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

deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #571  
Old November 15th 07, 03:20 AM posted to alt.child-support
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)



--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , Chris says...



--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
et...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
et...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
t...
Chris wrote:
How exactly have I done *anything* to prevent him from
parenting his
daughter?

Let him try to take her home so he can "parent" her, and
then you
will
have
your answer.

Dude! He LEFT THE STATE. Why should he get preferential

treatment
just
because he is a man? Because that is what you seem to be

implying.

How so?

Your statements imply that I should not have custody,

Not even CLOSE!

You say I should ,move her to TN.


IF you want her to be with her father. Forget THAT lil' part?


Prolly futile, as this is going around and around in circles, but clearly

what
it needed is for the father to be a CO-parent. The best Sarah can do

concerning
co-parenting with him since he up and moved far away is allow travel for
visitation. Which isn't really coparenting.

It's a situation he created.

You *are* consistently rather cryptic.


YOU figured it out.


Banty



  #572  
Old November 15th 07, 03:25 AM posted to alt.child-support
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)



--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Very Determined!" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Nov 13, 10:10 pm, Sarah Gray wrote:
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message

...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
.. .
Chris wrote:
Well, her grandparents would not be watching her; they

both
work,
too. I
have no problem with her being with her father;

Yes you do because that is why she is not with him.


Um, why should I give up seeing my daughter on a regular basis

so she
can go live with a man who has never expressed any intention

to raise
her in TN?

He is not even in a position to take care of her full-time!

- he left the state with less than a day's notice, and he has

not
seen
her since July.
-he has no transportation of his own
-he has no plans to have a apartment of his own anytime soon
-he has no arrangements for schooling or childcare
-if he is unable to pay half of a conservative estimate of his

child's
expenses, how in the hell can he afford to raise her full

time?

ALL irrelevant. My ONLY claim is that your claim that you have no
problem
with your child being with him is false.


It's not irrelevant. You suggest that I send her to live with him;


If you want her to be with him, as you claim, then sending her to be

with
him will accomplish such goal.


I want her to be able to see her father. However, I also should be able
to spend time with her. Why is it *my* obligation to facilitate his
relationship with his daughter in this situation? HE SHOULD MOVE BACK TO
BE WITH HER.

I am
explaining why that is not feasible.


Correction: You are giving reasons to support why you do NOT want her
to be
with him; thus, your claim is FALSE!


No, those are reasons why he is unable to support her. When he lived
here, we split up time 50/50. I have no problem with that whatsoever,m
but I don't think my daughter and I should have to make 16-hour round
trip drives multiple times a week! that is preposterous! He is UNABLE to
support her on his own. What good would it do my daughter to send her to
live with him?

Plus, you know, there's the fact
that he doesn't seem to really want her there full time...



I do not have her full-time because I'm her *mother*, I have

her full
time because her other parent decided she was not that

important to h
im
anymore and left the state.

Guess again. You DO have custody because you are the mother; and

the
government people say so too.


what are you talking about? That is completely fabricated bull****.


You're right. That "family" court sees to it that virtually all

mothers
custody of their children is merely a figment of my imagination.


You said that *I* have custody because I am a mother. That is false. In
fact, as far as I know, we *still* have 50/50 custody; he just does not
care to exercise his parenting time.

If I
left the state, leaving my daughter with her father, would I still

have
"custody" because I'm her mother?


Legally, YES.


Chris, I don't really think you believe that were I to leave the state
as he did, and he petitioned for full custody, that they would grant
*me* full custody and force him to send her to live with me,
particularly if I was, as he is, incapable of providing for her on a
full-time basis.
Please cite the law that states that mothers *always* get custody, in
every circumstance.


Why are you insisting that I am an unfit parent simply because I'm

a
woman?

I NEVER made that claim.


You insist that my daughter would be better off not attending school,
and living with her father who does not have an apartment, a car, or the
means to support her on his own. I'm assuming this is because I am a
woman, but maybe you just have a personal thing against me....

--

Sarah Gray


no, he has a personal thing against all women who feel that there
children are deserving of "free money," He does not understand a
mother's reasoning...


