Does anybody have any useful advice on how to collect a child

On Dec 10, 9:22 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Dec 10, 1:22 am, Sarah Gray wrote:
wrote
:

teachrmama wrote:
wrote in message
news:3574ed2e-87e9-4e85-ac3a-1f056953c1c1

@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com

...
On Nov 15, 8:56 pm, Sarah Gray wrote:
snip

Actually, I am not particularly well off. When we go to the
movies, it is only once in a while, and usually to the dollar
show. I just don't think the government should be mandating
"extras"; the parents in intact families are not put in jail for
not buying their kids ipods. Kids don't need lots of stuff to be
happy. Kids need love, understanding and (an appropriate degree
of) respect.

--

Sarah Gray- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to survive.
It is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for the movie to
come out on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many times as you want
for 5 days, or $9.50 a ticket to watch a movie one time in a
theater with a bunch of people you don't even know. I see now why
you want your ex to "help support" your daughter.

Geesh, Leda, she said she went to the dollar show. And not very
often.

I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need money from your ex,
you should not be going to the movies, or even have the internet.
Live within your means and then you won't need to depend on him for
suport.

She said that, now that the dad has moved out of state, he does not
have the daughter half the time, and she is going to have to pay for
child care. She would like the dad to contribute for the child's
needs, because that will help her pay for thye now-necessary child
care. I though you were of the opinion that fathers should provide
for their children? Did you change your mind
No I haven't. I just think that the CP needs to live within the means
they have.

But if "the means I have" is cut into by having to take care of *all* of
our child's expenses, should that mean my daughter should go without and
*only* have bare-bones basic everything because I don't make enough
money to cover both of her parent's shares of her expenses, *and* have
enough for extras?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sometimes it's a struggle to do what you have to do. My husband and I
ate dry potatoe's every night for a bit over three months, no
furinature in our apartment, and no television-all so that my
stepdaughter did not go without. The ex was going to school full time,
and working full time, and we were not going to let her not advance
her education and work two full time jobs. That would have been easy,
but in the long run, more expensive.
Finally my husband was able to better employ himself, and now we
struggle, but not near as bad as before. The ex is well employed
because she has her credentials, and she owes them to us.

And if she decides to be a b*tch, it will not matter that you made it
possible for her to have great employment, because the CS system does not
see it that way. She can decide to work part time as a waitress, and guess
who the system will decide needs to take up the slack--whether it puts you
back on dry potatoes or not. It's good that things are working out well in
your case--but they do not always work out so well.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I wonder how long Sarah waited to file for child support after her ex
left????


And if she decides to be a b*tch, it will not matter that you made it
possible for her to have great employment, because the CS system does not
see it that way. She can decide to work part time as a waitress, and guess
who the system will decide needs to take up the slack--whether it puts you
back on dry potatoes or not. It's good that things are working out well in
your case--but they do not always work out so well.

She would have a hard time to live on those wages of a waitress when
she pulls down so much money from her profession, and anyhow, she
can't file for an increase at this point in time because there has to
be a two year timeframe in which the case was made active.
Even if she wanted to be a bitch, she knows better that you cath more
flies with honey than you do vith vinigar, and she loves her child,
and knows her child loves the father-she would not do anything to hurt
the child, I can honestly say that. Once there was a time she was only
thinking about herself, but that's been different when D told her that
he wanted to see his dad more.

On Dec 10, 1:19 am, Sarah Gray wrote:
"Bob Whiteside" wrote :







"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
.17.102...
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in
om:

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
15.33.102...
wrote in

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to survive.
It is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for the movie to
come out on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many times as you want
for 5 days, or $9.50 a ticket to watch a movie one time in a
theater with a bunch of people you don't even know. I see now why
you want your ex to "help support" your daughter.
I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need money from your
ex, you should not be going to the movies, or even have the
internet. Live within your means and then you won't need to depend
on him for suport.

