If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Accountability and Responsibility
One of my (many) complaints about the CS system is the non-
accountability by the recipient parent. As we all know, as soon as I mention that I would like to see some accountability for the (large) amount of child support I pay each month, I am bombarded with the usual "It is CHILD support... it's for the CHILDREN" "How can you be so mean"... "Stop trying to be a control freak" "How dare you expect her to keep receipts and track expenditures". "It's none of your business!". "The guidelines say I do not have to do this!".... You all know the drill. It is interpreted by everyone as yet another tactic for bullying the ex-wife. Yet no one replies "Why?". "Why do you want accountability". Well, I'll tell you why. The average person fails to understand, or is unwilling to try to understand, the amount of double paying day in and day out I do. As well, I am constantly positioned between a rock and a hard place. For example, my child requires sports equipment for school gym. The total cost; about $40. I talk to the ex about this and her reply is "I'm not buying it.. oh, and since the child has no equipment, I have discussed it with his teacher and he will now be missing gym". I talked with my son and he says "Yeah, Mom won't buy the equipment" followed by some lame excuse as to why she cannot afford equipment.. "but I really want to take this gym class". So I chat with the ex and yup "SHE has decided all this; no equipment and he sits out the class". BTW we have joint custody, nice, eh. I can say to my son.. "Yup, too bad, life sucks"... or help him out and buy the equipment. After paying the ex more than $1K in child support, I really do not feel like dishing out more cash. And, if I buy the equipment, I have technically bought it twice. If I don't buy the equipment, what the heck kind of parent am I to let my child not participate in a simple school activity. I can't win. Mom, though, gets off Scott free. How does she do this? And this happens over and over: clothing, lessons, equipment, etc etc etc etc. Some times I let it go... some times I give in/give up. I want accountability because if somehow she spent $1000 on a child in one month (plus HER share of support), then I would be more receptive to helping out with costs above CS amounts. But I'll never get that since I'm just a mean, asshole, control freak wanting to see where all that cash went. So my new take on all this; I do not want accountability for the child support, I want a recipient's responsibility act put in place that ensures money is spent on the child. Sheesh. (thanks for the vent) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Accountability and Responsibility
If the government threatens anyone with imprisonment over money, then the
money needs to be accounted for. Problem is, they can't justify the large amounts they extort! "Henry" wrote in message ... One of my (many) complaints about the CS system is the non- accountability by the recipient parent. As we all know, as soon as I mention that I would like to see some accountability for the (large) amount of child support I pay each month, I am bombarded with the usual "It is CHILD support... it's for the CHILDREN" "How can you be so mean"... "Stop trying to be a control freak" "How dare you expect her to keep receipts and track expenditures". "It's none of your business!". "The guidelines say I do not have to do this!".... You all know the drill. It is interpreted by everyone as yet another tactic for bullying the ex-wife. Yet no one replies "Why?". "Why do you want accountability". Well, I'll tell you why. The average person fails to understand, or is unwilling to try to understand, the amount of double paying day in and day out I do. As well, I am constantly positioned between a rock and a hard place. For example, my child requires sports equipment for school gym. The total cost; about $40. I talk to the ex about this and her reply is "I'm not buying it.. oh, and since the child has no equipment, I have discussed it with his teacher and he will now be missing gym". I talked with my son and he says "Yeah, Mom won't buy the equipment" followed by some lame excuse as to why she cannot afford equipment.. "but I really want to take this gym class". So I chat with the ex and yup "SHE has decided all this; no equipment and he sits out the class". BTW we have joint custody, nice, eh. I can say to my son.. "Yup, too bad, life sucks"... or help him out and buy the equipment. After paying the ex more than $1K in child support, I really do not feel like dishing out more cash. And, if I buy the equipment, I have technically bought it twice. If I don't buy the equipment, what the heck kind of parent am I to let my child not participate in a simple school activity. I can't win. Mom, though, gets off Scott free. How does she do this? And this happens over and over: clothing, lessons, equipment, etc etc etc etc. Some times I let it go... some times I give in/give up. I want accountability because if somehow she spent $1000 on a child in one month (plus HER share of support), then I would be more receptive to helping out with costs above CS amounts. But I'll never get that since I'm just a mean, asshole, control freak wanting to see where all that cash went. So my new take on all this; I do not want accountability for the child support, I want a recipient's responsibility act put in place that ensures money is spent on the child. Sheesh. (thanks for the vent) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Accountability and Responsibility
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:38:29 -0600, Henry wrote:
