child support review objection

wrote in message
...
On Dec 18, 12:53 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Dec 12, 10:33 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Dec 11, 11:43 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
wrote in message

snip

No it's not. You are wrong. A woman can go for years and not tell
the
man
that he is the father of her child. Custody automatically rests
with
the
mother until it is challenged by a man calining to be the father.
Custody
does not need to be established by a court if there is only a
mother,
does
it?

Which would lead to her being in possession of the child,

Ah, yes, children as possessions--just like dogs, cats, and toilet
seats.
Sweet.

That's just how the Cp's and CS man-ghouls treat thier children, and I
see no reason to sugar-coat it. If you want to be kissing Sarahs ass,
and tell her she is doing the right thing, well then you need to
extent that to ALL cp's, and CS recipients. What is good for one is
good for the other.

Nonsense.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Nonsense/discrimination????!! So you ARE saying that only some single
mothers deserve child support,

No mothers anywhere deserve child support. They are adults and can pay
their own way. (If they are still minors, they might receive child support
from their own parent, but not for their children)

meaning that only some children deserve
to be supported by two/both parents. I knew something was wrong with
you.

Not at all. I somply believe that if a woman can walk away from
responsibility for an unwanted child through safe have, a man should be able
to do so, too.


Please explain why some women should get child support while others
shouldn't-mind now that *all* children are deserving to be supported
by both parents.

Every child ever born deserves a loving, 2 parent home. Absent that, they
deserve to be reared equally by mom and dad via 50/50 shared custody. But
just because someone deserves something does not mean they always get it. A
man should not be forced into parenthood any more than a woman should be.

"Gini" wrote in

Family law judges simply refuse to be encumbered by details.

There's only one detail that concerns them, how much money can we get from
this poor working sucker!

"DB" wrote in message
. net...

"Gini" wrote in

Family law judges simply refuse to be encumbered by details.

There's only one detail that concerns them, how much money can we get
from this poor working sucker!

Call me a cynic, but judges go after fathers with careers and good paying
jobs more aggressively than they go after low-end wage earners. They use
their power in the courtroom to overcome their frustrations with being
forced to deal with the low-lifes.

My attorney made it clear to me that judges resent men who make more money
than them because they are arrogant attorneys who couldn't compete
effectively in the free market of private practice.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote

"DB" wrote

"Gini" wrote in

Family law judges simply refuse to be encumbered by details.

There's only one detail that concerns them, how much money can we get
from this poor working sucker!

Call me a cynic, but judges go after fathers with careers and good paying
jobs more aggressively than they go after low-end wage earners. They use
their power in the courtroom to overcome their frustrations with being
forced to deal with the low-lifes.
..............................................
===
I think they do it because success is measured by the amount of child
support collected,
not the amount collected from "deadbeats." The total collected sounds better
on the resume.

"Gini" wrote in message
news:uHP9j.19964$1R1.7219@trndny02...

"teachrmama" wrote

"Animal02" wrote

"teachrmama" wrote ...

"Animal02" wrote
.................................................. ...........
I received 50/50 custody when my daughter was less than2 years old,
over the objections of her mother who didn't want me to have ANY
overnights,

And it has worked out well? Did mom come to accept the arrangement?
And has it worked out well for your daughter as well? I am all for
50/50 custody as the default option whenever it is possible.

Yes, it has worked out fine... to took a bit of time for her mom to get
"beaten" into submission........I think it was the judge threatening her
with jail time if she disregarded another of his orders.
My daughter will graduate this spring from one of the all girls schools
in the metro area (carrying a 4.0 right now) and has already been
accepted to Grand Valley which is where she really wants to go. Her mom
and I did the parent teacher conferences together throughout, and even
co sponsored a few parties for her......Last New Year's eve, she had a
party at my house, I became quite ill, so her mother ended up
supervising the party at my house while I stayed in bed.
At this point, she sort of decides where she stays....she has her own
car and goes back and forth.......(typically if she wants to entertain
friends, it is at my house)

I'm so glad it worked out well for all of you. I have seen quite a
number of 50/50 custody situations work out equally well. Even one where
the parents can't stand each other, but they each have her half the time.
====
And the key is for the parents to realize that the matter has zero to do
with them,
and 100% has to do with the child(ren). That's it--period.