I live within my means. I don't see how spending three dollars on
two movie tickets every few months should negate my ex-husband's
responsibility towards his daughter... I am not asking for him to
pay for extras! If he was taking care of his responsibilities to
his daughter, maybe I wouldn't have to put off seeing movies until
they were already on DVD, but playing at the dollar show.
At our court date on Tuesday, I found out that he was "laid off"
three weeks ago. (Of course, it was a coincidence that that
happened right after he got the paperwork from the court) So right
now, he's not supporting her at all, not even the 70 dollars a
month or so that he had been....

I am just amazed at the number of mothers who believe a child's
father being laid off from his job is somehow the manipulation of
the father.
Lay-offs are employer decisions, not father decisions.

He was "laid off" a week after he threatened to quit his job to come
up here and "keep dragging me in to court" with the intention of *me*
losing *my* job over it.
He claims he moved down there because jobs are plentiful, but he has
been out of work for nearly a month? I don't buy that.

Maybe he wasn't laid off. Maybe he just quit. Or maybe he is still
working but telling you he was laid off. If the father is as flakey
as you have described, why are you taking his statement about being
laid off at face value without verifying it?

I have no way of verifiying it, other than the fact that I have not
recieved child support monies this month. (Automatic deductions from
paycheck). For what it's worth, he told the referee he had been laid
off, and I don't think he's together enough to find work without it
getting garnished...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I would like to know why you chose such a person to father your child.
If he doesn't work this must have happened at the beginning of the
relationship (because as a rule of human nature, people don't change)
and yet you still had a child, that you can't afford on your own. Why?

Now he is gone, and I have a hard time to think that $70.00 is going
to make or break you. Then, I notice in other post's, you totally down
the system you yourself are so quick to use to your advantage. Why?

How did you pay for child care before your ex left, and if he was the
child care provider, why not let him be the CP?

wrote in message
...
On Dec 10, 9:22 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Dec 10, 1:22 am, Sarah Gray wrote:
wrote
:

teachrmama wrote:
wrote in message
news:3574ed2e-87e9-4e85-ac3a-1f056953c1c1

@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com

...
On Nov 15, 8:56 pm, Sarah Gray wrote:
snip

Actually, I am not particularly well off. When we go to the
movies, it is only once in a while, and usually to the dollar
show. I just don't think the government should be mandating
"extras"; the parents in intact families are not put in jail for
not buying their kids ipods. Kids don't need lots of stuff to be
happy. Kids need love, understanding and (an appropriate degree
of) respect.

--

Sarah Gray- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to
survive.
It is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for the movie to
come out on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many times as you want
for 5 days, or $9.50 a ticket to watch a movie one time in a
theater with a bunch of people you don't even know. I see now why
you want your ex to "help support" your daughter.

Geesh, Leda, she said she went to the dollar show. And not very
often.

I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need money from your
ex,
you should not be going to the movies, or even have the internet.
Live within your means and then you won't need to depend on him
for
suport.

She said that, now that the dad has moved out of state, he does not
have the daughter half the time, and she is going to have to pay
for
child care. She would like the dad to contribute for the child's
needs, because that will help her pay for thye now-necessary child
care. I though you were of the opinion that fathers should provide
for their children? Did you change your mind
No I haven't. I just think that the CP needs to live within the
means
they have.

But if "the means I have" is cut into by having to take care of *all*
of
our child's expenses, should that mean my daughter should go without
and
*only* have bare-bones basic everything because I don't make enough
money to cover both of her parent's shares of her expenses, *and* have
enough for extras?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sometimes it's a struggle to do what you have to do. My husband and I
ate dry potatoe's every night for a bit over three months, no
furinature in our apartment, and no television-all so that my
stepdaughter did not go without. The ex was going to school full time,
and working full time, and we were not going to let her not advance
her education and work two full time jobs. That would have been easy,
but in the long run, more expensive.
Finally my husband was able to better employ himself, and now we
struggle, but not near as bad as before. The ex is well employed
because she has her credentials, and she owes them to us.

