ForumGarden

I've just read a news story that covered the new passport rule, here it is...if you owe back child support....you don't get a passport....but this lead to a few more thoughs on child support....

I am a young, level headed woman, I admire single mothers...although I have no children of my own I also can't imagine what its like to raise a child by yourself... I agree that a father needs to take responsibility of his child...any man who doesn't isn't really a man now is he?! So i do support "child support"

BUT I have also seen the shoe on the other foot....my boyfriend has a 10 year old daughter...he is a VERY dedicated, caring, and supportive father. He has joint custody of her with his ex. Now they have two weeks each a month with her...she has two homes...two rooms...double the toys, clothes, video games etc. The only thing is....he has to pay her $400 a month for "child support"! Does anyone else see whats wrong here?!!! This little girl is very well taken care of by both parents...but yet me and my boyfriend have to write the "X" a check every month...which I'm assuming goes to her damn Lincoln Navigator car payment...all the while I drive a 2000 Jeep Cherokee. I agree that fathers should step up....but I have also seen child support abused....I think the system needs to be tighter on how this money is spent! If they're trying so hard to get all this money from these fathers (which they should), they also need to be more strict on the mothers....Im certain the rules don't state that the father needs to pay his ex's $40,000 car loan payment every month! Does anyone else see whats wrong here?!!! Sorry so long! But I am ANNOYED!!!:-5:-5

I suggest separating yourself from the child support issue. If your boyfriend is as good a man as you say, the issue's taken care of. This is an issue you can't affect and really has nothing to do with you .... unless .... You said you and your boyfriend have to write the check. Are you helping pay the child support?? If so, you need to reassess the boyfriend.

drumbunny1;679656 wrote: I've just read a news story that covered the new passport rule, here it is...if you owe back child support....you don't get a passport.... Here you are denied renewal of your drivers licence. but this lead to a few more thoughs on child support....

I am a young, level headed woman, I admire single mothers...although I have no children of my own I also can't imagine what its like to raise a child by yourself... I agree that a father needs to take responsibility of his child...any man who doesn't isn't really a man now is he?! So i do support "child support" It's a tough call, I mean I do receive CS however it barely covers food for one for a month, it's all I will ever get, I also had it reduced by 80% when my ex claimed he had to go on disability then eventually quit his job. So I make the best of it, and you can guarantee that money does not go towards anything fancy in my life, it feeds one child period. I really get pizzed when I hear of parents suplimenting their life styles with child support money.BUT I have also seen the shoe on the other foot....my boyfriend has a 10 year old daughter...he is a VERY dedicated, caring, and supportive father. He has joint custody of her with his ex. Now they have two weeks each a month with her...she has two homes...two rooms...double the toys, clothes, video games etc. The only thing is....he has to pay her $400 a month for "child support"! Does anyone else see whats wrong here?!!! Well does he make more money than the mother? Do you live together? Do you work? Here those all would come into play in determining what has to be paid, by whom. Does the mother work at a good job or is she just using the system?This little girl is very well taken care of by both parents...but yet me and my boyfriend have to write the "X" a check every month...which I'm assuming goes to her damn Lincoln Navigator car payment...all the while I drive a 2000 Jeep Cherokee. I agree that fathers should step up....but I have also seen child support abused....I think the system needs to be tighter on how this money is spent! I think that is an excellent point. If they're trying so hard to get all this money from these fathers (which they should), they also need to be more strict on the mothers....Im certain the rules don't state that the father needs to pay his ex's $40,000 car loan payment every month! Does anyone else see whats wrong here?!!! Sorry so long! But I am ANNOYED!!!:-5:-5


I think you brought up some very valid points. I too find the whole system of Child Support annoying. People fail to see the affects of this on the children. And If it were as simple as child support is paid into a controlled account and doled out for the child by some authority that would be great. Hah costly of course and not likely to ever happen but hey in a perfect world it would be grand.

