Name change because parent not visiting child

"ghostwriter" wrote in

IF WE AS A SOCIETY EASE THE BURDEN OFF OF THE GOOD FATHERS MORE OF THE
BAD ONES WILL SLIP THROUGH. THE PRICE TO SOCIETY IS FAR GREATER IF THAT
HAPPENS THAN FORCING GROWN MEN TO DO WITHOUT. YES IT SUCKS, BUT THAT IS
THE SIMPLE TRUTH.

Ghostwriter

Yes Comrade, treat all men the same regardless of guilt or innocence!

SO you think sending enough money to these abused kid's mothers is the
solution to broken homes?

Considering what you wrote about not caring about the fathers that are hurt
by the system, my wish for you is that you find yourself (or someone you
love) in a situation where you have done nothing wrong, but you are being
egregiously harmed because other people have done something wrong. When you
have actually experienced that which you are so casually dismissing as being
worth the price, then, perhaps, you can come back and share.


"ghostwriter" wrote in message
oups.com...

CasualObserver wrote:
ghostwriter wrote:
wrote:
Thanks Ghost writer. I live in Georgia.

My ex and I do not have personality issues or anything. He just
doesnt
want to do anything with his son because he choses not to tell the
world (and his girlfriends) that he has a son. I dont have a problem
with it...we are divorced now. But I am concerned about this name
thing
affecting my child who feels strange because he has never met this
person who shares his last name. It's just sad.

Personally, if you have the money an hour with an attorney would be
best. If not I would likley file for the name change since he doesnt
really seem to care.

I cant imainge a way that a judge could use to make that sufficient
reason to terminate child support and I suspect that the judge would be
very annoyed if your ex tried that tactic. But judges dont necessarily
need reasons so thats why I suggest seeing the lawyer.

If your ex allows the name change it would be an admission that he
wants nothing to do with his son, but his financial obligations have
nothing to do with his failure to meet personal obligations to his son.

Ghostwriter


The mother asking for the name change is an admission by her that she
doesn't want the father to have anything to do with his son. I can't
imagine that it would be held against him if he cooperates. And if he's
not visiting maybe she has done something really bad to the father. So
if you want to continue making accusations like a typical anti-father
child-support services shill, then let's go...

Alright lets go,

I dont know either person from Adam so I assume that the OP was telling
a minimually skewed version of the facts, you on the other hand took
your personal experiences and pinned your ex's face on the OP.

My understanding based on the OP was that the child is old enough to
wonder why their name isnt the same as mom's and that this bothers
them. Dad hasnt visited in a year but has maintained payments.
Assuming that this is true then, AND I HAVE LITTLE REASON TO ASSUME
OTHERWISE, then no earthly reason exists that this woman cant file for
a name change and give her ex an oppurtunity to challange it if he
wishes. Your assumtion is that since this is a custodial mother
getting child support payments that she is some kind of monster hag,
THE PLURAL OF ANECTDOTE IS NOT EVIDENCE.

I am a long time foster parent, I specialize in girls with histories of
sexual abuse. Dont ever expect anything but contempt if you attempt to
tell me fathers are the ones being mistreated. Yes the system IS far
too tough on the good fathers but that is simply because the good
fathers seldom have a F_#$ING CLUE about the people it is trying to get
to. The truth is that while almost all of the kids that walk though my
door are there because they were neglected/abused by their MOTHERS,
they or their mothers were almost always abused by their FATHERS prior
to the complete failure of the situation. Mom then fled the into
poverty. If even a small percentage of those FATHERS paid their
child-support those children would be in private therapy etc. rather
than in my care.

So yes the systems is too tough, boo f@#$ing hoo. Have a conversation
with a 10year old about what her daddy did to her then come bitching.
If the cost of getting a few of those *******s to support their kids is
that the policy is harsh, I consider it cheap(and will vote to keep it
that way). It also is far cheaper for us as taxpayers since the
failure of a household increases hugely the chance those kids will end
up in prison or having kids in the foster system once they are grown.

That is not to say that there arent a thousand ways the systems could
be made better, but I am tired of getting the same kids back every few
months because the system was too EASY on a BAD father.

