court order. I hardly
feel sorry for her. Eventually the law will catch up to her and the
eventual outcome will be YOU will be supporting her child with your
tax dollars. I am merely clamping down and enforcing the order that I
have already acquired. I'll be sure to follow up here with the
results of the family referee.

On Aug 28, 11:46 pm, whatamess wrote:
On Aug 27, 11:32 pm, "Chris" wrote:



"Gini" wrote in message

news:94JAi.843$Eh5.793@trndny06...

"whatamess" wrote
..................

I love your quote "Her new baby baby is well supported by a father
who has a job"...so, why is it that you don't do the same? hmmm...
Do you not have a job?
==
Heh. Good point. The new baby's dad supports him/her well so she doesn't
have to :-).
Maybe that $25. a month this dad is after is worth all the begging and
clawing after all.
Gives me a headache just thinking about working so hard for that pittance.
Bet those kids are
damn impressed, too.

NO one should have children that they are unable/unwilling to care for. That
includes both mothers AND fathers. Also, NO one should steal!

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are 100% correct...which means, NO WOMAN should be having
children that she cannot FULLY support on her own...What that means
is that don't give me the well the dad is 50% responsible, because
even
if daddy was with you, once he died, you WOULD have to support them
fully...oh no, sorry, then you would make the tax payers do that for
you as well...
Same goes for men...if she were to die tomorrow, you would have to
fully support them as well...so, stop trying to make excuses...If she
lived
with you, you would probably be fully supporting them ALL as well, so
just move on with your life...

On Aug 27, 11:18 pm, "Gini" wrote:
"DB" wrote in message

...

"SingleDad" wrote in

When we divorced our marriage settlement stated that she got two years
off from child support. Well two years have passed, and she got on
SSI (for depression I think) so she could evade child support.

Evading child support is a criminal offense, you don't have to do a dam
thing but submit her dead beat name to the local DA and let the CSE do all
the work!

==
Well, that would be if she had an order to pay.
==

And she does, the amount is what is up for argument here.

On Aug 28, 11:46 pm, whatamess wrote:
On Aug 27, 11:32 pm, "Chris" wrote:



"Gini" wrote in message

news:94JAi.843$Eh5.793@trndny06...

"whatamess" wrote
..................

I love your quote "Her new baby baby is well supported by a father
who has a job"...so, why is it that you don't do the same? hmmm...
Do you not have a job?
==
Heh. Good point. The new baby's dad supports him/her well so she doesn't
have to :-).
Maybe that $25. a month this dad is after is worth all the begging and
clawing after all.
Gives me a headache just thinking about working so hard for that pittance.
Bet those kids are
damn impressed, too.

NO one should have children that they are unable/unwilling to care for. That
includes both mothers AND fathers. Also, NO one should steal!

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are 100% correct...which means, NO WOMAN should be having
children that she cannot FULLY support on her own...What that means
is that don't give me the well the dad is 50% responsible, because
even
if daddy was with you, once he died, you WOULD have to support them
fully...oh no, sorry, then you would make the tax payers do that for
you as well...
Same goes for men...if she were to die tomorrow, you would have to
fully support them as well...so, stop trying to make excuses...If she
lived
with you, you would probably be fully supporting them ALL as well, so
just move on with your life...


She didn't die she just felt like not taking care of her kids. You
seem to be fighting really hard to see me move on, thats great but we
still have to deal with her, you don't. Maybe you see the system as
one set up for only women to get support but the real deal is many
women are walking out on their children. There are probably hundreds
of thousands of fathers who have to pick up the mess after a mother
does something like that. Obviously she lost the kids because she was
a danger. She still is a danger. I would love to see a day when she
is either responsible and caring for her children or the day she just
goes away. I hope for the first but I plan for the latter and the day
I take her to court to have her parental rights terminated. If you
really cared about your kids and wanted them to have a nice life you
would use your visitation and not keep kids hanging, you would also
pay child support and not fight doing so. I don't need her money but
that doesn't mean the kids couldn't use it.