I agree. But when you have grown up being led to believe that the
government should have the solution to your every problem, and that other
people can make better decisions for you than you can make for yourself,
then you can justify just about anything you do by saying that it wasn't
your choice, it was whatever government agency you let take charge. Which is
very sad.

"Gini" wrote in message
newsM2aj.5786$Xh1.4170@trndny03...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote

"DB" wrote

"Gini" wrote in

Family law judges simply refuse to be encumbered by details.

There's only one detail that concerns them, how much money can we get
from this poor working sucker!

Call me a cynic, but judges go after fathers with careers and good paying
jobs more aggressively than they go after low-end wage earners. They use
their power in the courtroom to overcome their frustrations with being
forced to deal with the low-lifes.
.............................................
===
I think they do it because success is measured by the amount of child
support collected,
not the amount collected from "deadbeats." The total collected sounds
better on the resume.

But anybody they collect from is a "deadbeat." Surely you knew that!!
Otherwise they would not have to collect from them, right? They would just
pay outomatically. (Even if, down the road, everything they paid was called
a 'gift' because it wasn't collected by them) Sort of the Catch 22 of
NCPhood.

"teachrmama" wrote
......................
(Even if, down the road, everything they paid was called
a 'gift' because it wasn't collected by them) Sort of the Catch 22 of
NCPhood.
=======
Did you have to bring that up? That $7,000. "gift" still ****es me off ;-(

"Gini" wrote in message
news:wL8aj.21622$1R1.129@trndny02...

"teachrmama" wrote
.....................
(Even if, down the road, everything they paid was called
a 'gift' because it wasn't collected by them) Sort of the Catch 22 of
NCPhood.
=======
Did you have to bring that up? That $7,000. "gift" still ****es me off ;-(

Just keep thinking about the karma she built up by letting that happen.

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

"Chris" wrote in message
...


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

"Chris" wrote in message
...


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

Better question: Did he invite her to go with him? If the answer
is
"yes",
then I will stand corrected.

Huh? Then it is also true that he moved to get away from his
daughter,
because he did not invite her to go with him either.

Since he does not want her to be with him and the mother doesn't want
her
to
be with him, then what's the problem?




Sarah, did you really say that?



Seems to me that Sarah said he moved to be with his parents.

The two are NOT mutually exclusive. Nice try though.

I never made the claim that they were and have no clue where you
got
that
odd idea.

Anything BUT odd being that it was implied by your context.

Actually that is not true.

"And just how do you know that he chose to move away from Sarah?"
followed
with "Seems to me that Sarah said he moved to be with his parents."
implies
that BOTH cannot be true at the same time. Otherwise, your statement
following your question is irrelevant.

That's not at all true, Chris. More word-game tap dancing from you.
Still
no real answers, though.

From YOU, absolutely! Perhaps the following analogy will help you to
understand the truth of my claim: "How do you know that he had chocolate
ice-cream? Seems to me that he ordered vanilla." Did that help?

Of course not, Chris.

Ah, blindness. SUCH a handicap.......

It in no way touches on the idiocy of your
interpretation of the situation.

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

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. 17.102...
"Chris" wrote in
:

The night must have been longer than I thought. Thank you for
pointing
out my error. The fact is NONE of them have rights.


A completely false statement.

Since the claim is yours, guess what? The burden of proof rests with
YOU.


How can I prove he has rights any more than I can prove I have rights?
He
has the same rights I have!

Like I said, don't just say it........ PROVE it!

Prove what?

That he like.............. has rights.