ANY INCREASE IN FATHERS RIGHTS MUST BE COUPLED WITH AN INCREASE IN
SOCIAL SERVICES. OTHERWISE MORE FAMILIES WILL FAIL AND WE AS A SOCIETY
WILL BE STUCK WITH THE (MUCH HIGHER) BILL.

IF WE AS A SOCIETY EASE THE BURDEN OFF OF THE GOOD FATHERS MORE OF THE
BAD ONES WILL SLIP THROUGH. THE PRICE TO SOCIETY IS FAR GREATER IF THAT
HAPPENS THAN FORCING GROWN MEN TO DO WITHOUT. YES IT SUCKS, BUT THAT IS
THE SIMPLE TRUTH.

Ghostwriter

PS I am the father of two children by birth and just sent hold my 21st
foster placment. I expect to continue fostering for the rest of my life
and to adopt any child that goes permanent custody while in my care. I
am however 100% in favor of reunification outside of the worst cases.

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
Considering what you wrote about not caring about the fathers that are
hurt by the system, my wish for you is that you find yourself (or someone
you love) in a situation where you have done nothing wrong, but you are
being egregiously harmed because other people have done something wrong.
When you have actually experienced that which you are so casually
dismissing as being worth the price, then, perhaps, you can come back and
share.

Hmmm, you mean like the CP mothers who are castigated, accused of being
greedy, lazy, and all manner of things, because SOME CP mothers are that
way?

Those kind of generalizations?



"ghostwriter" wrote in message
oups.com...

CasualObserver wrote:
ghostwriter wrote:
wrote:
Thanks Ghost writer. I live in Georgia.

My ex and I do not have personality issues or anything. He just
doesnt
want to do anything with his son because he choses not to tell the
world (and his girlfriends) that he has a son. I dont have a problem
with it...we are divorced now. But I am concerned about this name
thing
affecting my child who feels strange because he has never met this
person who shares his last name. It's just sad.

Personally, if you have the money an hour with an attorney would be
best. If not I would likley file for the name change since he doesnt
really seem to care.

I cant imainge a way that a judge could use to make that sufficient
reason to terminate child support and I suspect that the judge would
be
very annoyed if your ex tried that tactic. But judges dont
necessarily
need reasons so thats why I suggest seeing the lawyer.

If your ex allows the name change it would be an admission that he
wants nothing to do with his son, but his financial obligations have
nothing to do with his failure to meet personal obligations to his
son.

Ghostwriter


The mother asking for the name change is an admission by her that she
doesn't want the father to have anything to do with his son. I can't
imagine that it would be held against him if he cooperates. And if he's
not visiting maybe she has done something really bad to the father. So
if you want to continue making accusations like a typical anti-father
child-support services shill, then let's go...

Alright lets go,

I dont know either person from Adam so I assume that the OP was telling
a minimually skewed version of the facts, you on the other hand took
your personal experiences and pinned your ex's face on the OP.

My understanding based on the OP was that the child is old enough to
wonder why their name isnt the same as mom's and that this bothers
them. Dad hasnt visited in a year but has maintained payments.
Assuming that this is true then, AND I HAVE LITTLE REASON TO ASSUME
OTHERWISE, then no earthly reason exists that this woman cant file for
a name change and give her ex an oppurtunity to challange it if he
wishes. Your assumtion is that since this is a custodial mother
getting child support payments that she is some kind of monster hag,
THE PLURAL OF ANECTDOTE IS NOT EVIDENCE.

I am a long time foster parent, I specialize in girls with histories of
sexual abuse. Dont ever expect anything but contempt if you attempt to
tell me fathers are the ones being mistreated. Yes the system IS far
too tough on the good fathers but that is simply because the good
fathers seldom have a F_#$ING CLUE about the people it is trying to get
to. The truth is that while almost all of the kids that walk though my
door are there because they were neglected/abused by their MOTHERS,
they or their mothers were almost always abused by their FATHERS prior
to the complete failure of the situation. Mom then fled the into
poverty. If even a small percentage of those FATHERS paid their
child-support those children would be in private therapy etc. rather
than in my care.