One of my (many) complaints about the CS system is the non- accountability by the recipient parent. As we all know, as soon as I mention that I would like to see some accountability for the (large) amount of child support I pay each month, I am bombarded with the usual "It is CHILD support... it's for the CHILDREN" "How can you be so mean"... "Stop trying to be a control freak" "How dare you expect her to keep receipts and track expenditures". "It's none of your business!". "The guidelines say I do not have to do this!".... You all know the drill. It is interpreted by everyone as yet another tactic for bullying the ex-wife. Yet no one replies "Why?". "Why do you want accountability". Well, I'll tell you why. The average person fails to understand, or is unwilling to try to understand, the amount of double paying day in and day out I do. As well, I am constantly positioned between a rock and a hard place. For example, my child requires sports equipment for school gym. The total cost; about $40. I talk to the ex about this and her reply is "I'm not buying it.. oh, and since the child has no equipment, I have discussed it with his teacher and he will now be missing gym". I talked with my son and he says "Yeah, Mom won't buy the equipment" followed by some lame excuse as to why she cannot afford equipment.. "but I really want to take this gym class". So I chat with the ex and yup "SHE has decided all this; no equipment and he sits out the class". BTW we have joint custody, nice, eh. I can say to my son.. "Yup, too bad, life sucks"... or help him out and buy the equipment. After paying the ex more than $1K in child support, I really do not feel like dishing out more cash. And, if I buy the equipment, I have technically bought it twice. If I don't buy the equipment, what the heck kind of parent am I to let my child not participate in a simple school activity. I can't win. Mom, though, gets off Scott free. How does she do this? And this happens over and over: clothing, lessons, equipment, etc etc etc etc. Some times I let it go... some times I give in/give up. I want accountability because if somehow she spent $1000 on a child in one month (plus HER share of support), then I would be more receptive to helping out with costs above CS amounts. But I'll never get that since I'm just a mean, asshole, control freak wanting to see where all that cash went. So my new take on all this; I do not want accountability for the child support, I want a recipient's responsibility act put in place that ensures money is spent on the child. Sheesh. (thanks for the vent) This is a perfectly valid complaint. My son and daughter are adults, and it is many years since I got my ex-wife off my payroll. However, when I was paying her, it was perfectly clear to me that I was being forced to support her lifestyle, not that of my daughter. (For most of the time after the divorce, I had custody of my son, an arrangement that my ex consented to because she found him too much trouble.) Now I still support my son and daughter financially and in other ways, and am happy to do so, because I do so directly and there is no element of subsidizing my ex. The fact that I no longer have to write out large checks each month to my ex is, even after many years, a great relief. Like so many aspects of the "child support" system, the nonaccountability for CS money reflects a simple, and central, fact: overwhelmingly, CS is money that fathers pay to mothers. In the current climate in the U.S. and other western countries, when the interests of the two sexes are in conflict, the female interest always triumphs. (In this context, note the other thread in this news group about the court case that ruled that, while DNA testing can be used to impose a CS obligation on a man, it cannot be used to remove such an obligation from a man who is NOT the father of the children in question.) There will be no reform of this or any of the many other indefensible aspects of "child support" until there is a change in underlying factors -- such as an end to the glass ceiling on paternal custody, or the development of an interest group that can exercise politically significant clout on behalf of fathers. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Accountability and Responsibility
A funny thing I have noticed since I retired a few months ago. I now
live on $1200/month, which is $200/month less than C$ cost me. I live in an 3bd/2car/2 bath in a nice neighborhood and pay all my bills. Funny how the state believes that a child living with a parent in the grandparent's home (rent and utility bill free) needs enough to fully support an entire independent household. Phil #3 "Kenneth S." wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:38:29 -0600, Henry wrote: One of my (many) complaints about the CS system is the non- accountability by the recipient parent. As we all know, as soon as I mention that I would like to see some accountability for the (large) amount of child support I pay each month, I am bombarded with the usual "It is CHILD support... it's for the CHILDREN" "How can you be so mean"... "Stop trying to be a control freak" "How dare you expect her to keep receipts and track expenditures". "It's none of your business!". "The guidelines say I do not have to do this!".... You all know the drill. It is interpreted by everyone as yet another tactic for bullying the ex-wife. Yet no one replies "Why?". "Why do you want accountability". Well, I'll tell you why. The average person fails to understand, or is unwilling to try to understand, the amount of double paying day in and day out I do. As well, I