"Child Support" money?

This is where I have some problems, Cameron. What are the children
being taught if dad is impoverished to provide mom with the means to a
higher lifestyle for herself and the children? Do we want our sons to
believe that their lot in life is to supply a woman with money so
*she* can raise their children? Or do we want them to understand that
children need both fathers and mothers in their lives? Do we want ur
daughters to look at their husbands as disposable money machines? Or
do we want them to understand the importance of a father in his
children's day-to-day lives? By "just accepting" the way things are
and getting on with life without a whimper--just what do the children
glean form that in forming their attitudes on the way the world works?

"Cameron Stevens" wrote in message m...
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Cameron Stevens" wrote in message
.. .

It's ok for the CP to live in the 3000sq ft. house while the NCP is in
that
apartment. If the father can show he wants to be a CP (~ 50/50) then the
courts should be supporting this.

So let's say the CP's new "interest" is the man she left you for and she
is
living in the 3,000 square foot house that used to be yours. You are
paying
her CS so she and your children can live with the guy who helped destroy
your marriage. Your CS is funding a wonderful life for her with her new
love "interest."

You have been kicked out of your prior home and now live in a one bedroom
apartment. You rarely see your children, and have been relegated to a
visitor in their lives. The guy who is living with your ex has more
access
to your children than you do. You also had to give her at least half of
your assets and to help her get adjusted to being a single mother you are
paying her alimony.

Do you still think that is just her "good luck" and are you still happy
about her new life?

That scenario, which is not mine - but I will empathize, calls for a
seperation of two things. What she did to break up the marriage has nothing
to do with the justification or need for CS. The idea that you are prevented
from being an active father to a visitor is deplorable and while there are
legal paths to try to change that you're already broke from the CS you're
paying and the courts are not friends to the NCP. It's not fair or right in
the "BIG PICTURE" but...

Child Support is not about who screwed up the relationship, etc. It is about
parents being responsible financially. In this scenario there is a real lack
of responsible behavior from the ex-wife as she is allowing a minimized
amount of access to the children. Your only course of action, if you have
joint custody and no legal restrictions (R.O.s), is to show up at the ex's
home on a regular basis and do everything possible to ensure those children
have every chance to see you (in this scenario) as the father. If they ever
call "new-guy" (NG) "Dad" politely correct them. Kids only have one father.
If you're actively involved in their lives then you are still "Dad".

Alimony is not CS and should be considered seperately for the same reasons.

Cameron

This is where I have some problems, Cameron. What are the children
being taught if dad is impoverished to provide mom with the means to a
higher lifestyle for herself and the children? Do we want our sons to
believe that their lot in life is to supply a woman with money so
*she* can raise their children? Or do we want them to understand that
children need both fathers and mothers in their lives? Do we want ur
daughters to look at their husbands as disposable money machines? Or
do we want them to understand the importance of a father in his
children's day-to-day lives? By "just accepting" the way things are
and getting on with life without a whimper--just what do the children
glean form that in forming their attitudes on the way the world works?

"Cameron Stevens" wrote in message m...
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Cameron Stevens" wrote in message
.. .

It's ok for the CP to live in the 3000sq ft. house while the NCP is in
that
apartment. If the father can show he wants to be a CP (~ 50/50) then the
courts should be supporting this.

So let's say the CP's new "interest" is the man she left you for and she
is
living in the 3,000 square foot house that used to be yours. You are
paying
her CS so she and your children can live with the guy who helped destroy
your marriage. Your CS is funding a wonderful life for her with her new
love "interest."

You have been kicked out of your prior home and now live in a one bedroom
apartment. You rarely see your children, and have been relegated to a
visitor in their lives. The guy who is living with your ex has more
access
to your children than you do. You also had to give her at least half of
your assets and to help her get adjusted to being a single mother you are
paying her alimony.

Do you still think that is just her "good luck" and are you still happy
about her new life?

That scenario, which is not mine - but I will empathize, calls for a
seperation of two things. What she did to break up the marriage has nothing
to do with the justification or need for CS. The idea that you are prevented
from being an active father to a visitor is deplorable and while there are
legal paths to try to change that you're already broke from the CS you're
paying and the courts are not friends to the NCP. It's not fair or right in
the "BIG PICTURE" but...

Child Support is not about who screwed up the relationship, etc. It is about
parents being responsible financially. In this scenario there is a real lack
of responsible behavior from the ex-wife as she is allowing a minimized
amount of access to the children. Your only course of action, if you have
joint custody and no legal restrictions (R.O.s), is to show up at the ex's
home on a regular basis and do everything possible to ensure those children
have every chance to see you (in this scenario) as the father. If they ever
call "new-guy" (NG) "Dad" politely correct them. Kids only have one father.
If you're actively involved in their lives then you are still "Dad".

Alimony is not CS and should be considered seperately for the same reasons.

Cameron

While you are digging your foot out of your mouth, you might realize that
the 18.43 a week was the balance not being kept for welfare
reimbursement.......seems the other money grubbing mommy wasn't capable of
even supporting herself and needed big daddy guvmint to do it for her.

"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:40:33 -0800, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:


"stealing for mommies" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:49:40 GMT, "The Dave©" wrote:

18.43 a week? Thats ridiculous

only in your man=bad women=good alternate reality


No on my 18.43 a week for support is a joke for anyone.

While you are digging your foot out of your mouth, you might realize that
the 18.43 a week was the balance not being kept for welfare
reimbursement.......seems the other money grubbing mommy wasn't capable of
even supporting herself and needed big daddy guvmint to do it for her.