So yes the systems is too tough, boo f@#$ing hoo. Have a conversation
with a 10year old about what her daddy did to her then come bitching.
If the cost of getting a few of those *******s to support their kids is
that the policy is harsh, I consider it cheap(and will vote to keep it
that way). It also is far cheaper for us as taxpayers since the
failure of a household increases hugely the chance those kids will end
up in prison or having kids in the foster system once they are grown.

That is not to say that there arent a thousand ways the systems could
be made better, but I am tired of getting the same kids back every few
months because the system was too EASY on a BAD father.

ANY INCREASE IN FATHERS RIGHTS MUST BE COUPLED WITH AN INCREASE IN
SOCIAL SERVICES. OTHERWISE MORE FAMILIES WILL FAIL AND WE AS A SOCIETY
WILL BE STUCK WITH THE (MUCH HIGHER) BILL.

IF WE AS A SOCIETY EASE THE BURDEN OFF OF THE GOOD FATHERS MORE OF THE
BAD ONES WILL SLIP THROUGH. THE PRICE TO SOCIETY IS FAR GREATER IF THAT
HAPPENS THAN FORCING GROWN MEN TO DO WITHOUT. YES IT SUCKS, BUT THAT IS
THE SIMPLE TRUTH.

Ghostwriter

PS I am the father of two children by birth and just sent hold my 21st
foster placment. I expect to continue fostering for the rest of my life
and to adopt any child that goes permanent custody while in my care. I
am however 100% in favor of reunification outside of the worst cases.

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
Considering what you wrote about not caring about the fathers that are
hurt by the system, my wish for you is that you find yourself (or someone
you love) in a situation where you have done nothing wrong, but you are
being egregiously harmed because other people have done something wrong.
When you have actually experienced that which you are so casually
dismissing as being worth the price, then, perhaps, you can come back and
share.

Hmmm, you mean like the CP mothers who are castigated, accused of being
greedy, lazy, and all manner of things, because SOME CP mothers are that
way?

Those kind of generalizations?

You haven't seen me do that, Moon. I think both sides of the issue have
victims. It is not a good system.

DB wrote:
"ghostwriter" wrote in

IF WE AS A SOCIETY EASE THE BURDEN OFF OF THE GOOD FATHERS MORE OF THE
BAD ONES WILL SLIP THROUGH. THE PRICE TO SOCIETY IS FAR GREATER IF THAT
HAPPENS THAN FORCING GROWN MEN TO DO WITHOUT. YES IT SUCKS, BUT THAT IS
THE SIMPLE TRUTH.

Ghostwriter

Yes Comrade, treat all men the same regardless of guilt or innocence!

SO you think sending enough money to these abused kid's mothers is the
solution to broken homes?

No, I think that forcing the *******s to pay a portion of their child
support is an excellent way to protect their children from future
abuse, by stressed out mothers, abusive boyfriend/roomates, dirt cheap
babysitters.

No guilt or innocence exists in this case since no one have ever been
convicted of anything. But a harsh system does insure that fewer
single mother households fail in the long run. They simply are higher
on my priorities than you are.

Ghostwriter

teachrmama wrote:
Considering what you wrote about not caring about the fathers that are hurt
by the system, my wish for you is that you find yourself (or someone you
love) in a situation where you have done nothing wrong, but you are being
egregiously harmed because other people have done something wrong. When you
have actually experienced that which you are so casually dismissing as being
worth the price, then, perhaps, you can come back and share.

Care is a difficult term, it is not that I do not care for fathers
rights it is simply that an increase in father's rights at the expense
of the most at risk population of children is an EXTREMELY poor trade.

I would wish for you to work with some victimized children, then come
back and tell us if you getting rid of your obligations is worth their
fathers escaping their's.

Ghostwriter



"ghostwriter" wrote in message
oups.com...

CasualObserver wrote:
ghostwriter wrote:
wrote:
Thanks Ghost writer. I live in Georgia.

My ex and I do not have personality issues or anything. He just
doesnt
want to do anything with his son because he choses not to tell the
world (and his girlfriends) that he has a son. I dont have a problem
with it...we are divorced now. But I am concerned about this name
thing
affecting my child who feels strange because he has never met this
person who shares his last name. It's just sad.