am constantly positioned between a rock and a hard place. For example, my child requires sports equipment for school gym. The total cost; about $40. I talk to the ex about this and her reply is "I'm not buying it.. oh, and since the child has no equipment, I have discussed it with his teacher and he will now be missing gym". I talked with my son and he says "Yeah, Mom won't buy the equipment" followed by some lame excuse as to why she cannot afford equipment.. "but I really want to take this gym class". So I chat with the ex and yup "SHE has decided all this; no equipment and he sits out the class". BTW we have joint custody, nice, eh. I can say to my son.. "Yup, too bad, life sucks"... or help him out and buy the equipment. After paying the ex more than $1K in child support, I really do not feel like dishing out more cash. And, if I buy the equipment, I have technically bought it twice. If I don't buy the equipment, what the heck kind of parent am I to let my child not participate in a simple school activity. I can't win. Mom, though, gets off Scott free. How does she do this? And this happens over and over: clothing, lessons, equipment, etc etc etc etc. Some times I let it go... some times I give in/give up. I want accountability because if somehow she spent $1000 on a child in one month (plus HER share of support), then I would be more receptive to helping out with costs above CS amounts. But I'll never get that since I'm just a mean, asshole, control freak wanting to see where all that cash went. So my new take on all this; I do not want accountability for the child support, I want a recipient's responsibility act put in place that ensures money is spent on the child. Sheesh. (thanks for the vent) This is a perfectly valid complaint. My son and daughter are adults, and it is many years since I got my ex-wife off my payroll. However, when I was paying her, it was perfectly clear to me that I was being forced to support her lifestyle, not that of my daughter. (For most of the time after the divorce, I had custody of my son, an arrangement that my ex consented to because she found him too much trouble.) Now I still support my son and daughter financially and in other ways, and am happy to do so, because I do so directly and there is no element of subsidizing my ex. The fact that I no longer have to write out large checks each month to my ex is, even after many years, a great relief. Like so many aspects of the "child support" system, the nonaccountability for CS money reflects a simple, and central, fact: overwhelmingly, CS is money that fathers pay to mothers. In the current climate in the U.S. and other western countries, when the interests of the two sexes are in conflict, the female interest always triumphs. (In this context, note the other thread in this news group about the court case that ruled that, while DNA testing can be used to impose a CS obligation on a man, it cannot be used to remove such an obligation from a man who is NOT the father of the children in question.) There will be no reform of this or any of the many other indefensible aspects of "child support" until there is a change in underlying factors -- such as an end to the glass ceiling on paternal custody, or the development of an interest group that can exercise politically significant clout on behalf of fathers. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Accountability and Responsibility
I wonder how many kids get a $1200 per month allowance?
"Phil" wrote in message m... A funny thing I have noticed since I retired a few months ago. I now live on $1200/month, which is $200/month less than C$ cost me. I live in an 3bd/2car/2 bath in a nice neighborhood and pay all my bills. Funny how the state believes that a child living with a parent in the grandparent's home (rent and utility bill free) needs enough to fully support an entire independent household. Phil #3 "Kenneth S." wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:38:29 -0600, Henry wrote: One of my (many) complaints about the CS system is the non- accountability by the recipient parent. As we all know, as soon as I mention that I would like to see some accountability for the (large) amount of child support I pay each month, I am bombarded with the usual "It is CHILD support... it's for the CHILDREN" "How can you be so mean"... "Stop trying to be a control freak" "How dare you expect her to keep receipts and track expenditures". "It's none of your business!". "The guidelines say I do not have to do this!".... You all know the drill. It is interpreted by everyone as yet another tactic for bullying the ex-wife. Yet no one replies "Why?". "Why do you want accountability". Well, I'll tell you why. The average person fails to understand, or is unwilling to try to understand, the amount of double paying day in and day out I do. As well, I am constantly positioned between a rock and a hard place. For example, my child requires sports equipment for school gym. The total cost; about $40. I talk to the ex about this and her reply is "I'm not buying it.. oh, and since the child has no equipment, I have discussed it with his teacher and he will now be missing gym". I talked with my son and he says "Yeah, Mom won't buy the equipment" followed by some lame excuse as to why she cannot afford equipment.. "but I really want to take this gym class". So I chat with the ex and yup "SHE has decided all this; no equipment and he sits out the class". BTW we have joint custody, nice, eh. I can say to my son.. "Yup, too bad, life sucks"... or help him out and buy the equipment. After paying the ex more than $1K in child support, I really do not feel like