And if she decides to be a b*tch, it will not matter that you made it
possible for her to have great employment, because the CS system does not
see it that way. She can decide to work part time as a waitress, and
guess
who the system will decide needs to take up the slack--whether it puts
you
back on dry potatoes or not. It's good that things are working out well
in
your case--but they do not always work out so well.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I wonder how long Sarah waited to file for child support after her ex
left????

My impression is that she did not want to file--she asked for a reasonable
amount af assistance in providing for their child--but he refused and told
her to take him to court. Even after that, she tried to talk before she
filed. And she is still asking for less than a court judgement would be.



And if she decides to be a b*tch, it will not matter that you made it
possible for her to have great employment, because the CS system does not
see it that way. She can decide to work part time as a waitress, and
guess
who the system will decide needs to take up the slack--whether it puts
you
back on dry potatoes or not. It's good that things are working out well
in
your case--but they do not always work out so well.

She would have a hard time to live on those wages of a waitress when
she pulls down so much money from her profession, and anyhow, she
can't file for an increase at this point in time because there has to
be a two year timeframe in which the case was made active.
Even if she wanted to be a bitch, she knows better that you cath more
flies with honey than you do vith vinigar, and she loves her child,
and knows her child loves the father-she would not do anything to hurt
the child, I can honestly say that. Once there was a time she was only
thinking about herself, but that's been different when D told her that
he wanted to see his dad more.

You have no idea how fortunate you aer. Not everyone is treated well by the
CP. Some have horror stories that you would find it terrible to live
through. Count your blessings.

wrote in message
...
On Dec 9, 10:08 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

...







teachrmama wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Nov 15, 8:56 pm, Sarah Gray wrote:
snip

Actually, I am not particularly well off. When we go to the movies,
it
is only once in a while, and usually to the dollar show. I just
don't
think the government should be mandating "extras"; the parents in
intact
families are not put in jail for not buying their kids ipods.
Kids don't need lots of stuff to be happy. Kids need love,
understanding
and (an appropriate degree of) respect.

--

Sarah Gray- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to survive.
It
is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for the movie to come
out
on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many times as you want for 5 days,
or $9.50 a ticket to watch a movie one time in a theater with a
bunch
of people you don't even know. I see now why you want your ex to
"help
support" your daughter.

Geesh, Leda, she said she went to the dollar show. And not very
often.

I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need money from your ex,
you should not be going to the movies, or even have the internet.
Live
within your means and then you won't need to depend on him for
suport.

She said that, now that the dad has moved out of state, he does not
have
the
daughter half the time, and she is going to have to pay for child
care.
She
would like the dad to contribute for the child's needs, because that
will
help her pay for thye now-necessary child care. I though you were of
the
opinion that fathers should provide for their children? Did you
change
your
mind
No I haven't. I just think that the CP needs to live within the means
they have.

She is living in within the means she has. You seem to be talking from
both
directions. The father is not demonstrating any responsibility, having
walked away from their 50/50 shared parenting plan. Sarah is managing
with
what she has, but would also like a bit of help from the dad to cover new
expenses created by his walking away, such as child care. What other
suggestions do you have for her?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Make oneself more employable, or get a second job. Sometimes the only
way to get something is by the sweat of ones own brow.
That's why the government implemented child support.

No it isn't, but you obviously don't let the facts get in your way.

Sara's ex is just
one of many that walk away from thier responsibilities to the children
they have a 50/50 cocreateation and responsibility of.

a second swing and a miss

It proves my
point that there is a reason the CS system exists. For all of the
fathers that do want to do right, there are men like Sarah's ex.

and a third swing and a miss

wrote in message
...
On Dec 10, 9:19 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Dec 9, 10:08 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

...

teachrmama wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Nov 15, 8:56 pm, Sarah Gray wrote:
snip

Actually, I am not particularly well off. When we go to the
movies,
it
is only once in a while, and usually to the dollar show. I just
don't
think the government should be mandating "extras"; the parents
in
intact
families are not put in jail for not buying their kids ipods.
Kids don't need lots of stuff to be happy. Kids need love,
understanding
and (an appropriate degree of) respect.