Personally, if you have the money an hour with an attorney would be
best. If not I would likley file for the name change since he doesnt
really seem to care.

I cant imainge a way that a judge could use to make that sufficient
reason to terminate child support and I suspect that the judge would be
very annoyed if your ex tried that tactic. But judges dont necessarily
need reasons so thats why I suggest seeing the lawyer.

If your ex allows the name change it would be an admission that he
wants nothing to do with his son, but his financial obligations have
nothing to do with his failure to meet personal obligations to his son.

Ghostwriter


The mother asking for the name change is an admission by her that she
doesn't want the father to have anything to do with his son. I can't
imagine that it would be held against him if he cooperates. And if he's
not visiting maybe she has done something really bad to the father. So
if you want to continue making accusations like a typical anti-father
child-support services shill, then let's go...

Alright lets go,

I dont know either person from Adam so I assume that the OP was telling
a minimually skewed version of the facts, you on the other hand took
your personal experiences and pinned your ex's face on the OP.

My understanding based on the OP was that the child is old enough to
wonder why their name isnt the same as mom's and that this bothers
them. Dad hasnt visited in a year but has maintained payments.
Assuming that this is true then, AND I HAVE LITTLE REASON TO ASSUME
OTHERWISE, then no earthly reason exists that this woman cant file for
a name change and give her ex an oppurtunity to challange it if he
wishes. Your assumtion is that since this is a custodial mother
getting child support payments that she is some kind of monster hag,
THE PLURAL OF ANECTDOTE IS NOT EVIDENCE.

I am a long time foster parent, I specialize in girls with histories of
sexual abuse. Dont ever expect anything but contempt if you attempt to
tell me fathers are the ones being mistreated. Yes the system IS far
too tough on the good fathers but that is simply because the good
fathers seldom have a F_#$ING CLUE about the people it is trying to get
to. The truth is that while almost all of the kids that walk though my
door are there because they were neglected/abused by their MOTHERS,
they or their mothers were almost always abused by their FATHERS prior
to the complete failure of the situation. Mom then fled the into
poverty. If even a small percentage of those FATHERS paid their
child-support those children would be in private therapy etc. rather
than in my care.

So yes the systems is too tough, boo f@#$ing hoo. Have a conversation
with a 10year old about what her daddy did to her then come bitching.
If the cost of getting a few of those *******s to support their kids is
that the policy is harsh, I consider it cheap(and will vote to keep it
that way). It also is far cheaper for us as taxpayers since the
failure of a household increases hugely the chance those kids will end
up in prison or having kids in the foster system once they are grown.

That is not to say that there arent a thousand ways the systems could
be made better, but I am tired of getting the same kids back every few
months because the system was too EASY on a BAD father.

ANY INCREASE IN FATHERS RIGHTS MUST BE COUPLED WITH AN INCREASE IN
SOCIAL SERVICES. OTHERWISE MORE FAMILIES WILL FAIL AND WE AS A SOCIETY
WILL BE STUCK WITH THE (MUCH HIGHER) BILL.

IF WE AS A SOCIETY EASE THE BURDEN OFF OF THE GOOD FATHERS MORE OF THE
BAD ONES WILL SLIP THROUGH. THE PRICE TO SOCIETY IS FAR GREATER IF THAT
HAPPENS THAN FORCING GROWN MEN TO DO WITHOUT. YES IT SUCKS, BUT THAT IS
THE SIMPLE TRUTH.

Ghostwriter

PS I am the father of two children by birth and just sent hold my 21st
foster placment. I expect to continue fostering for the rest of my life
and to adopt any child that goes permanent custody while in my care. I
am however 100% in favor of reunification outside of the worst cases.

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
Considering what you wrote about not caring about the fathers that are
hurt by the system, my wish for you is that you find yourself (or
someone you love) in a situation where you have done nothing wrong, but
you are being egregiously harmed because other people have done
something wrong. When you have actually experienced that which you are
so casually dismissing as being worth the price, then, perhaps, you can
come back and share.

Hmmm, you mean like the CP mothers who are castigated, accused of being
greedy, lazy, and all manner of things, because SOME CP mothers are that
way?