dishing out more cash. And, if I buy the equipment, I have technically bought it twice. If I don't buy the equipment, what the heck kind of parent am I to let my child not participate in a simple school activity. I can't win. Mom, though, gets off Scott free. How does she do this? And this happens over and over: clothing, lessons, equipment, etc etc etc etc. Some times I let it go... some times I give in/give up. I want accountability because if somehow she spent $1000 on a child in one month (plus HER share of support), then I would be more receptive to helping out with costs above CS amounts. But I'll never get that since I'm just a mean, asshole, control freak wanting to see where all that cash went. So my new take on all this; I do not want accountability for the child support, I want a recipient's responsibility act put in place that ensures money is spent on the child. Sheesh. (thanks for the vent) This is a perfectly valid complaint. My son and daughter are adults, and it is many years since I got my ex-wife off my payroll. However, when I was paying her, it was perfectly clear to me that I was being forced to support her lifestyle, not that of my daughter. (For most of the time after the divorce, I had custody of my son, an arrangement that my ex consented to because she found him too much trouble.) Now I still support my son and daughter financially and in other ways, and am happy to do so, because I do so directly and there is no element of subsidizing my ex. The fact that I no longer have to write out large checks each month to my ex is, even after many years, a great relief. Like so many aspects of the "child support" system, the nonaccountability for CS money reflects a simple, and central, fact: overwhelmingly, CS is money that fathers pay to mothers. In the current climate in the U.S. and other western countries, when the interests of the two sexes are in conflict, the female interest always triumphs. (In this context, note the other thread in this news group about the court case that ruled that, while DNA testing can be used to impose a CS obligation on a man, it cannot be used to remove such an obligation from a man who is NOT the father of the children in question.) There will be no reform of this or any of the many other indefensible aspects of "child support" until there is a change in underlying factors -- such as an end to the glass ceiling on paternal custody, or the development of an interest group that can exercise politically significant clout on behalf of fathers. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Accountability and Responsibility
Mine do, er.. well OK, $1017.55 But close enough for GovCo work.
"DB" wrote in message ... I wonder how many kids get a $1200 per month allowance? "Phil" wrote in message m... A funny thing I have noticed since I retired a few months ago. I now live on $1200/month, which is $200/month less than C$ cost me. I live in an 3bd/2car/2 bath in a nice neighborhood and pay all my bills. Funny how the state believes that a child living with a parent in the grandparent's home (rent and utility bill free) needs enough to fully support an entire independent household. Phil #3 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Accountability and Responsibility
The answer to the question below is that very, very few kids get a $1200 per month allowance. However, quite a few mothers get $1200 per month in "child support." On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 23:52:47 +0100, "Dusty" wrote: Mine do, er.. well OK, $1017.55 But close enough for GovCo work. "DB" wrote in message .. . I wonder how many kids get a $1200 per month allowance? "Phil" wrote in message m... A funny thing I have noticed since I retired a few months ago. I now live on $1200/month, which is $200/month less than C$ cost me. I live in an 3bd/2car/2 bath in a nice neighborhood and pay all my bills. Funny how the state believes that a child living with a parent in the grandparent's home (rent and utility bill free) needs enough to fully support an entire independent household. Phil #3 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Accountability and Responsibility
-- Any man that's good enough to pay child support is good enough to have custody of such child. "Kenneth S." wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:38:29 -0600, Henry wrote: One of my (many) complaints about the CS system is the non- accountability by the recipient parent. As we all know, as soon as I mention that I would like to see some accountability for the (large) amount of child support I pay each month, I am bombarded with the usual "It is CHILD support... it's for the CHILDREN" "How can you be so mean"... "Stop trying to be a control freak" "How dare you expect her to keep receipts and track expenditures". "It's none of your business!". "The guidelines say I do not have to do this!".... You all know the drill. It is interpreted by everyone as yet another tactic for bullying the ex-wife. Yet no one replies "Why?". "Why do you want accountability". Well, I'll tell you why. The average person fails to understand, or is unwilling to try to understand, the amount of double paying day in and day out I do. As well, I am constantly positioned between a rock and a hard place. For example, my child requires sports equipment for school gym. The total cost; about $40. I talk to the ex about this and her reply is "I'm not buying it.. oh, and since the child has no equipment, I have discussed it with his teacher and he will now be missing gym". I talked with my son and he says "Yeah, Mom won't buy the equipment" followed by some lame excuse as to why she cannot