Dead Beat Dad -- record lien on home?

--
Tippy
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Tippy" wrote in message
news:MqP0d.33504$Ka6.26146@okepread03...

"The Dave©" wrote in message
...
Tippy wrote:
====
What's wrong with the deadbeat mother?
====
====
Chronic mental relapses, in and out of institutions. Unable to work
and often unable to cope with small traumas. Deadbeat Dad was making
good $ for an extremely large, well known, software company.

Goin' for the deeper pockets, eh?

Any pockets would be fine-- none of the bios have contributed a nickel.
I
have 3 kids (ages 6/10/12) involving 5 bio parents -- all 3 kids are
related as half-sibs or cousins. While their immediate needs are well
taken
care of, I'm in late 50s and, I'm a single "parent." I would like to
make
sure their education will be taken care of in the likely event all 3
choose
to go to college or something similar.

I retired once. Fortunately, I have an excellent job now and would
probably work even if I didn't have these kids. The bios don't know
what
they are missing and the satisfaction of seeing these kids achieve. .

I'm curious as to how you came to have custody of the children. Are you
related to them? Do you have CS orders on any of them? It sounds as if
you
are doing an awful lot for them already just by having them with you. If
all you give them is a happy childhood, you've given the most important
thing. They will all be able to find some way to get themselves to
college.
But, meanwhile, play squeaky wheel and see what CSE will do for you.


A few years ago, I got involved when the children were left in hotel room in
VA and the mother did not return-- mental problems. I had once been
co-custodian of one of the children, who was a niece of the mother who left
them in the hotel room. (This about the extent that I can disclose.)

I've helped the children in one way or another since 1998 but became a legal
custodian of all about 3 years ago-- their extended family was already
overburdened in many ways. The oldest child did not attend school until she
came into my co-custody and is a few grades behind. I had to do a lot of
juggling to cope with the mother(s) before the courts stepped in, and she
has been in 5 elementary schools in 3 jurisdictions, none of which were in
MD.

This year, I'm proud to say that the two oldest (girls) are in the gifted
and talented program. The oldest earned the honor roll and citizenship
award all year long for the last 2 years. The other girl needs a lot of
counseling but made the honor roll too. The youngest (boy) is in first
grade and was well-liked by his K teacher and, if all goes well, eventually
merit the gifted and talented program, too. "My" kids participate in
sports, dance, special interest clubs, strings (violin), patrol, or other
activity.

They are now in their 3rd year (2nd for the youngest) of attending the same
school with a lot of stability that they never had before. I'm very proud
that they seemed to have overcome significant emotional events, at least for
now. They get a lot of love but not as much attention as they deserve from
a "single" father of my age who works a pressure job-- but one that I enjoy
a lot.

I love them a lot and took this opportunity to brag about them. So, it
would be nice to be able to have the one bio parent with any resources to
contribute toward his own son's future. Since no money is coming and a
house is involved, I still wonder whether I can go around CSE and place the
lien on the house on behalf of the son.

And just for the record-- until I became involved in this situation, I was
so against TANF and CSE because so much is wasted and provided to deadbeats.
If a few deadbeats manage to beat the system and draw from the system funds
intended for those in need, so be it -- those kids who get help are worth it
and likely won't be a burden on the taxpayer in the future and their kids
won't be burden either. That said, beef up controls and catch the deadbeats
and frauds.

I think you are right-- annoy CSE until they act. I shall pursue that way
first.

Tippy

Tippy wrote:

====
What's wrong with the deadbeat mother?
====
====

Chronic mental relapses, in and out of institutions. Unable to work and
often unable to cope with small traumas. Deadbeat Dad was making good $ for
an extremely large, well known, software company.

Tippy

So way back when, the state decided that the kids would be better placed
with the headcase mother than the working father, eh? Typical.

For what it's worth, I think you're doing the right thing, and
commendably, in taking these kids in and caring for them -- and you are
right, the bio parents don't know what they are missing. If my headcase
ex did anything stupid enough to lose her share of custody of our son,
I'd be all over taking it out of her hands and getting full... That
bio-dad is a fool.

