Child support- what do you think?

whierd

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.

I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

This fact has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not the single mother should file for support. This fact was put out there specifically to paint the man in a particular light to evoke a desired response from the forum.

Yup, it is a "look at this dirtbag!" addition.

UsedToBeHusky

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.

I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

This fact has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not the single mother should file for support. This fact was put out there specifically to paint the man in a particular light to evoke a desired response from the forum.

Listen... if the guy was doing the right thing in the first place, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. No one has to paint him in a particular light. He did that on his own by his actions and inactions.

whierd

Listen, we only know half of half of the story

We know two grown adults had consensual sex and a child was born. What else do you need to know?

This!

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.


I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

I didn't miss that. I don't see how it changes anything. He should still pay.

Yes, I agree that he should pay. I'm talking about the people that are saying things about how she tricked him or how the system is skewed in favor of women...

The tricking part was sarcasm. And it is skewed.

And he has the money to pay, if he didn't he just wouldn't pay it. It's not actually enforced. They don't actually make a person pay what they don't have. When I was in college I did mediation in the courts watching case after case of people coming in saying they were not being paid, and the judge said, "Oh, well, if he won't pay he won't pay. There's nothing I can do about that."

I have known several men who were taken to jail for not paying child support.

BinaryPulsar

From my opinion I would actually not get child support. I'd just keep him out of my life.

BinaryPulsar

Listen, we only know half of half of the story

We know two grown adults had consensual sex and a child was born. What else do you need to know?

This!

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.


I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

I didn't miss that. I don't see how it changes anything. He should still pay.

Yes, I agree that he should pay. I'm talking about the people that are saying things about how she tricked him or how the system is skewed in favor of women...

The tricking part was sarcasm. And it is skewed.

And he has the money to pay, if he didn't he just wouldn't pay it. It's not actually enforced. They don't actually make a person pay what they don't have. When I was in college I did mediation in the courts watching case after case of people coming in saying they were not being paid, and the judge said, "Oh, well, if he won't pay he won't pay. There's nothing I can do about that."

I have known several men who were taken to jail for not paying child support.

It certainly depends on the circumstances, the state, and the judge.

Contrary to what people are saying the circumstances are highly considered in court (his deception).

vtmoon

Listen, we only know half of half of the story

We know two grown adults had consensual sex and a child was born. What else do you need to know?

This!

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.


I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

I didn't miss that. I don't see how it changes anything. He should still pay.

Yes, I agree that he should pay. I'm talking about the people that are saying things about how she tricked him or how the system is skewed in favor of women...

The tricking part was sarcasm. And it is skewed.

And he has the money to pay, if he didn't he just wouldn't pay it. It's not actually enforced. They don't actually make a person pay what they don't have. When I was in college I did mediation in the courts watching case after case of people coming in saying they were not being paid, and the judge said, "Oh, well, if he won't pay he won't pay. There's nothing I can do about that."

They can garnish wages or even take you to jail for not paying. Doesn't matter if you are in debt, if you have income coming in they take the payment first.

red_road

I agree with the 50/50 payment from each parent, but only if each parent has the kid 50% of the time. If the mother is raising the kid 80% of the time the father should pay more, but i also do not think that a father should have to support the mother as much as the kid. Its a tough situation regardless and one i hope i would never have to deal with.

TheSlorax

Listen, we only know half of half of the story

We know two grown adults had consensual sex and a child was born. What else do you need to know?

This!

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.


I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

I didn't miss that. I don't see how it changes anything. He should still pay.

Yes, I agree that he should pay. I'm talking about the people that are saying things about how she tricked him or how the system is skewed in favor of women...

And he has the money to pay, if he didn't he just wouldn't pay it. It's not actually enforced. They don't actually make a person pay what they don't have.

In CA it can be up to 50% of your income.

I just had a deal blow up because one of our borrowers paid close to 50% of his substantial income in child support. His new wife made almost what he paid out, but not quite enough to offset his other liabilities or housing payment. With the alimony payment his ex made as much as he did, but her income is tax free. So who was saying the system isn't skewed toward women?

BinaryPulsar

Listen, we only know half of half of the story

We know two grown adults had consensual sex and a child was born. What else do you need to know?

This!

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.


I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

I didn't miss that. I don't see how it changes anything. He should still pay.

Yes, I agree that he should pay. I'm talking about the people that are saying things about how she tricked him or how the system is skewed in favor of women...

The tricking part was sarcasm. And it is skewed.

And he has the money to pay, if he didn't he just wouldn't pay it. It's not actually enforced. They don't actually make a person pay what they don't have. When I was in college I did mediation in the courts watching case after case of people coming in saying they were not being paid, and the judge said, "Oh, well, if he won't pay he won't pay. There's nothing I can do about that."