--

Sarah Gray- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to
survive.
It
is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for the movie to
come
out
on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many times as you want for 5
days,
or $9.50 a ticket to watch a movie one time in a theater with a
bunch
of people you don't even know. I see now why you want your ex to
"help
support" your daughter.

Geesh, Leda, she said she went to the dollar show. And not very
often.

I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need money from your
ex,
you should not be going to the movies, or even have the internet.
Live
within your means and then you won't need to depend on him for
suport.

She said that, now that the dad has moved out of state, he does not
have
the
daughter half the time, and she is going to have to pay for child
care.
She
would like the dad to contribute for the child's needs, because
that
will
help her pay for thye now-necessary child care. I though you were
of
the
opinion that fathers should provide for their children? Did you
change
your
mind
No I haven't. I just think that the CP needs to live within the
means
they have.

She is living in within the means she has. You seem to be talking
from
both
directions. The father is not demonstrating any responsibility,
having
walked away from their 50/50 shared parenting plan. Sarah is managing
with
what she has, but would also like a bit of help from the dad to cover
new
expenses created by his walking away, such as child care. What other
suggestions do you have for her?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Make oneself more employable, or get a second job. Sometimes the only
way to get something is by the sweat of ones own brow.
That's why the government implemented child support. Sara's ex is just
one of many that walk away from thier responsibilities to the children
they have a 50/50 cocreateation and responsibility of. It proves my
point that there is a reason the CS system exists. For all of the
fathers that do want to do right, there are men like Sarah's ex.

So let the system deal with those who refuse to take on their own
responsibilities--and leave the rest alone. I have no idea why you have
chosen to be so hard on Sarah who, from what she has written here, is
working very hard to do what is right by her child, and is asking for a
minimal amount of help. She has stated that her job has great
advancement
potential, and that she is very fortunate to have such a job, so she IS
becoming more employable just by working there. That is far, far better
than some of the CPs who come through, complaining endlessly about how
much
they are "owed" for simply being parents to their children.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

She has stated that her job has great advancement
potential, and that she is very fortunate to have such a job, so she IS
becoming more employable just by working there. That is far, far better
than some of the CPs who come through, complaining endlessly about how
much
they are "owed" for simply being parents to their children.-

I don't see where she is not complaining about the cost of raising the
child, or the fact that the ex left the state. She has a recourse-she
can allow her child to live with the ex and his parents until she has
advanced in her job and is able to offord the essintals, and the
*extras*.

Just exactly why do you think that she should give up on having her child
with her because her ex chose to leave the state? Why should she scrimp and
barely get by every month in order to send money to him to have the joy of
raising their child? HE walked away from that--not her. Why is your nose
so out of joint about Sarah?

wrote in
:

On Dec 10, 9:22 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

news:c697c729-41cb-4471-83b7-

...





On Dec 10, 1:22 am, Sarah Gray wrote:
wrote
innews:8abbb539-ace7-4ada-a66e-7df27bb89b98
@l16g2000hsf.googlegroup
s.com:

teachrmama wrote:
wrote in message
news:3574ed2e-87e9-4e85-ac3a-1f056953c1c1

@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com

...
On Nov 15, 8:56 pm, Sarah Gray
wrote:
snip

Actually, I am not particularly well off. When we go to the
movies, it is only once in a while, and usually to the
dollar show. I just don't think the government should be
mandating "extras"; the parents in intact families are not
put in jail for not buying their kids ipods. Kids don't need
lots of stuff to be happy. Kids need love, understanding and
(an appropriate degree of) respect.

--

Sarah Gray- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to
survive. It is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for
the movie to come out on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many
times as you want for 5 days, or $9.50 a ticket to watch a
movie one time in a theater with a bunch of people you don't
even know. I see now why you want your ex to "help support"
your daughter.

Geesh, Leda, she said she went to the dollar show. And not
very often.