My biological mother received child support for my sister from her dad. He quit paying for a long time, and then started back up when my sister was 17. When she turned 18, he was still forced to pay the back child support payments he had missed. Which would of been great if my bio-mom had given the money to my sister who was living on her own raising a kid. Instead she kept the money saying it was her money, which is selfish in my opinion. And one of the many reasons I haven't talked to bio-mom in a few years. So I agree the system does need to be checked out to make sure spouses receiving payments are doing with them what they should.

Never thought I'd be on this side of this issue.

Sheryl, your bio-mom spent money on your sister. Since the dad didn't pay child support at that time, the money came out of your mom's pocket. The back support payments should go to reimburse whoever paid the child support back when it was supposed to have been paid. Would it have been better/more meaningful to give the late payments to the daughter? Sure. But I don't think it should be a legal necessity.

Not to be rude...but I really wasn't asking for advice in regards to my boyfriend. I don't help pay child support....but we live together and share a bank account....so it DOES affect me. I was using my own experience to back my opinion. I'm just saying that there are regulations on welfare...as far as what you can spend it on.....what you can't....so why aren't the same rules applied to Child Support? I'm sure it wouldn't fix all child support problems...or make EVERY man pay...but I do think that more men would be more willing to pay if they were SURE it went to there child.... I just see way too many women who are out to make a man pay for them....not the child...plus I think if child custody is evenly split (like my boyfriends) whats the point of having child support? I can see if the guy lives far away....not active in his childs life....etc. so I was basically just seeing if maybe I'm crazy or not!

drumbunny1;680321 wrote: I just see way too many women who are out to make a man pay for them....not the child...Is the legislation written in such sexist terms? Maybe it is where you live, it's not here. I've seen our local calculation rules. It's not "man this woman that", or "father, mother", it's parent one and parent two. With equal-shared custody the parent with the lower net income has that household budget increased to adjust the resources available in that household while bringing up the child. Is it different in the system you're describing? What rules apply there instead?

It's your "I'm assuming goes to her damn Lincoln Navigator car payment" that I found irritating, as though sources of income can be partitioned off or ringfenced in practice. That and the idea that as long as a child has half its life in comfort the other half is irrelevant. It's you who's saying the $400 goes toward luxury spending instead of basics for the child. Are you saying there isn't $400 worth of food, clothing and accomodation being bought for the child as well? Of course there is. What the $400 is spent on is an interpretation of your own, not a reality. Maybe all you mean by "the system needs to be tighter on how this money is spent" is that if there's no hardship need there should be no payment at all. That might be so, but it's not what you're claiming to be your position.

As for Sheryl's comments on back-payments, Acc's already said it. Obviously if the missing money were taken from somewhere else at the time it gets put back to the same place later when it finally arrives.

drumbunny1;680321 wrote: Not to be rude...but I really wasn't asking for advice in regards to my boyfriend. I don't help pay child support....but we live together and share a bank account....so it DOES affect me. I was using my own experience to back my opinion. I'm just saying that there are regulations on welfare...as far as what you can spend it on.....what you can't....so why aren't the same rules applied to Child Support? I'm sure it wouldn't fix all child support problems...or make EVERY man pay...but I do think that more men would be more willing to pay if they were SURE it went to there child.... I just see way too many women who are out to make a man pay for them....not the child...plus I think if child custody is evenly split (like my boyfriends) whats the point of having child support? I can see if the guy lives far away....not active in his childs life....etc. so I was basically just seeing if maybe I'm crazy or not!
Not rude at all. Sorry I missed the point.



I can understand and support requiring the parent that receives child support to prove that at least that amount of money (or twice that amount, if she/he has good income) is spent on the kiddo. Of course, how do you define that? A good soccer mom NEEEEDS that new suv (with the LCD screen for the DVD & X-box) for the child.

Accountable;680147 wrote: Never thought I'd be on this side of this issue.

Sheryl, your bio-mom spent money on your sister. Since the dad didn't pay child support at that time, the money came out of your mom's pocket. The back support payments should go to reimburse whoever paid the child support back when it was supposed to have been paid. Would it have been better/more meaningful to give the late payments to the daughter? Sure. But I don't think it should be a legal necessity.


:wah: I'd say you were right if my mom did spend the money on my sister, but my grandma raised us the majority of the time. Bio mom was to busy finding her next boyfriend.