SWEEPING generalization. But when a mother claims 2+2=5, you're right; I
will NEVER understand such "reasoning".





  #573  
Old November 15th 07, 03:26 AM posted to alt.child-support
teachrmama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,905
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)


"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. net...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
The thing is, it's for *his daughter*, not for me.

Uhuh.

*I* don't need anyone supporting me,

Umm, it's more like greed, not need.

It is not greed to insist her father provide for her.


Nice twist. It is GREED to insist that he give you FREE MONEY.


He has no way of providing for her commensurate to how I do without
either sending money, or paying in full for certain expenses on his own.


His obligation to you and your daughter is exactly SQUAT!


How about his obligation to HIS daughter?


  #574  
Old November 15th 07, 03:28 AM posted to alt.child-support
teachrmama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,905
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)


"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to
have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to
have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
et...
DB wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in

That is $516 a month; half of that is $258.

OK, just for argument sake, lets round it off to $600!

Lets look at it from a different perspective, that's about
the
same
cost
of new car with fuel and insurance too.
Millions of single people buy new cars everyday and live to

tell
the
tale.

Are single mothers really that financially strapped that they
need
a
huge
government bureaucracy to help them out?

Sounds to me you're far better off without this immature
idiot
in
your
life and the chump change isn't worth the aggravation.

That isn't the point. This is not about my personal financial
circumstances, it's about his responsibility to help support

his
child.
He
says he wants to be in her life; Why should I assume all the
costs
of
raising our daughter just because I can? That is ridiculous.
If

I
had
a
six-figure income, I might feel differently about it. He says
that
I
am
"using his money as a safety net", but seeing how
irresponsible
he
has
been, I see no problem in ensuring that my daughter has her

needs
met.

I don't know either of you, but it sounds as if he has some sort

of
a
plan
and is tryijng to lure you into this whole court thing for a
reason.
Have
you met his parents? Could he be trying for custody? I agree

that
he
should be helping with basic needs for his own child--and it is

ok
that
it
is a safety net, allowing you to put away a little each month in
case
you
become ill and have to rely on savings for a while.

Your TRUE colors exposed.

Chris, I have ALWAYS said that I thought that the basic needs for

the
child
should be split between the parents. I have NEVER said that I

thought
there
should not be child support, especially in a divorce situation. Go
back
and
check it out. It is today's imfair, biased system that I do not

agree
with--not the idea of both parents supporting their children. I

have
also
stated repeatedly that 50/50 joint custody should be the default
position,
with no money changing hands.

I was making reference to this part: "allowing you to put away a

little
each
month".

Why should she not put away part of the money she earns?

We aren't talking about the money she earns; we are talking about HIS
money.


No we're not. You're confused. He sends his half of the basic needs,
she
spends it on the child's basic needs. Her money that she earns that she

was
spending on his half of the basic needs before is now freed up for her to
put a bit away. Soo, not that hard to understand.


She can't have that "safety net" without receiving HIS money. Therefore,
it
is HIS money that is being "put away". Not hard at ALL to understand.


chuckle Perhaps you will feel better when your child support obligation
is finally paid off, Chris.


  #575  
Old November 15th 07, 03:29 AM posted to alt.child-support,talk.abortion
teachrmama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,905
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)


"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
well, please, Chris, enlighten me as to how he can contribute

anm
equal
share towards supporting her without sending me money.

EXACTLY the same way you are doing it.

Well how do you propose he pay for half of her food costs, shelter
costs, and childcare costs without sending me money (or the

equivalent)?

Like I said, EXACTLY the same way you are doing it.


But I *am* spending money on these things. He is unable to care for her
on his own.


NOW I get it....... duh! HE'S not good enough to care for her, but he's
good enough to send you free money. Please forgive me as I am not the
brightest bulb in the chandelier. I keep forgetting that we are talking
about a man and NOT a woman.




I spend the money I earn on those things. Why should he not do so?


Why SHOULD he? The burden of proof rests with you.