I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need money from
your ex, you should not be going to the movies, or even have
the internet. Live within your means and then you won't need
to depend on him for suport.

She said that, now that the dad has moved out of state, he does
not have the daughter half the time, and she is going to have
to pay for child care. She would like the dad to contribute
for the child's needs, because that will help her pay for thye
now-necessary child care. I though you were of the opinion
that fathers should provide for their children? Did you change
your mind
No I haven't. I just think that the CP needs to live within the
means they have.

But if "the means I have" is cut into by having to take care of
*all* of our child's expenses, should that mean my daughter should
go without and *only* have bare-bones basic everything because I
don't make enough money to cover both of her parent's shares of
her expenses, *and* have enough for extras?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sometimes it's a struggle to do what you have to do. My husband and
I ate dry potatoe's every night for a bit over three months, no
furinature in our apartment, and no television-all so that my
stepdaughter did not go without. The ex was going to school full
time, and working full time, and we were not going to let her not
advance her education and work two full time jobs. That would have
been easy, but in the long run, more expensive.
Finally my husband was able to better employ himself, and now we
struggle, but not near as bad as before. The ex is well employed
because she has her credentials, and she owes them to us.

And if she decides to be a b*tch, it will not matter that you made it
possible for her to have great employment, because the CS system does
not see it that way. She can decide to work part time as a waitress,
and guess who the system will decide needs to take up the
slack--whether it puts you back on dry potatoes or not. It's good
that things are working out well in your case--but they do not always
work out so well.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I wonder how long Sarah waited to file for child support after her ex
left????


Over three months. And that was just to ask for a readjustment of the
original amount ordered (based on us splitting time with her 50/50)

wrote in
:

On Dec 10, 1:19 am, Sarah Gray wrote:
"Bob Whiteside" wrote
:







"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
.17.102...
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in
om:

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
15.33.102...
wrote in

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to
survive. It is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for
the movie to come out on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many
times as you want for 5 days, or $9.50 a ticket to watch a
movie one time in a theater with a bunch of people you don't
even know. I see now why you want your ex to "help support"
your daughter. I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need
money from your ex, you should not be going to the movies, or
even have the internet. Live within your means and then you
won't need to depend on him for suport.

I live within my means. I don't see how spending three dollars
on two movie tickets every few months should negate my
ex-husband's responsibility towards his daughter... I am not
asking for him to pay for extras! If he was taking care of his
responsibilities to his daughter, maybe I wouldn't have to put
off seeing movies until they were already on DVD, but playing at
the dollar show. At our court date on Tuesday, I found out that
he was "laid off" three weeks ago. (Of course, it was a
coincidence that that happened right after he got the paperwork
from the court) So right now, he's not supporting her at all,
not even the 70 dollars a month or so that he had been....

I am just amazed at the number of mothers who believe a child's
father being laid off from his job is somehow the manipulation of
the father.
Lay-offs are employer decisions, not father decisions.

He was "laid off" a week after he threatened to quit his job to
come up here and "keep dragging me in to court" with the intention
of *me* losing *my* job over it.
He claims he moved down there because jobs are plentiful, but he
has been out of work for nearly a month? I don't buy that.

Maybe he wasn't laid off. Maybe he just quit. Or maybe he is
still working but telling you he was laid off. If the father is as
flakey as you have described, why are you taking his statement
about being laid off at face value without verifying it?

I have no way of verifiying it, other than the fact that I have not
recieved child support monies this month. (Automatic deductions from
paycheck). For what it's worth, he told the referee he had been laid
off, and I don't think he's together enough to find work without it
getting garnished...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I would like to know why you chose such a person to father your child.
If he doesn't work this must have happened at the beginning of the
relationship (because as a rule of human nature, people don't change)
and yet you still had a child, that you can't afford on your own. Why?


It was a decision made after the fact of conception, not before. We were
living with his parents at the time; if I had lived alone with him at
any point before we had our daughter, I would have gotten sick of it in
a matter of months.