In regards to Spots comment....ofcourse I wasn't quoting the exact legislation terms....also...it may say parent one and parent two.....but WAKE UP!!! It might sound fair and pretty but the reality is there is almost always a bias decision...and more than likely that decision goes to the mother....so your saying because my boyfriend makes more....he should have to provide an extra 400 dollars to try and keep it even....and thats exactly my point....if BOTH PARENTS HAVE EQUAL CUSTODY....THEN NO ONE SHOULD HAVE TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT....and the whole lincoln navigator thing? It just seemed a little odd that after the child custody battle they went through...not a month....week....or even DAYS....but the SAME day that check went through....momma got herself a new SUV....so I might be wrong...but hey! Something about that didn't add up right.....so maybe the legislation says one thing....but I know from experience that this world does not really abide by rules...... it does seem that more people side with me on this one...thank god!!! There is hope!

You know how to fix it. Get the legislation changed. That's how democratic societies come to agreements on what the law does to people.

"there is almost always a bias decision" sounds like unjustifiable opinion. If you have evidence as opposed to an opinion that there is almost always a bias decision, or even that there is even occasionally a bias decision, then posting details would count for a lot more, I suggest you post it.

"If both parents have equal custody....then no one should have to pay child support" is again unjustifiable opinion and directly contradicts whichever child support law you're criticizing. Why do you even think it? If both parents have equal custody and one parent has no income then no one should have to pay child support? That's part of what you're saying? Where did "the interest of the child is paramount" get to, or is that untrue and irrelevant? The whole point of Child Support laws is to enforce payments where there's an imbalance of income. You do know that If both parents have equal custody and both have an equivalent income then there's no child support payments either way, don't you? And that the payments don't make both household incomes identical, they just provide an underlying minimum basis for the child's welfare?

Which Child Support jurisdiction are you complaining about, in particular? I'd quite like to read the specific terms, maybe you just live somewhere very unusual.

I'm not really complaining about any particular part of the legislation....I'm just saying that I think that the way the child support money is spent should be watched closer....like how some welfare systems use a card and you can only buy certain things ie. food...toilet paper...etc. I personally think thats how child support should go....give the mother OR father a card and it has a certain amount on it....whatever the other parents pays....and you can only purchase those kinds of things or school supplies....whatever...as long as its for just the child...ya know? That way it could prevent "certain people" from using that money for a new car payment...or clothes for themselves or whatever....Plus I think more people would be willing to pay if they knew for sure that thier money was going to support their child...not the other parent!

drumbunny1;679656 wrote: I've just read a news story that covered the new passport rule, here it is...if you owe back child support....you don't get a passport....but this lead to a few more thoughs on child support....

I am a young, level headed woman, I admire single mothers...although I have no children of my own I also can't imagine what its like to raise a child by yourself... I agree that a father needs to take responsibility of his child...any man who doesn't isn't really a man now is he?! So i do support "child support"

BUT I have also seen the shoe on the other foot....my boyfriend has a 10 year old daughter...he is a VERY dedicated, caring, and supportive father. He has joint custody of her with his ex. Now they have two weeks each a month with her...she has two homes...two rooms...double the toys, clothes, video games etc. The only thing is....he has to pay her $400 a month for "child support"! Does anyone else see whats wrong here?!!! This little girl is very well taken care of by both parents...but yet me and my boyfriend have to write the "X" a check every month...which I'm assuming goes to her damn Lincoln Navigator car payment...all the while I drive a 2000 Jeep Cherokee. I agree that fathers should step up....but I have also seen child support abused....I think the system needs to be tighter on how this money is spent! If they're trying so hard to get all this money from these fathers (which they should), they also need to be more strict on the mothers....Im certain the rules don't state that the father needs to pay his ex's $40,000 car loan payment every month! Does anyone else see whats wrong here?!!! Sorry so long! But I am ANNOYED!!!:-5:-5


Everytime I took OUR daughter out of the country I had to get a notorized statement from my EX that he approved AND of how long we would be gone AND have reservation back to the US. I also had to have 3 phone numbers for his family on file at customs check-in.