afford equipment.. "but I really want to take this gym class". So I chat with the ex and yup "SHE has decided all this; no equipment and he sits out the class". BTW we have joint custody, nice, eh. I can say to my son.. "Yup, too bad, life sucks"... or help him out and buy the equipment. After paying the ex more than $1K in child support, I really do not feel like dishing out more cash. And, if I buy the equipment, I have technically bought it twice. If I don't buy the equipment, what the heck kind of parent am I to let my child not participate in a simple school activity. I can't win. Mom, though, gets off Scott free. How does she do this? And this happens over and over: clothing, lessons, equipment, etc etc etc etc. Some times I let it go... some times I give in/give up. I want accountability because if somehow she spent $1000 on a child in one month (plus HER share of support), then I would be more receptive to helping out with costs above CS amounts. But I'll never get that since I'm just a mean, asshole, control freak wanting to see where all that cash went. So my new take on all this; I do not want accountability for the child support, I want a recipient's responsibility act put in place that ensures money is spent on the child. Sheesh. (thanks for the vent) This is a perfectly valid complaint. My son and daughter are adults, and it is many years since I got my ex-wife off my payroll. However, when I was paying her, it was perfectly clear to me that I was being forced to support her lifestyle, not that of my daughter. (For most of the time after the divorce, I had custody of my son, an arrangement that my ex consented to because she found him too much trouble.) Now I still support my son and daughter financially and in other ways, and am happy to do so, because I do so directly and there is no element of subsidizing my ex. The fact that I no longer have to write out large checks each month to my ex is, even after many years, a great relief. Like so many aspects of the "child support" system, the nonaccountability for CS money reflects a simple, and central, fact: overwhelmingly, CS is money that fathers pay to mothers. In the current climate in the U.S. and other western countries, when the interests of the two sexes are in conflict, the female interest always triumphs. (In this context, note the other thread in this news group about the court case that ruled that, while DNA testing can be used to impose a CS obligation on a man, it cannot be used to remove such an obligation from a man who is NOT the father of the children in question.) A slight correction to your previous statement: CS is money that MEN (not necessarily fathers) pay to mothers. This, of course, assumes that one is using the REAL (as opposed to the kourt) definition of "father". The question remains unanswered: If DNA is unnecessary to convict for "child support", then why have it? There will be no reform of this or any of the many other indefensible aspects of "child support" until there is a change in underlying factors -- such as an end to the glass ceiling on paternal custody, or the development of an interest group that can exercise politically significant clout on behalf of fathers. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Accountability and Responsibility
-- Any man that's good enough to pay child support is good enough to have custody of such child. "Kenneth S." wrote in message ... The answer to the question below is that very, very few kids get a $1200 per month allowance. However, quite a few mothers get $1200 per month in "child support." That's a mortgage payment, including taxes and insurance. All the woman has to do is secure a 15 year mortgage with zero down, and when she makes the last payment, she will still have a few more years of FREE INCOME! Ok, I fudged a lil'; so she has to put 10 percent down. Still, who in their right mind would NOT jump at the opportunity to own a house for ten cents on the dollar? I have MY hand raised. Let's not forget that the down payment will lower the monthly payment thus giving her MORE free cash that she can use to pay for the loan that funded the down payment. Or, she can use it to pay extra principal each month, shortening (by years) the amount of time before she has clear title. I would LOVE that deal. In fact, I would be more than happy to settle for HALF the amount. Where do I sign up? On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 23:52:47 +0100, "Dusty" wrote: Mine do, er.. well OK, $1017.55 But close enough for GovCo work. "DB" wrote in message . .. I wonder how many kids get a $1200 per month allowance? "Phil" wrote in message m... A funny thing I have noticed since I retired a few months ago. I now live on $1200/month, which is $200/month less than C$ cost me. I live in an 3bd/2car/2 bath in a nice neighborhood and pay all my bills. Funny how the state believes that a child living with a parent in the grandparent's home (rent and utility bill free) needs enough to fully support an entire independent household. Phil #3 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DCF may drop agency's contract over accountability concerns | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | January 28th 06 03:57 PM |
Accountability required Our position: | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | March 18th 05 05:01 PM |
Pharmaceutical Accountability Act of 2005' | Kevysmom | Kids Health | 12 | March 12th 05 02:37 PM |
CPS encourages false accusations discourages accountability | Fern5827 | Spanking | 1 | March 3rd 04 11:33 PM |
Looking for accountability? ... | Her Bank | Child Support | 2 | July 31st 03 10:45 PM |