Now he is gone, and I have a hard time to think that $70.00 is going
to make or break you. Then, I notice in other post's, you totally down
the system you yourself are so quick to use to your advantage. Why?


If he is not contributing anything (as right now), I break even at the
end of the month. Just because I think the system is ****ed up, does not
mean I am not going to use it to ensure my daughter's father helps
support her.

How did you pay for child care before your ex left, and if he was the
child care provider, why not let him be the CP?


Before she was in school, she was in a daycare/preschool that he signed
up for a subsidy for; it was only $30 a week, and we split that.
He picked her up every day because my work schedule changed, and I could
not get there by 6. My mom helps me out with that, now.

wrote in
:

On Dec 10, 9:19 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

news:10ecbfc8-5f78-4fcf-9fc6-16fcd29d48e8
@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com
...





On Dec 9, 10:08 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

news:8abbb539-ace7-4ada-a66e-7df27bb89b98
@l16g2000hsf.googlegroups.c
om...

teachrmama wrote:
wrote in message
news:3574ed2e-87e9-4e85-ac3a-1f056953c1c1
@j20g2000hsi.googlegroup
s.com...
On Nov 15, 8:56 pm, Sarah Gray
wrote:
snip

Actually, I am not particularly well off. When we go to the
movies, it
is only once in a while, and usually to the dollar show. I
just don't
think the government should be mandating "extras"; the
parents in intact
families are not put in jail for not buying their kids
ipods. Kids don't need lots of stuff to be happy. Kids need
love, understanding
and (an appropriate degree of) respect.

--

Sarah Gray- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to
survive. It
is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for the movie to
come out
on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many times as you want for
5 days, or $9.50 a ticket to watch a movie one time in a
theater with a bunch
of people you don't even know. I see now why you want your ex
to "help
support" your daughter.

Geesh, Leda, she said she went to the dollar show. And not
very often.

I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need money from
your ex, you should not be going to the movies, or even have
the internet. Live
within your means and then you won't need to depend on him
for suport.

She said that, now that the dad has moved out of state, he does
not have
the
daughter half the time, and she is going to have to pay for
child care.
She
would like the dad to contribute for the child's needs, because
that will
help her pay for thye now-necessary child care. I though you
were of the
opinion that fathers should provide for their children? Did
you change
your
mind
No I haven't. I just think that the CP needs to live within the
means they have.

She is living in within the means she has. You seem to be talking
from both
directions. The father is not demonstrating any responsibility,
having walked away from their 50/50 shared parenting plan. Sarah
is managing with
what she has, but would also like a bit of help from the dad to
cover new expenses created by his walking away, such as child
care. What other suggestions do you have for her?- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

Make oneself more employable, or get a second job. Sometimes the
only way to get something is by the sweat of ones own brow.
That's why the government implemented child support. Sara's ex is
just one of many that walk away from thier responsibilities to the
children they have a 50/50 cocreateation and responsibility of. It
proves my point that there is a reason the CS system exists. For
all of the fathers that do want to do right, there are men like
Sarah's ex.

So let the system deal with those who refuse to take on their own
responsibilities--and leave the rest alone. I have no idea why you
have chosen to be so hard on Sarah who, from what she has written
here, is working very hard to do what is right by her child, and is
asking for a minimal amount of help. She has stated that her job has
great advancement potential, and that she is very fortunate to have
such a job, so she IS becoming more employable just by working there.
That is far, far better than some of the CPs who come through,
complaining endlessly about how much they are "owed" for simply being
parents to their children.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

She has stated that her job has great advancement
potential, and that she is very fortunate to have such a job, so she
IS becoming more employable just by working there. That is far, far
better than some of the CPs who come through, complaining endlessly
about how much they are "owed" for simply being parents to their
children.-

I don't see where she is not complaining about the cost of raising the
child, or the fact that the ex left the state. She has a recourse-she
can allow her child to live with the ex and his parents until she has
advanced in her job and is able to offord the essintals, and the
*extras*.