Why *should* he? You argue that she ought to live with him,


IF, keword "IF", you want her to be with him. For some reason, you keep
making sure to NOT include that part of my claim.


however,
this is not an option. If he is unwilling to do what he needs to do to
be a real dad, the last he can do is help to support her.


Argumentum ad misericordiam.


Idiotum ad infinitum


  #576  
Old November 15th 07, 03:40 AM posted to alt.child-support
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)



--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. net...
teachrmama wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
teachrmama wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. net...
DB wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in

He is angry because I cheated on him, so his mindset is that
*everything* I say and do is wrong.
Betrayal is a strong motivator for denying you any assistance of

any
kind in his eyes!

He's never going to give you a dime, I would plan on going it alone
from here out!

The thing is, it's for *his daughter*, not for me. And frankly, I am
not willing to fight this in court past the motion I filed to

increase
support. If he really does quit his job to haul me into court over

and
over, that's his problem- he'll just be accruing arrearages.
Well, it is very sad that you cheated on him. Were you married or

just
in a relationship? It would be a very hurtful thing to work through.
It would be nice if he could look past the hurt and see his daughter.


We were married. I'll admit, I was a pretty crummy wife in many
respects. That has nothing to do with how well of a job I do raising

our
daughter. The only reason I *didn't* file for divorce once I realized
things were not working out at all, was because of our daughter.

Again, it is very hard to look past hurt. Hurt tends to obscure just
about everthing else. You say you only need $250 per month to make it
financially--the court will probably order much more than that. If you
really want to keep things cooperative for your daughter's sake, you
could send back the monies over and above the $250 per month. Just
because the court orders it doesn't mean you have to keep it.


I see your point, but why should I be cooperative when he refuses to

agree
to the $250 in the first place? I think the money would be better spent

in
a college savings fund for my daughter, but I'm sure you think that that
would be stealing money from him or something.


Well, if you tell him that the money is going into a college fund, and you
keep him apprised as to how much he is contributing to the fund, he may

not
be as upset. But let's just hope that he is reasonable, and agrees to the
$250.


She controls her money, she controls the child, she controls HIS money, and
he's supposed to be reasonable by by giving her free cash? With all due
respect, what the heck is WRONG with you?

If he is lurking here, he will have begun to understand how unfair
courts can be to NCPs.


Code for "fathers".






  #577  
Old November 15th 07, 03:40 AM posted to alt.child-support,talk.abortion
Bob Whiteside
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 981
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)


"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
well, please, Chris, enlighten me as to how he can contribute

anm
equal
share towards supporting her without sending me money.

EXACTLY the same way you are doing it.

Well how do you propose he pay for half of her food costs, shelter
costs, and childcare costs without sending me money (or the
equivalent)?

Like I said, EXACTLY the same way you are doing it.

But I *am* spending money on these things. He is unable to care for her
on his own.


NOW I get it....... duh! HE'S not good enough to care for her, but he's
good enough to send you free money. Please forgive me as I am not the
brightest bulb in the chandelier. I keep forgetting that we are talking
about a man and NOT a woman.




I spend the money I earn on those things. Why should he not do so?

Why SHOULD he? The burden of proof rests with you.

Why *should* he? You argue that she ought to live with him,


IF, keword "IF", you want her to be with him. For some reason, you keep
making sure to NOT include that part of my claim.


however,
this is not an option. If he is unwilling to do what he needs to do to
be a real dad, the last he can do is help to support her.


Argumentum ad misericordiam.


Idiotum ad infinitum


Quod erat demonstrandum.

  #578  
Old November 15th 07, 04:57 AM posted to alt.child-support
teachrmama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,905
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)


"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
et...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
et...
Chris wrote:
Why would I ask for more than an approximate of half of my

daughter's
basic expenses?

Actually, it's a demand; but that's another discussion. A better
question is
why not? Afterall, when something's FREE why not get all you can?

*you* think it unethical to expect a father to support his children
financially.


Correction: I think it "unethical" to extort money from a man by force!


What about a woman? We agreed to have a child. Now he does not want to
support her. If anything, *he* is creating a financial burden on *me*!


Uhuh. And if you agree that I should purchase a new automobile, but you
don't contribute to the payments, then you are creating a financial burden
on me. LOVE your reasoning!