"SingleDad" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Aug 27, 11:18 pm, "Gini" wrote:
"DB" wrote in message

...

"SingleDad" wrote in

When we divorced our marriage settlement stated that she got two years
off from child support. Well two years have passed, and she got on
SSI (for depression I think) so she could evade child support.

Evading child support is a criminal offense, you don't have to do a dam
thing but submit her dead beat name to the local DA and let the CSE do
all
the work!

==
Well, that would be if she had an order to pay.
==

And she does, the amount is what is up for argument here.
==
Well, then what amount does the order require her to pay?

On Aug 30, 1:47 pm, SingleDad wrote:
On Aug 28, 11:46 pm, whatamess wrote:





On Aug 27, 11:32 pm, "Chris" wrote:

"Gini" wrote in message

news:94JAi.843$Eh5.793@trndny06...

"whatamess" wrote
..................

I love your quote "Her new baby baby is well supported by a father
who has a job"...so, why is it that you don't do the same? hmmm...
Do you not have a job?
==
Heh. Good point. The new baby's dad supports him/her well so she doesn't
have to :-).
Maybe that $25. a month this dad is after is worth all the begging and
clawing after all.
Gives me a headache just thinking about working so hard for that pittance.
Bet those kids are
damn impressed, too.

NO one should have children that they are unable/unwilling to care for. That
includes both mothers AND fathers. Also, NO one should steal!

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are 100% correct...which means, NO WOMAN should be having
children that she cannot FULLY support on her own...What that means
is that don't give me the well the dad is 50% responsible, because
even
if daddy was with you, once he died, you WOULD have to support them
fully...oh no, sorry, then you would make the tax payers do that for
you as well...
Same goes for men...if she were to die tomorrow, you would have to
fully support them as well...so, stop trying to make excuses...If she
lived
with you, you would probably be fully supporting them ALL as well, so
just move on with your life...

She didn't die she just felt like not taking care of her kids. You
seem to be fighting really hard to see me move on, thats great but we
still have to deal with her, you don't. Maybe you see the system as
one set up for only women to get support but the real deal is many
women are walking out on their children. There are probably hundreds
of thousands of fathers who have to pick up the mess after a mother
does something like that. Obviously she lost the kids because she was
a danger. She still is a danger. I would love to see a day when she
is either responsible and caring for her children or the day she just
goes away. I hope for the first but I plan for the latter and the day
I take her to court to have her parental rights terminated. If you
really cared about your kids and wanted them to have a nice life you
would use your visitation and not keep kids hanging, you would also
pay child support and not fight doing so. I don't need her money but
that doesn't mean the kids couldn't use it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have to agree with single dad 100%. Are you guys saying these kids
don't deserve financial support from both of their parents? It takes a
lot of courage to step up to the plate and go through what the courts
put you through to get what your kids rightfully deserve. He's also
absolutely right that if it were vice versa he would be the terrible
horrible dead beat dad that they would track across the country to get
the child support. I too am tired of people who live off the state (my
taxes), continue to have children and do nothing to better themselves.
I say go for it and good luck.

wrote
...........................

I have to agree with single dad 100%. Are you guys saying these kids
don't deserve financial support from both of their parents?
==
Not at all.
==
It takes a
lot of courage to step up to the plate and go through what the courts
put you through to get what your kids rightfully deserve.
==
"Deserve?" The kids "deserve" to have immature parents duking it out in a
courtroom over a few dollars??
==
He's also
absolutely right that if it were vice versa he would be the terrible
horrible dead beat dad that they would track across the country to get
the child support. I too am tired of people who live off the state (my
taxes), continue to have children and do nothing to better themselves.
==
And, I'm equally tired of of people picking lousy partners to have children
with and then whining about how much
they "deserve" and using my tax dollars to tie up family courts for years to
squeeze $25.-50. a month out of them to
"make them responsible." The custodial parent
was abysmally irresponsible in procreating with this woman and he now
expects taxpayers to go after her because he can't
manage his own family. He shouldn't have had kids he doesn't want to
support. Period.
==
I say go for it and good luck.
==
Really? What a productive way to spend one's time and my tax dollars.
Exactly, why would you "go for it?"
To "teach her a lesson? To "make her accept responsibility?" Clue--the money
isn't about "her"
at all. And, the "award" for dozens of hours of hassles and court time will
do nothing to help those kids--
And, it's MY taxes paying for this fiasco! I don't give a **** if he wants
to teach her a lesson
but I do give a **** that he's taking my money to play this silly game.

