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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake
Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake
Fri Apr 5, 2002, 10:40 AM ET ROME (Reuters) - In a ruling that has sent a shiver down many parents' spines, Italy's highest appeals court has decreed that fathers must carry on supporting adult children until they find a job to their liking. Psychologists warned that the decision could discourage people from having children in a country whose birthrate is already one of the lowest in the world, while commentators said it could boost Italy's already high unemployment rate. The case revolves around a wealthy family in the southern city of Naples, where the father is still paying some $680 a month in maintenance to a son who is in his 30s and has a university law degree. The son also has a trust fund worth some $220,000, lives in one of the smartest parts of the city, and has turned down several job offers. But the court ruled that the father, Giuseppe Andreoli, who is a former parliamentarian and a respected Neapolitan medic, should carry on supporting his estranged son. "You cannot blame a young person, particularly from a well-off family, who refuses a job that does not fit his aspirations. The parents have to pay for their upkeep," said the court in a verdict handed down earlier this week. Andreoli said on Friday he was shocked by the decision. "I feel disgust for a country that I love. It wasn't always like this," he told Reuters. (When this story came out, quite a few people asked why this hadn't already happened in California!) Well, it has. Only it has only happened to fathers! ~AZ~ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake
Continental European laws and practices sometimes are radically
different from what happens in the U.S., the U.K., and other English-speaking countries. The case reported below may be an example of this. Another example happened several years ago, when an Italian judge told a divorced father that he MUST have contact with his children during visitation periods. (How the latter ruling was enforced, I don't know.) Still another example . . . in France, they used to have forced inheritance laws (and they may still have such laws). These laws barred parents from disinheriting their children. Wealthy French people used to invest in the U.S. as a way of putting their assets beyond the reach of French inheritance laws -- yet another example of the iron law of unintended consequences. So far as the U.S. is concerned, the application of aberrant legal principles is, as far as I can see, governed entirely by whether the target is fathers. That's the explanation for the suspension of the general rules about the age of majority, when it comes to forcing fathers to pay for their adult children. It's also the explanation for the suspension of the general U.S. rules about debtors' prison, when it comes to imprisoning fathers for "child support" debts. "AZ Astrea" wrote in message ... Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake Fri Apr 5, 2002, 10:40 AM ET ROME (Reuters) - In a ruling that has sent a shiver down many parents' spines, Italy's highest appeals court has decreed that fathers must carry on supporting adult children until they find a job to their liking. Psychologists warned that the decision could discourage people from having children in a country whose birthrate is already one of the lowest in the world, while commentators said it could boost Italy's already high unemployment rate. The case revolves around a wealthy family in the southern city of Naples, where the father is still paying some $680 a month in maintenance to a son who is in his 30s and has a university law degree. The son also has a trust fund worth some $220,000, lives in one of the smartest parts of the city, and has turned down several job offers. But the court ruled that the father, Giuseppe Andreoli, who is a former parliamentarian and a respected Neapolitan medic, should carry on supporting his estranged son. "You cannot blame a young person, particularly from a well-off family, who refuses a job that does not fit his aspirations. The parents have to pay for their upkeep," said the court in a verdict handed down earlier this week. Andreoli said on Friday he was shocked by the decision. "I feel disgust for a country that I love. It wasn't always like this," he told Reuters. (When this story came out, quite a few people asked why this hadn't already happened in California!) Well, it has. Only it has only happened to fathers! ~AZ~ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake
Continental European laws and practices sometimes are radically