Here's hoping that mommy never "recovers" and gives you a boatload of
heartache,

- Ron ^*^

--
Tippy
"Werebat" wrote in message
news:fr_0d.2010$fA1.913@lakeread02...


Tippy wrote:

====
What's wrong with the deadbeat mother?
====
====

Chronic mental relapses, in and out of institutions. Unable to work and
often unable to cope with small traumas. Deadbeat Dad was making good $
for
an extremely large, well known, software company.

Tippy

So way back when, the state decided that the kids would be better placed
with the headcase mother than the working father, eh? Typical.

For what it's worth, I think you're doing the right thing, and
commendably, in taking these kids in and caring for them -- and you are
right, the bio parents don't know what they are missing. If my headcase
ex did anything stupid enough to lose her share of custody of our son,
I'd be all over taking it out of her hands and getting full... That
bio-dad is a fool.

Here's hoping that mommy never "recovers" and gives you a boatload of
heartache,

- Ron ^*^

The father of the boy never wanted the child so it wasn't a matter of the
child going to the bio father. Courts weren't involved until "abuse" of
leaving the children. Mommy is unlikely to fully recover sufficiently to be
safe with kids. I permit phone calls, but her in/out of their lives (phone
only) over the last year has her daughter puzzled and why her mother
doesn't try to see her. Child has been in Counseling for a year. Since
the mother resurfaced about 3 weeks ago, she finally called last week. For
her daughter's sake, I will take the child to visit in my presence next
weekend.

Either have your case manager in Virginia file an interstate lien for
support through the appropriate court system in Maryland ($12 fee for
CSE.) Or, have your CM file a UIFSA petition (Uniform Interstate Family
Support Act{free}) through the central registry in Baltimore and follow up
to ensure that the MD CSE has filed the appropriate lien. The time frame
on the UIFSA is about one year, on the interstate lien, about 90 days.
Good luck forcing your case worker to do some work for 'your' kids. fj

--
Tippy
"frankjones" wrote in message
lkaboutparenting.com...
Either have your case manager in Virginia file an interstate lien for
support through the appropriate court system in Maryland ($12 fee for
CSE.) Or, have your CM file a UIFSA petition (Uniform Interstate Family
Support Act{free}) through the central registry in Baltimore and follow up
to ensure that the MD CSE has filed the appropriate lien. The time frame
on the UIFSA is about one year, on the interstate lien, about 90 days.
Good luck forcing your case worker to do some work for 'your' kids. fj


Thank you,

I will look into that and push.

Tippy

Tippy wrote:
Any pockets would be fine-- none of the bios have contributed a
nickel. I have 3 kids (ages 6/10/12) involving 5 bio parents -- all
3 kids are related as half-sibs or cousins. While their immediate
needs are well taken care of, I'm in late 50s and, I'm a single
"parent." I would like to make sure their education will be taken
care of in the likely event all 3 choose to go to college or
something similar.

Ensuring they go to college (if they desire) is admirable, but even if
the bio-parents were responsible enough to provide for them now, and
they stayed married, no one would be able to force them to pay for
college.

--
Whose cruel idea was it to put an 's' in the word lisp?

Tippy
----- Original Message -----
From: "The Dave©"
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 10:56 PM
Subject: Dead Beat Dad -- record lien on home?


Tippy wrote:
Any pockets would be fine-- none of the bios have contributed a
nickel. I have 3 kids (ages 6/10/12) involving 5 bio parents -- all
3 kids are related as half-sibs or cousins. While their immediate
needs are well taken care of, I'm in late 50s and, I'm a single
"parent." I would like to make sure their education will be taken
care of in the likely event all 3 choose to go to college or
something similar.

Ensuring they go to college (if they desire) is admirable, but even if
the bio-parents were responsible enough to provide for them now, and
they stayed married, no one would be able to force them to pay for
college.


Actually, the child support payments should be adequate enough to put some
money away for that purpose. Many custodial parents fail to recognize that
and buy Tommy Hilfiger brand shoes, etc., rather than hit Walmart and put
the difference away. .