They can garnish wages or even take you to jail for not paying. Doesn't matter if you are in debt, if you have income coming in they take the payment first.

Some judges will garnish wages (if they have wages to garnish). When I was in court (training in mediation) the judge said no to ever garnishing wages.

whierd

I agree with the 50/50 payment from each parent, but only if each parent has the kid 50% of the time. If the mother is raising the kid 80% of the time the father should pay more, but i also do not think that a father should have to support the mother as much as the kid. Its a tough situation regardless and one i hope i would never have to deal with.

If each parent has the kid 50% of the time, then no child support is needed.

teamAmelia

My ex-husband actually told me that he couldn't buy new shoes or food for his family because he had to pay a whopping $325 a month for TWO kids, not $325 each but total!!!! I told him he could keep his money. I am lucky that I am married to a man who will provide for kids that are not biologically his. I haven't gotten child support in four years. I could have taken him to court and had his pay garnished, license taken away and his tax returns taken but why???? I have the best part of the deal....my kids

So, you didn't file for child support because another man is taking care of his kids? Or was it a combination of you feeling sorry for him and deciding not to go after him since your kids are being supported by your new husband? The answer to your question about why you should have filed is because it's his responsibility. I've done payroll and unless the laws are a bit different in your state, they can only take out so much. Don't feel so sorry for him.

And, don't forget about other things that they can be forced to pay w child support, like medical care. Why would anyone want to take on these responsibilities by themselves??? I'd tell this friend that I would stop helping her if she didn't file for child support. It's nice of you to help when she needs it every now and then, but she has the opportunity to get child support fro the guy who got her pregnant. She just refuses to. Let her deal with that on her own.

I honestly don't want his money....I didn't do it because I feel sorry for him, I honesty have no respect for him. The fact that my current husband takes care of my kids is a plus but I could do it on my own if needed. If it meant we had to live a conservative life then so be it. I would rather him keep his stupid $325 than to put up with him.

I wouldn't advise anyone to do this. I chose this because it's what works for me and my kids. They are happy and have everything they need......without his money.

The reason that I said that is bc the first post of yours that I quoted stated that your current husband provides for your kids, so that implies that you're relying on him to raise your kids when, IMO, you shouldn't be. But, more importantly, I was concerned about what will happen if you two get divorced or something happens to him. My thought is that you would have then gone after your ex for support, but your latest post stated that you'd just live conservatively. I'm not trying to attack you, but I don't think that your kids should have to suffer bc you don't want to deal w your ex. Once you file, that's it. The wages are garnished each pay period and the check is sent to you or the state. You don't even have to deal w him at all. It's not too late.

BrandNewFabulousMe

This fact has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not the single mother should file for support. This fact was put out there specifically to paint the man in a particular light to evoke a desired response from the forum.
[/quote]

No I did not. I said it b/c it was the truth and it's pretty sick and sad that she found out the reason the father of her child had another family knowning a new child of his was about to be born. It not only hurt her I'm sure, but I'm sure he realized it would hurt his family if they found out the truth. Please dont attempt to give reason for what I wrote. Speak for yourself. Thank you

nena49659

Listen, we only know half of half of the story

We know two grown adults had consensual sex and a child was born. What else do you need to know?

This!

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.


I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

I didn't miss that. I don't see how it changes anything. He should still pay.

Yes, I agree that he should pay. I'm talking about the people that are saying things about how she tricked him or how the system is skewed in favor of women...

And he has the money to pay, if he didn't he just wouldn't pay it. It's not actually enforced. They don't actually make a person pay what they don't have.

In CA it can be up to 50% of your income.

Usually they take 50% of your income because you are behind. I don't believe that I've ever seen them take 50% just because.

lizsmith1976

The child should be supported to the best of both parent's ability. If one parent makes a crapton of money, then they pay MORE. I don't care if they pay more than actual cost of child-rearing, why does the child have to live a lower lifestyle than one of their parents?

So many men complain about their b*tch ex-wife getting to life a lifestyle that they are paying for... Well, you picked her, you scr*wed her, and you made a baby. Use a condom next time or be a little more selective.

I for one am the one who makes way more money. I also picked a wonderful person to marry and have a baby with, so now after divorce we don't need to fight and both do whatever we can for OUR child.

doctorsookie

I ABSOLUTELY DO NOT TOLERATE DEAD BEAT DADS!
GET WHAT YOU RIGHTFULLY DESERVE!
it takes 2 to make that baby.
PAY UP!
*kitten*!

^^THIS^^

vtmoon

Listen, we only know half of half of the story

We know two grown adults had consensual sex and a child was born. What else do you need to know?

This!

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.


I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

I didn't miss that. I don't see how it changes anything. He should still pay.