different from what happens in the U.S., the U.K., and other English-speaking countries. The case reported below may be an example of this. Another example happened several years ago, when an Italian judge told a divorced father that he MUST have contact with his children during visitation periods. (How the latter ruling was enforced, I don't know.) Still another example . . . in France, they used to have forced inheritance laws (and they may still have such laws). These laws barred parents from disinheriting their children. Wealthy French people used to invest in the U.S. as a way of putting their assets beyond the reach of French inheritance laws -- yet another example of the iron law of unintended consequences. So far as the U.S. is concerned, the application of aberrant legal principles is, as far as I can see, governed entirely by whether the target is fathers. That's the explanation for the suspension of the general rules about the age of majority, when it comes to forcing fathers to pay for their adult children. It's also the explanation for the suspension of the general U.S. rules about debtors' prison, when it comes to imprisoning fathers for "child support" debts. "AZ Astrea" wrote in message ... Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake Fri Apr 5, 2002, 10:40 AM ET ROME (Reuters) - In a ruling that has sent a shiver down many parents' spines, Italy's highest appeals court has decreed that fathers must carry on supporting adult children until they find a job to their liking. Psychologists warned that the decision could discourage people from having children in a country whose birthrate is already one of the lowest in the world, while commentators said it could boost Italy's already high unemployment rate. The case revolves around a wealthy family in the southern city of Naples, where the father is still paying some $680 a month in maintenance to a son who is in his 30s and has a university law degree. The son also has a trust fund worth some $220,000, lives in one of the smartest parts of the city, and has turned down several job offers. But the court ruled that the father, Giuseppe Andreoli, who is a former parliamentarian and a respected Neapolitan medic, should carry on supporting his estranged son. "You cannot blame a young person, particularly from a well-off family, who refuses a job that does not fit his aspirations. The parents have to pay for their upkeep," said the court in a verdict handed down earlier this week. Andreoli said on Friday he was shocked by the decision. "I feel disgust for a country that I love. It wasn't always like this," he told Reuters. (When this story came out, quite a few people asked why this hadn't already happened in California!) Well, it has. Only it has only happened to fathers! ~AZ~ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake
Continental European laws and practices sometimes are radically
different from what happens in the U.S., the U.K., and other English-speaking countries. The case reported below may be an example of this. Another example happened several years ago, when an Italian judge told a divorced father that he MUST have contact with his children during visitation periods. (How the latter ruling was enforced, I don't know.) Still another example . . . in France, they used to have forced inheritance laws (and they may still have such laws). These laws barred parents from disinheriting their children. Wealthy French people used to invest in the U.S. as a way of putting their assets beyond the reach of French inheritance laws -- yet another example of the iron law of unintended consequences. So far as the U.S. is concerned, the application of aberrant legal principles is, as far as I can see, governed entirely by whether the target is fathers. That's the explanation for the suspension of the general rules about the age of majority, when it comes to forcing fathers to pay for their adult children. It's also the explanation for the suspension of the general U.S. rules about debtors' prison, when it comes to imprisoning fathers for "child support" debts. "AZ Astrea" wrote in message ... Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake Fri Apr 5, 2002, 10:40 AM ET ROME (Reuters) - In a ruling that has sent a shiver down many parents' spines, Italy's highest appeals court has decreed that fathers must carry on supporting adult children until they find a job to their liking. Psychologists warned that the decision could discourage people from having children in a country whose birthrate is already one of the lowest in the world, while commentators said it could boost Italy's already high unemployment rate. The case revolves around a wealthy family in the southern city of Naples, where the father is still paying some $680 a month in maintenance to a son who is in his 30s and has a university law degree. The son also has a trust fund worth some $220,000, lives in one of the smartest parts of the city, and has turned down several job offers. But the court ruled that the father, Giuseppe Andreoli, who is a former parliamentarian and a respected Neapolitan medic, should carry on supporting his estranged son. "You cannot blame a young person, particularly from a well-off family, who refuses a job that does not fit his aspirations. The parents have to pay for their upkeep," said the court in a verdict handed down earlier this week. Andreoli said on Friday he was shocked by the decision. "I feel disgust for a country that I love. It wasn't always like this," he told Reuters. (When this story came out, quite a few people asked why this hadn't already happened in California!) Well, it has. Only it has only happened to fathers! ~AZ~ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake
"Kenneth S." wrote in message ... Continental European laws and practices sometimes are radically different from what happens in the U.S., the U.K., and other English-speaking countries. The case reported below may be an example of this. Another example happened several years ago, when an Italian judge told a divorced father that he MUST have contact with his children during visitation periods. (How the latter ruling was enforced, I don't know.) Still another example . . . in France, they used to have forced inheritance laws (and they may still have such laws). These laws barred parents from disinheriting their children. Wealthy French people used to invest in the U.S. as a way of putting their assets beyond the reach of French inheritance laws -- yet another example of the iron law of unintended consequences. --------------------- Luckily these wealthy families were able to get around the law some way. When it comes to inheritances here it also takes some finageling to get around the laws. Like if you are married but don't want your spouse to get your money. -------------------- So far as the U.S. is concerned, the application of aberrant legal principles is, as far as I can see, governed entirely by whether the target is fathers. That's the explanation for the suspension of the general rules about the age of majority, when it comes to forcing fathers to pay for their adult children. ------------------------------- That's what came to my mind when I saw this article. I think most Americans would read it and be shocked or laugh at those strange Italians, forcing all parents to pay support to their adult children! But what most don't realize is that fathers are already put in a similar situation right here. Nobody should be forced to pay for the choices of those over 18 years old, (unless they're disabled then 21). Nobody should be forced to pay for college for anybody else. ~AZ~ It's also the explanation for the suspension of the general U.S. rules about debtors' prison, when it comes to imprisoning fathers for "child support" debts. "AZ Astrea" wrote in message ... Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake Fri Apr 5, 2002, 10:40 AM ET ROME (Reuters) - In a ruling that has sent a shiver down many parents' spines, Italy's highest appeals court has decreed that fathers must carry on supporting adult children until they find a job to their liking. Psychologists warned that the decision could discourage people from having children in a country whose birthrate is already one of the lowest in the world, while commentators said it could boost Italy's already high unemployment rate. The case revolves around a wealthy family in the southern city of Naples, where the father is still paying some $680 a month in maintenance to a son who is in his 30s and has a university law degree. The son also has a trust fund worth some $220,000, lives in one of the smartest parts of the city, and has turned down several job offers. But the court ruled that the father, Giuseppe Andreoli, who is a former parliamentarian and a respected Neapolitan medic, should carry on supporting his estranged son. "You cannot blame a young person, particularly from a well-off family, who refuses a job that does not fit his aspirations. The parents have to pay for their upkeep," said the court in a verdict handed down earlier this week. Andreoli said on Friday he was shocked by the decision. "I feel disgust for a country that I love. It wasn't always like this," he told Reuters. (When this story came out, quite a few people asked why this hadn't already happened in California!) Well, it has. Only it has only happened to fathers! ~AZ~ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake
"Kenneth S." wrote in message ... Continental European laws and practices sometimes are radically different from what happens in the U.S., the U.K., and other English-speaking countries. The case reported below may be an example of this. Another example happened several years ago, when an Italian judge told a divorced father that he MUST have contact with his children during visitation periods. (How the latter ruling was enforced, I don't know.) Still another example . . . in France, they used to have forced inheritance laws (and they may still have such laws). These laws barred parents from disinheriting their children. Wealthy French people used to invest in the U.S. as a way of putting their assets beyond the reach of French inheritance laws -- yet another example of the iron law of unintended consequences. --------------------- Luckily these wealthy families were able to get around the law some way. When it comes to inheritances here it also takes some finageling to get around the laws. Like if you are married but don't want your spouse to get your money. -------------------- So far as the U.S. is concerned, the application of aberrant legal principles is, as far as I can see, governed entirely by whether the target is fathers. That's the explanation for the suspension of the general rules about the age of majority, when it comes to forcing fathers to pay for their adult children. ------------------------------- That's what came to my mind when I saw this article. I think most Americans would read it and be shocked or laugh at those strange Italians, forcing all parents to pay support to their adult children! But what most don't realize is that fathers are already put in a similar situation right here. Nobody should be forced to pay for the choices of those over 18 years old, (unless they're disabled then 21). Nobody should be forced to pay for college for anybody else. ~AZ~ It's also the explanation for the suspension of the general U.S. rules about debtors' prison, when it comes to imprisoning fathers for "child support" debts. "AZ Astrea" wrote in message ... Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake Fri Apr 5, 2002, 10:40 AM ET ROME (Reuters) - In a ruling that has sent a shiver down many parents' spines, Italy's highest appeals court has decreed that fathers must carry on supporting adult children until they find a job to their liking. Psychologists warned that the decision could discourage people from having children in a country whose birthrate is already one of the lowest in the world, while commentators said it could boost Italy's already high unemployment rate. The case revolves around a wealthy family in the southern city of Naples, where the father is still paying some $680 a month in maintenance to a son who is in his 30s and has a university law degree. The son also has a trust fund worth some $220,000, lives in one of the smartest parts of the city, and has turned down several job offers. But the court ruled that the father, Giuseppe Andreoli, who is a former parliamentarian and a respected Neapolitan medic, should carry on supporting his estranged son. "You cannot blame a young person, particularly from a well-off family, who refuses a job that does not fit his aspirations. The parents have to pay for their upkeep," said the court in a verdict handed down earlier this week. Andreoli said on Friday he was shocked by the decision. "I feel disgust for a country that I love. It wasn't always like this," he told Reuters. (When this story came out, quite a few people asked why this hadn't already happened in California!) Well, it has. Only it has only happened to fathers! ~AZ~ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake
"Kenneth S." wrote in message ... Continental European laws and practices sometimes are radically different from what happens in the U.S., the U.K., and other English-speaking countries. The case reported below may be an example of this. Another example happened several years ago, when an Italian judge told a divorced father that he MUST have contact with his children during visitation periods. (How the latter ruling was enforced, I don't know.) Still another example . . . in France, they used to have forced inheritance laws (and they may still have such laws). These laws barred parents from disinheriting their children. Wealthy French people used to invest in the U.S. as a way of putting their assets beyond the reach of French inheritance laws -- yet another example of the iron law of unintended consequences. --------------------- Luckily these wealthy families were able to get around the law some way. When it comes to inheritances here it also takes some finageling to get around the laws. Like if you are married but don't want your spouse to get your money. -------------------- So far as the U.S. is concerned, the application of aberrant legal principles is, as far as I can see, governed entirely by whether the target is fathers. That's the explanation for the suspension of the general rules about the age of majority, when it comes to forcing fathers to pay for their adult children. ------------------------------- That's what came to my mind when I saw this article. I think most Americans would read it and be shocked or laugh at those strange Italians, forcing all parents to pay support to their adult children! But what most don't realize is that fathers are already put in a similar situation right here. Nobody should be forced to pay for the choices of those over 18 years old, (unless they're disabled then 21). Nobody should be forced to pay for college for anybody else. ~AZ~ It's also the explanation for the suspension of the general U.S. rules about debtors' prison, when it comes to imprisoning fathers for "child support" debts. "AZ Astrea" wrote in message ... Court Ruling Makes Parents Quake Fri Apr 5, 2002, 10:40 AM ET ROME (Reuters) - In a ruling that has sent a shiver down many parents' spines, Italy's highest appeals court has decreed that fathers must carry on supporting adult children until they find a job to their liking. Psychologists warned that the decision could discourage people from having children in a country whose birthrate is already one of the lowest in the world, while commentators said it could boost Italy's already high unemployment rate. The case revolves around a wealthy family in the southern city of Naples, where the father is still paying some $680 a month in maintenance to a son who is in his 30s and has a university law degree. The son also has a trust fund worth some $220,000, lives in one of the smartest parts of the city, and has turned down several job offers. But the court ruled that the father, Giuseppe Andreoli, who is a former parliamentarian and a respected Neapolitan medic, should carry on supporting his estranged son. "You cannot blame a young person, particularly from a well-off family, who refuses a job that does not fit his aspirations. The parents have to pay for their upkeep," said the court in a verdict handed down earlier this week. Andreoli said on Friday he was shocked by the decision. "I feel disgust for a country that I love. It wasn't always like this," he told Reuters. (When this story came out, quite a few people asked why this hadn't already happened in California!) Well, it has. Only it has only happened to fathers! ~AZ~ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How Children REALLY React To Control | Chris | General | 444 | July 20th 04 07:14 PM |
Paternity Fraud - US Supreme Court | Wizardlaw | Child Support | 12 | June 4th 04 02:19 AM |
Mother's Paternity Fraud - US Supreme Court Case | TrashBBRT | Child Support | 8 | May 21st 04 05:52 PM |
WAVY TV-10 Investigates "both sides" of child support | Editor - Child Support News | Child Support | 9 | May 5th 04 09:51 PM |
The Determination of Child Custody in the USA | Fighting for kids | Child Support | 21 | November 17th 03 01:35 AM |