Huh? Do you really think that the abysmally few dollars he might be able to
wrest from her long after his children are grown and gone are going to be
worth the stress being created to get those abysmally few dollars? She
works part time at a fast food place, and can probably keep hopping around
changing jobs for years to come. Meanwhile, he is spending time and money
to go after her for money that he says he really doesn't want--he just wants
her to sign off on the kids so his current wife can adopt them.

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Aug 30, 1:47 pm, SingleDad wrote:
On Aug 28, 11:46 pm, whatamess wrote:





On Aug 27, 11:32 pm, "Chris" wrote:

"Gini" wrote in message

news:94JAi.843$Eh5.793@trndny06...

"whatamess" wrote
..................

I love your quote "Her new baby baby is well supported by a
father
who has a job"...so, why is it that you don't do the same?
hmmm...
Do you not have a job?
==
Heh. Good point. The new baby's dad supports him/her well so she
doesn't
have to :-).
Maybe that $25. a month this dad is after is worth all the begging
and
clawing after all.
Gives me a headache just thinking about working so hard for that
pittance.
Bet those kids are
damn impressed, too.

NO one should have children that they are unable/unwilling to care
for. That
includes both mothers AND fathers. Also, NO one should steal!

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are 100% correct...which means, NO WOMAN should be having
children that she cannot FULLY support on her own...What that means
is that don't give me the well the dad is 50% responsible, because
even
if daddy was with you, once he died, you WOULD have to support them
fully...oh no, sorry, then you would make the tax payers do that for
you as well...
Same goes for men...if she were to die tomorrow, you would have to
fully support them as well...so, stop trying to make excuses...If she
lived
with you, you would probably be fully supporting them ALL as well, so
just move on with your life...

She didn't die she just felt like not taking care of her kids. You
seem to be fighting really hard to see me move on, thats great but we
still have to deal with her, you don't. Maybe you see the system as
one set up for only women to get support but the real deal is many
women are walking out on their children. There are probably hundreds
of thousands of fathers who have to pick up the mess after a mother
does something like that. Obviously she lost the kids because she was
a danger. She still is a danger. I would love to see a day when she
is either responsible and caring for her children or the day she just
goes away. I hope for the first but I plan for the latter and the day
I take her to court to have her parental rights terminated. If you
really cared about your kids and wanted them to have a nice life you
would use your visitation and not keep kids hanging, you would also
pay child support and not fight doing so. I don't need her money but
that doesn't mean the kids couldn't use it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have to agree with single dad 100%. Are you guys saying these kids
don't deserve financial support from both of their parents? It takes a
lot of courage to step up to the plate and go through what the courts
put you through to get what your kids rightfully deserve. He's also
absolutely right that if it were vice versa he would be the terrible
horrible dead beat dad that they would track across the country to get
the child support. I too am tired of people who live off the state (my
taxes), continue to have children and do nothing to better themselves.
I say go for it and good luck.

"teachrmama" wrote
Huh? Do you really think that the abysmally few dollars he might be able
to wrest from her long after his children are grown and gone are going to
be worth the stress being created to get those abysmally few dollars? She
works part time at a fast food place, and can probably keep hopping around
changing jobs for years to come. Meanwhile, he is spending time and money
to go after her for money that he says he really doesn't want--he just
wants her to sign off on the kids so his current wife can adopt them.
==
And we're footing the bill. Sweet.
==