Those kind of generalizations?

You haven't seen me do that, Moon. I think both sides of the issue have
victims. It is not a good system.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to say that YOU were guilty of it - but you have to
admit, CP's come here at their own peril - and all too many posters here
insist that all CP's are terrible people who are ruining their children -
and I really dislike broad generalizations of any kind.

While it may not be a good system, having gone through a number of years
without the system (it's pretty impossible to do a wage assignment on
someone who's self-employed), this is far better.

"ghostwriter" wrote in message
oups.com...

DB wrote:
"ghostwriter" wrote in

IF WE AS A SOCIETY EASE THE BURDEN OFF OF THE GOOD FATHERS MORE OF THE
BAD ONES WILL SLIP THROUGH. THE PRICE TO SOCIETY IS FAR GREATER IF THAT
HAPPENS THAN FORCING GROWN MEN TO DO WITHOUT. YES IT SUCKS, BUT THAT IS
THE SIMPLE TRUTH.

Ghostwriter

Yes Comrade, treat all men the same regardless of guilt or innocence!

SO you think sending enough money to these abused kid's mothers is the
solution to broken homes?

No, I think that forcing the *******s to pay a portion of their child
support is an excellent way to protect their children from future
abuse, by stressed out mothers, abusive boyfriend/roomates, dirt cheap
babysitters.

Do you really think that having a bit more money is going to stop the mom
from having a boyfriend? From needing a babysitter? Do you really think
that "cheap" babysitters are more prone to be abusive than more costly ones?
Do you think that, perhaps, the mom's choices may have led to thier
difficulties? Why pin it all on the father?


No guilt or innocence exists in this case since no one have ever been
convicted of anything. But a harsh system does insure that fewer
single mother households fail in the long run. They simply are higher
on my priorities than you are.

No it doesn't. Those men who do not want to pay find ways to not pay
anyway. No system is going to solve that problem. And by punishing the
innocent to try to catch the guilty, you are simply creating anger among
those who have been so punished for no reason. You may feel that your
"priorities" are wonderful. I don't think you have though this through
thoroughly.

"ghostwriter" wrote in message
oups.com...

teachrmama wrote:
Considering what you wrote about not caring about the fathers that are
hurt
by the system, my wish for you is that you find yourself (or someone you
love) in a situation where you have done nothing wrong, but you are being
egregiously harmed because other people have done something wrong. When
you
have actually experienced that which you are so casually dismissing as
being
worth the price, then, perhaps, you can come back and share.

Care is a difficult term, it is not that I do not care for fathers
rights it is simply that an increase in father's rights at the expense
of the most at risk population of children is an EXTREMELY poor trade.

Why does there have to be a tradeoff? Why can't the rights of men be
protected without harming children? Do you really think it is fair that a
man is tricked into believing that he is a father, then forced to continue
paying child support when it is proved that he is NOT the father? Do you
really think it is fair that a woman can hide the fact that a man is a
father until years after the birth of the child, then go back and demand not
only current support, but arrearages for all the years the man did not pay
when he was not aware of his fatherhood? Are these the unfairnesses that
you feel should continue? If so, why?


I would wish for you to work with some victimized children, then come
back and tell us if you getting rid of your obligations is worth their
fathers escaping their's.

Well, Ghostwriter, you have your wish. I have worked with such children.
And still do. This year I have 2 such children in my classroom. I don't
think that money is going to solve the problems. I think that only
education is going to do that. Not the education of the children in
school--although that is also important. But the education of the mothers
who are making choices that are not necessarily good for their children.
Help the mothers help themselves--don't just throw money at them and see
that as a solution. I could tell you stories about what I have seen that
would curl your eyebrows. And I don;t think that money has ever been the
solution. Neither is taking away the rights of the innocent. I do not
think you have thought this through thoroughly enough.


"ghostwriter" wrote in message
oups.com...

CasualObserver wrote:
ghostwriter wrote:
wrote:
Thanks Ghost writer. I live in Georgia.