That makes no sense! I'm not complaining about the cost, I'm simply
stating the fact that the costs are incurred, and he should be
contributing.
The only reason I'm asking him for more is because he left, and
therefore *all* of the costs are on me now!
I should have my child taken from me because I can't afford many extras,
but he should have custody when he doesn't even have a job to support
her with the basics?
Whatever.

On Dec 10, 9:27 pm, "Animal02" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Dec 9, 10:08 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

...

teachrmama wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Nov 15, 8:56 pm, Sarah Gray wrote:
snip

Actually, I am not particularly well off. When we go to the movies,
it
is only once in a while, and usually to the dollar show. I just
don't
think the government should be mandating "extras"; the parents in
intact
families are not put in jail for not buying their kids ipods.
Kids don't need lots of stuff to be happy. Kids need love,
understanding
and (an appropriate degree of) respect.

--

Sarah Gray- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to survive.
It
is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for the movie to come
out
on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many times as you want for 5 days,
or $9.50 a ticket to watch a movie one time in a theater with a
bunch
of people you don't even know. I see now why you want your ex to
"help
support" your daughter.

Geesh, Leda, she said she went to the dollar show. And not very
often.

I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need money from your ex,
you should not be going to the movies, or even have the internet.
Live
within your means and then you won't need to depend on him for
suport.

She said that, now that the dad has moved out of state, he does not
have
the
daughter half the time, and she is going to have to pay for child
care.
She
would like the dad to contribute for the child's needs, because that
will
help her pay for thye now-necessary child care. I though you were of
the
opinion that fathers should provide for their children? Did you
change
your
mind
No I haven't. I just think that the CP needs to live within the means
they have.

She is living in within the means she has. You seem to be talking from
both
directions. The father is not demonstrating any responsibility, having
walked away from their 50/50 shared parenting plan. Sarah is managing
with
what she has, but would also like a bit of help from the dad to cover new
expenses created by his walking away, such as child care. What other
suggestions do you have for her?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Make oneself more employable, or get a second job. Sometimes the only
way to get something is by the sweat of ones own brow.
That's why the government implemented child support.

No it isn't, but you obviously don't let the facts get in your way.

Sara's ex is just
one of many that walk away from thier responsibilities to the children
they have a 50/50 cocreateation and responsibility of.

a second swing and a miss

It proves my
point that there is a reason the CS system exists. For all of the
fathers that do want to do right, there are men like Sarah's ex.

and a third swing and a miss- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No it isn't, but you obviously don't let the facts get in your way.
So you don't think child support was created as a way to get welfare
recipients off of state money? That's your view, and you're entitled
to it, (just like CP's are entitled to CS)

Sara's ex is just
one of many that walk away from thier responsibilities to the children
they have a 50/50 cocreateation and responsibility of.

a second swing and a miss
So are you implying that fathers do not walk away from thier children,
and that the number is not that great?
Isn't that what fathers wan't, 50/50 shared custody in divorce cases,
(not just because the child has 50/50 chromosoneal make up of both
parent's), because the fathers feel that they can do just as good a
job as the mothers?
Stupidity is not a crime so I can't hold it against you.

It proves my
point that there is a reason the CS system exists. For all of the
fathers that do want to do right, there are men like Sarah's ex.

and a third swing and a miss

So if not for the reason of people walking away from thier parental
and financial responsibilities to the children, then why?

Also, please go into more detail as to why you feel I am wrong, it is
helpful to show why you agree or disagree with person, otherwise it's
just dust in the wind.

On Dec 11, 1:36 am, Sarah Gray wrote:
wrote :





On Dec 10, 1:19 am, Sarah Gray wrote:
"Bob Whiteside" wrote
:

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
.17.102...
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in
om:

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
15.33.102...
wrote in

Going to the movies is not something you need in order to
survive. It is more practical, and cose efficent to wait for
the movie to come out on DVD. $3.50 to watch a movie as many
times as you want for 5 days, or $9.50 a ticket to watch a
movie one time in a theater with a bunch of people you don't
even know. I see now why you want your ex to "help support"
your daughter. I am sorry, but if you are saying that you need
money from your ex, you should not be going to the movies, or
even have the internet. Live within your means and then you
won't need to depend on him for suport.