Yes, I agree that he should pay. I'm talking about the people that are saying things about how she tricked him or how the system is skewed in favor of women...

The tricking part was sarcasm. And it is skewed.

And he has the money to pay, if he didn't he just wouldn't pay it. It's not actually enforced. They don't actually make a person pay what they don't have. When I was in college I did mediation in the courts watching case after case of people coming in saying they were not being paid, and the judge said, "Oh, well, if he won't pay he won't pay. There's nothing I can do about that."

They can garnish wages or even take you to jail for not paying. Doesn't matter if you are in debt, if you have income coming in they take the payment first.

Some judges will garnish wages (if they have wages to garnish). When I was in court (training in mediation) the judge said no to ever garnishing wages.

I understand that some judges won't, I was just replying to you saying "it's not actually enforced".

emaren

A vague friend of mine committed suicide after having his life pretty much destroyed by the mother of his child.

Long story short - drunk sex lead to pregnancy, led to court orders to relieve him of 50% of his income, led to loss of home, led to depression and finally, almost four years after the nigh of drunken sex he parked his car outside her house and blew his own brains out with a shotgun.

She had three children by three men, all of whom paid for her home, cars, etc

My ex-wife signed an agreement to not come after me as the divorce settlement included a lump sum (many hundreds of thousands) and property (2 paid-off homes with rental income) in lieu of child support. This did not stop her trying and it cost me a great deal of money in legal fees to prevent her from getting even more money out of me.

Child support is to pay for the support of children, not the mothers.

BinaryPulsar

Listen, we only know half of half of the story

We know two grown adults had consensual sex and a child was born. What else do you need to know?

This!

She found out after her child was born that he was married with kids! His family lived in a different state! They had dated almost a year and he always "traveled" for his job.


I think a lot of you missed this part (as well as most of the content of the actual OP).

I didn't miss that. I don't see how it changes anything. He should still pay.

Yes, I agree that he should pay. I'm talking about the people that are saying things about how she tricked him or how the system is skewed in favor of women...

And he has the money to pay, if he didn't he just wouldn't pay it. It's not actually enforced. They don't actually make a person pay what they don't have.

In CA it can be up to 50% of your income.

Usually they take 50% of your income because you are behind. I don't believe that I've ever seen them take 50% just because.

Exactly, this thread is full of anecdotal evidence of "Well, my buddy told me this happened and this is why it happened and this is how it happened!"

Sjenny5891

you know what I agree with that. It should be based on the cost of raising a child rather than income, but in some cases like this she's making probably less than 18k a year and he's making 90k a year. His other kids probably have a college fund I feel that her child should get the same treatment as the others. I commend you for taking care of your kids. You don't hear of too many single dads in the area I live in. People like you could def make a difference in some of the dead beat dads out there

The fact that she makes very little and he makes a lot doesn't change it. No, the kid shouldn't "have the same treatment as the others" unless he chooses to make it so. The only things he should ever be on the hook for is 1/2 the cost of raising the kid. She should have been more careful about having a kid if she wasn't ready for the responsibility. If he chooses to do more than the minimum, that's on him.

If she was under the impression that it was a long term relationship, she would have thought THEY were ready. It still doesn't change the fact that he is still responsible.

I agree that child support can be expensive, but when you factor in clothes, school supplies, FOOD, insurance, etc. you spend quite a bit more than you may realize each month on your children.

I get a whopping $124 a month per child from their father.....

I agree there should be a limit, but the father should be expected to pay a portion of what he was making when he concieved the child (what the mother expected him to be able to care for their child) not a huge raise with a new job 3 years later.

BrandNewFabulousMe

what I've always found interesting is a woman can get an abortion with out the Dad's consent if she doesn't want it. She doesn't even have to tell him. She has all the control. So if a guy does not want a kid, gives up his rights, asks her to terminate, why should he have to pay up the rest of his life? It does indeed take two to tango, and if a woman puts herself in a position to get knocked up by a man she doesn't know too well and is not married to....well then....it's the bed you made.

He's free to sign over his rights

He can't just sign over rights and get out of paying support. The mother has to agree to that.

she's offered it to him already. it's still an option that he has refused to take and just do nothing about. so that is why i feel he can help take care of the child.

If she is struggling WHY would she offer for him to sign over his parental rights? Then he has no legal claim to the child and would not ever have to pay support.

She needs to do what is best for the child and GO FILE WITH THE STATE FOR SUPPORT. It's not about her and the father; it's about what is in the best interest of the child.

Legally, the state will not allow him to sign over her rights unless she is married to someone who wants to adopt the child.

Here in iowa she spoke to a family attorney and with him living in a different state if they both agreed he would be able to sign over his rights. he never responde to her asking him if he wanted to do so. so I guess Legally it depends on where you live?