My ex and I do not have personality issues or anything. He just
doesnt
want to do anything with his son because he choses not to tell the
world (and his girlfriends) that he has a son. I dont have a
problem
with it...we are divorced now. But I am concerned about this name
thing
affecting my child who feels strange because he has never met this
person who shares his last name. It's just sad.

Personally, if you have the money an hour with an attorney would be
best. If not I would likley file for the name change since he
doesnt
really seem to care.

I cant imainge a way that a judge could use to make that sufficient
reason to terminate child support and I suspect that the judge would
be
very annoyed if your ex tried that tactic. But judges dont
necessarily
need reasons so thats why I suggest seeing the lawyer.

If your ex allows the name change it would be an admission that he
wants nothing to do with his son, but his financial obligations have
nothing to do with his failure to meet personal obligations to his
son.

Ghostwriter


The mother asking for the name change is an admission by her that she
doesn't want the father to have anything to do with his son. I can't
imagine that it would be held against him if he cooperates. And if
he's
not visiting maybe she has done something really bad to the father. So
if you want to continue making accusations like a typical anti-father
child-support services shill, then let's go...

Alright lets go,

I dont know either person from Adam so I assume that the OP was telling
a minimually skewed version of the facts, you on the other hand took
your personal experiences and pinned your ex's face on the OP.

My understanding based on the OP was that the child is old enough to
wonder why their name isnt the same as mom's and that this bothers
them. Dad hasnt visited in a year but has maintained payments.
Assuming that this is true then, AND I HAVE LITTLE REASON TO ASSUME
OTHERWISE, then no earthly reason exists that this woman cant file for
a name change and give her ex an oppurtunity to challange it if he
wishes. Your assumtion is that since this is a custodial mother
getting child support payments that she is some kind of monster hag,
THE PLURAL OF ANECTDOTE IS NOT EVIDENCE.

I am a long time foster parent, I specialize in girls with histories of
sexual abuse. Dont ever expect anything but contempt if you attempt to
tell me fathers are the ones being mistreated. Yes the system IS far
too tough on the good fathers but that is simply because the good
fathers seldom have a F_#$ING CLUE about the people it is trying to get
to. The truth is that while almost all of the kids that walk though my
door are there because they were neglected/abused by their MOTHERS,
they or their mothers were almost always abused by their FATHERS prior
to the complete failure of the situation. Mom then fled the into
poverty. If even a small percentage of those FATHERS paid their
child-support those children would be in private therapy etc. rather
than in my care.

So yes the systems is too tough, boo f@#$ing hoo. Have a conversation
with a 10year old about what her daddy did to her then come bitching.
If the cost of getting a few of those *******s to support their kids is
that the policy is harsh, I consider it cheap(and will vote to keep it
that way). It also is far cheaper for us as taxpayers since the
failure of a household increases hugely the chance those kids will end
up in prison or having kids in the foster system once they are grown.

That is not to say that there arent a thousand ways the systems could
be made better, but I am tired of getting the same kids back every few
months because the system was too EASY on a BAD father.

ANY INCREASE IN FATHERS RIGHTS MUST BE COUPLED WITH AN INCREASE IN
SOCIAL SERVICES. OTHERWISE MORE FAMILIES WILL FAIL AND WE AS A SOCIETY
WILL BE STUCK WITH THE (MUCH HIGHER) BILL.

IF WE AS A SOCIETY EASE THE BURDEN OFF OF THE GOOD FATHERS MORE OF THE
BAD ONES WILL SLIP THROUGH. THE PRICE TO SOCIETY IS FAR GREATER IF THAT
HAPPENS THAN FORCING GROWN MEN TO DO WITHOUT. YES IT SUCKS, BUT THAT IS
THE SIMPLE TRUTH.

Ghostwriter

PS I am the father of two children by birth and just sent hold my 21st
foster placment. I expect to continue fostering for the rest of my life
and to adopt any child that goes permanent custody while in my care. I
am however 100% in favor of reunification outside of the worst cases.

"teachrmama" wrote

He didn't come to California, did he? We don't need any more of that
here!
==
The man who attacked and disabled me in 1998 served his full sentence in
state
prison (5 years) and now lives 10 miles down the road from me. There isn't
a
damn thing I can do about it.