"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:40:33 -0800, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:


"stealing for mommies" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:49:40 GMT, "The Dave©" wrote:

18.43 a week? Thats ridiculous

only in your man=bad women=good alternate reality


No on my 18.43 a week for support is a joke for anyone.

yawn
more of the 3rd grade mentality.........how quaint

"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message
...
You are the one who made the first lousey attempt at cutting me down.
I think you need a time out.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:46:58 -0800, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:


"stealing for mommies" wrote in message
.. .
Well we all know you have an entire house full of cheese, as much
whine as you have..

YAWN what's up next......"I know you are but what am I" or "Your
mother wears army boots" Go in the corner, throw your tantrum, and
when
the meds arrive, get back to us.


On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:42:50 -0800, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:

Maybe you should buy some cheese to go with that whine

"mary Adrian" wrote in message
...
How I spent my son's $18.43 a week court ordered child-support
payments
from a man making $65,000+ a year -OK let's see $1.50 a day for
lunch-that's 7.50. Another dollar a day for an afterschool
snack-another
5.00. This leaves me with $5.93 to help feed him for the rest of the
week. Hot damn we can afford that Top Ramen we have the cravings
for.
Later, Mary

yawn
more of the 3rd grade mentality.........how quaint

"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message
...
You are the one who made the first lousey attempt at cutting me down.
I think you need a time out.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:46:58 -0800, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:


"stealing for mommies" wrote in message
.. .
Well we all know you have an entire house full of cheese, as much
whine as you have..

YAWN what's up next......"I know you are but what am I" or "Your
mother wears army boots" Go in the corner, throw your tantrum, and
when
the meds arrive, get back to us.


On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:42:50 -0800, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:

Maybe you should buy some cheese to go with that whine

"mary Adrian" wrote in message
...
How I spent my son's $18.43 a week court ordered child-support
payments
from a man making $65,000+ a year -OK let's see $1.50 a day for
lunch-that's 7.50. Another dollar a day for an afterschool
snack-another
5.00. This leaves me with $5.93 to help feed him for the rest of the
week. Hot damn we can afford that Top Ramen we have the cravings
for.
Later, Mary

you doubt get it yet.......you have no credibility

"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message
...

Can't attack real credibility so you go to the little child stuff.
Typical .

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:40:12 -0800, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:

YAWN

looks like we have a 3rd grader boy to go along with 'stealing for
mommies:"
3rd grader girl mentality

"Quedar de encargo" wrote in message
et...


"Paul Fritz" wrote in message
...
You out of your ass?

LOL.....Learn how to talk!

John


"Quedar de encargo" wrote in message
t...

"Paul Fritz" wrote in message
...
Maybe you should buy some cheese to go with that whine

Sorry but I couldn't help but LMFAO!!!!! Man........ look who's
talking!

John

"mary Adrian" wrote in message
...
How I spent my son's $18.43 a week court ordered child-support
payments
from a man making $65,000+ a year -OK let's see $1.50 a day for
lunch-that's 7.50. Another dollar a day for an afterschool
snack-another
5.00. This leaves me with $5.93 to help feed him for the rest
of
the
week. Hot damn we can afford that Top Ramen we have the
cravings
for.
Later, Mary

you doubt get it yet.......you have no credibility

"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message
...

Can't attack real credibility so you go to the little child stuff.
Typical .

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:40:12 -0800, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:

YAWN

looks like we have a 3rd grader boy to go along with 'stealing for
mommies:"
3rd grader girl mentality

"Quedar de encargo" wrote in message
et...


"Paul Fritz" wrote in message
...
You out of your ass?

LOL.....Learn how to talk!

John


"Quedar de encargo" wrote in message
t...

"Paul Fritz" wrote in message
...
Maybe you should buy some cheese to go with that whine

Sorry but I couldn't help but LMFAO!!!!! Man........ look who's
talking!

John

"mary Adrian" wrote in message
...
How I spent my son's $18.43 a week court ordered child-support
payments
from a man making $65,000+ a year -OK let's see $1.50 a day for
lunch-that's 7.50. Another dollar a day for an afterschool
snack-another
5.00. This leaves me with $5.93 to help feed him for the rest
of
the
week. Hot damn we can afford that Top Ramen we have the
cravings
for.
Later, Mary

what was it you just said...."Can't attack real credibility so you go to the
little child stuff"

snicker what a maroon

"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message
...
Paul, Ken, whoever you REALLY are... you have identified yourself..
the "I know you are but what am I type". Wow, this must be break
through for you.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 23:14:28 -0500, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:


"Gini52" wrote in message
...
In article , Paul Fritz says...

YAWN

looks like we have a 3rd grader boy to go along with 'stealing for
mommies:"
3rd grader girl mentality
====
Perhaps. But, it is an adelphia server.
====
===

didn't mean to imply they were the same person, just the same
mentality.......the "I know you are but what am I" type.

LOL

what was it you just said...."Can't attack real credibility so you go to the
little child stuff"

snicker what a maroon

"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message
...
Paul, Ken, whoever you REALLY are... you have identified yourself..
the "I know you are but what am I type". Wow, this must be break
through for you.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 23:14:28 -0500, "Paul Fritz"
wrote:


"Gini52" wrote in message
...
In article , Paul Fritz says...

YAWN

looks like we have a 3rd grader boy to go along with 'stealing for
mommies:"
3rd grader girl mentality
====
Perhaps. But, it is an adelphia server.
====
===

didn't mean to imply they were the same person, just the same
mentality.......the "I know you are but what am I" type.

LOL