Ah.....Car = child. Hmmmm..........Purchase =
reproduction....I...um....seee......sure.....


  #579  
Old November 15th 07, 04:59 AM posted to alt.child-support
teachrmama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,905
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)


"Chris" wrote in message
news


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. net...
teachrmama wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
teachrmama wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. net...
DB wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in

He is angry because I cheated on him, so his mindset is that
*everything* I say and do is wrong.
Betrayal is a strong motivator for denying you any assistance of

any
kind in his eyes!

He's never going to give you a dime, I would plan on going it
alone
from here out!

The thing is, it's for *his daughter*, not for me. And frankly, I
am
not willing to fight this in court past the motion I filed to

increase
support. If he really does quit his job to haul me into court over

and
over, that's his problem- he'll just be accruing arrearages.
Well, it is very sad that you cheated on him. Were you married or

just
in a relationship? It would be a very hurtful thing to work
through.
It would be nice if he could look past the hurt and see his
daughter.


We were married. I'll admit, I was a pretty crummy wife in many
respects. That has nothing to do with how well of a job I do raising

our
daughter. The only reason I *didn't* file for divorce once I realized
things were not working out at all, was because of our daughter.

Again, it is very hard to look past hurt. Hurt tends to obscure just
about everthing else. You say you only need $250 per month to make it
financially--the court will probably order much more than that. If
you
really want to keep things cooperative for your daughter's sake, you
could send back the monies over and above the $250 per month. Just
because the court orders it doesn't mean you have to keep it.

I see your point, but why should I be cooperative when he refuses to

agree
to the $250 in the first place? I think the money would be better spent

in
a college savings fund for my daughter, but I'm sure you think that
that
would be stealing money from him or something.


Well, if you tell him that the money is going into a college fund, and
you
keep him apprised as to how much he is contributing to the fund, he may

not
be as upset. But let's just hope that he is reasonable, and agrees to
the
$250.


She controls her money, she controls the child, she controls HIS money,
and
he's supposed to be reasonable by by giving her free cash? With all due
respect, what the heck is WRONG with you?


Where, pray tell, is she controlling his money? What the heck is wrong with
you?


If he is lurking here, he will have begun to understand how unfair
courts can be to NCPs.


Code for "fathers".


Most often, yes.


  #580  
Old November 15th 07, 05:01 AM posted to alt.child-support,talk.abortion
teachrmama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,905
Default deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
well, please, Chris, enlighten me as to how he can contribute
anm
equal
share towards supporting her without sending me money.

EXACTLY the same way you are doing it.

Well how do you propose he pay for half of her food costs, shelter
costs, and childcare costs without sending me money (or the
equivalent)?

Like I said, EXACTLY the same way you are doing it.

But I *am* spending money on these things. He is unable to care for her
on his own.

NOW I get it....... duh! HE'S not good enough to care for her, but he's
good enough to send you free money. Please forgive me as I am not the
brightest bulb in the chandelier. I keep forgetting that we are talking
about a man and NOT a woman.




I spend the money I earn on those things. Why should he not do so?

Why SHOULD he? The burden of proof rests with you.

Why *should* he? You argue that she ought to live with him,

IF, keword "IF", you want her to be with him. For some reason, you keep
making sure to NOT include that part of my claim.


however,
this is not an option. If he is unwilling to do what he needs to do to
be a real dad, the last he can do is help to support her.

Argumentum ad misericordiam.


Idiotum ad infinitum


Quod erat demonstrandum.



Illegitimi no carborundum



 




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
CT: New Haven witch hunt for deadbeat fathers - notice that NO mothers were on their list... Dusty Child Support 1 April 5th 05 06:37 AM
Guest Speaker: Dr. Rita Laws Topic: Topic: Why Kids Lie and What We Can Do About It wexwimpy Foster Parents 0 March 2nd 04 06:42 PM
Waiting list for POFAK mailing list Herself General 3 October 15th 03 06:26 PM
Waiting list for POFAK mailing list Herself Breastfeeding 3 October 15th 03 06:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.