I live within my means. I don't see how spending three dollars
on two movie tickets every few months should negate my
ex-husband's responsibility towards his daughter... I am not
asking for him to pay for extras! If he was taking care of his
responsibilities to his daughter, maybe I wouldn't have to put
off seeing movies until they were already on DVD, but playing at
the dollar show. At our court date on Tuesday, I found out that
he was "laid off" three weeks ago. (Of course, it was a
coincidence that that happened right after he got the paperwork
from the court) So right now, he's not supporting her at all,
not even the 70 dollars a month or so that he had been....

I am just amazed at the number of mothers who believe a child's
father being laid off from his job is somehow the manipulation of
the father.
Lay-offs are employer decisions, not father decisions.

He was "laid off" a week after he threatened to quit his job to
come up here and "keep dragging me in to court" with the intention
of *me* losing *my* job over it.
He claims he moved down there because jobs are plentiful, but he
has been out of work for nearly a month? I don't buy that.

Maybe he wasn't laid off. Maybe he just quit. Or maybe he is
still working but telling you he was laid off. If the father is as
flakey as you have described, why are you taking his statement
about being laid off at face value without verifying it?

I have no way of verifiying it, other than the fact that I have not
recieved child support monies this month. (Automatic deductions from
paycheck). For what it's worth, he told the referee he had been laid
off, and I don't think he's together enough to find work without it
getting garnished...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I would like to know why you chose such a person to father your child.
If he doesn't work this must have happened at the beginning of the
relationship (because as a rule of human nature, people don't change)
and yet you still had a child, that you can't afford on your own. Why?

It was a decision made after the fact of conception, not before. We were
living with his parents at the time; if I had lived alone with him at
any point before we had our daughter, I would have gotten sick of it in
a matter of months.

Now he is gone, and I have a hard time to think that $70.00 is going
to make or break you. Then, I notice in other post's, you totally down
the system you yourself are so quick to use to your advantage. Why?

If he is not contributing anything (as right now), I break even at the
end of the month. Just because I think the system is ****ed up, does not
mean I am not going to use it to ensure my daughter's father helps
support her.

How did you pay for child care before your ex left, and if he was the
child care provider, why not let him be the CP?

Before she was in school, she was in a daycare/preschool that he signed
up for a subsidy for; it was only $30 a week, and we split that.
He picked her up every day because my work schedule changed, and I could
not get there by 6. My mom helps me out with that, now.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It was a decision made after the fact of conception, not before. We
were
living with his parents at the time; if I had lived alone with him at
any point before we had our daughter, I would have gotten sick of it
in
a matter of months.
So there was no indication that this guy was a mooch? You were both
living with his parents, and he moved and is still living with his
parents? He can't even support himself, and now you want him to
support you and your child?

If he is not contributing anything (as right now), I break even at the
end of the month. Just because I think the system is ****ed up, does not
mean I am not going to use it to ensure my daughter's father helps
support her.
And if he dosen't pay his child supprt, what then? You'll still be
broke same as now. If your job has room for advancement, when you're
making much more money, that acculmination of arrears will be a nice
bonus, won't it? I just don't understand why you feel entitled to this
man's money when you can apply for that subsidized child care same as
before he left. Wouldn;t it give you more chld care now he is gone?
I think it's about his money, because you could get assistance from
elsewhere instead of beating a horse that will not pull the buggy.

Before she was in school, she was in a daycare/preschool that he signed
up for a subsidy for; it was only $30 a week, and we split that.
He picked her up every day because my work schedule changed, and I could
not get there by 6. My mom helps me out with that, now.-

You don't have a problem with getting subsidy, so why not continue to
do so.