Furthermore, an aquaintence of mine some years ago -- would have been early
80s -- was in the Navy and from Louisana. He was really ticked; the courts
required him to continue funding his kids through college. Maybe that has
changed or his info was wrong. But, he thought he was done at 18.

"Tippy" wrote in message
news:%0u1d.2204$fA1.97@lakeread02...

Tippy
----- Original Message -----
From: "The Dave©"
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 10:56 PM
Subject: Dead Beat Dad -- record lien on home?


Tippy wrote:
Any pockets would be fine-- none of the bios have contributed a
nickel. I have 3 kids (ages 6/10/12) involving 5 bio parents -- all
3 kids are related as half-sibs or cousins. While their immediate
needs are well taken care of, I'm in late 50s and, I'm a single
"parent." I would like to make sure their education will be taken
care of in the likely event all 3 choose to go to college or
something similar.

Ensuring they go to college (if they desire) is admirable, but even if
the bio-parents were responsible enough to provide for them now, and
they stayed married, no one would be able to force them to pay for
college.


Actually, the child support payments should be adequate enough to put some
money away for that purpose. Many custodial parents fail to recognize
that
and buy Tommy Hilfiger brand shoes, etc., rather than hit Walmart and put
the difference away. .
---------------
Actually cs wasn't set up to include enough money to "put away for college".
If a cp has enough cs money to put away for college after paying for the
things that are supposed to be paid for then that's proof that they are
getting more money than is needed. And that is wrong. But what you don't
seem to get is that many ncps are forced to pay for their adult kids to go
to college, (by threat of imprisonment), while parents of kids in intact
families have no such requirement. In an intact family once a kid turns 18
they can toss him/her into the street and nobody can do anything about it.
In a divorced family a ncp can be held liable for an adult kid as long as
they are in college. And no, the cp is not held to these same standards
either.

And to me, just because you came by these kids through some 'unselfish act'
of your own it's not much different than a woman who chooses to have kids
they can't afford and then expects everyone else to pick up the tab. You
knew the situation with them and their parents and you still chose to take
them. Did you think that somehow these people were suddenly going to change
into responsible people and send you money? You knew what you were getting
into and yet now you whine about how haaarrdd it is. Jeez.

~AZ~


Furthermore, an aquaintence of mine some years ago -- would have been
early
80s -- was in the Navy and from Louisana. He was really ticked; the
courts
required him to continue funding his kids through college. Maybe that has
changed or his info was wrong. But, he thought he was done at 18.

//snipped//
Actually cs wasn't set up to include enough money to "put away for
college".
If a cp has enough cs money to put away for college after paying for the
things that are supposed to be paid for then that's proof that they are
getting more money than is needed. And that is wrong. But what you don't

That is ridiculous..."proof that they are getting more money than is
needed." If the custodian wants to make sacrifices to put money away for
college for the child-- that is supposed to be proof they have too much
money! The selfishness of people never ceases to amaze me.

seem to get is that many ncps are forced to pay for their adult kids to go
to college, (by threat of imprisonment), while parents of kids in intact
families have no such requirement. In an intact family once a kid turns
18
they can toss him/her into the street and nobody can do anything about it.
In a divorced family a ncp can be held liable for an adult kid as long as
they are in college. And no, the cp is not held to these same standards
either.

A bit unfair but so what. The right thing to do is help those kids go to
college if they have the desire and appitude. You may also ignore that many
parents help their children to college-- and what would happened whether the
"family" stayed intact is open to speculation so to err to the benefit of
the child is certainly no sin.


And to me, just because you came by these kids through some 'unselfish
act'
of your own it's not much different than a woman who chooses to have kids
they can't afford and then expects everyone else to pick up the tab.

Again, the woman perhaps wanted the kids-- but she needed help. If he
didn't want kids, he could have prevented it-- options abound. If he was a
fool, is the child supposed to suffer! Don't take it out on the child. He
is stuck, and whether you want to admit it, she is stuck, too.

You
knew the situation with them and their parents and you still chose to take
them. Did you think that somehow these people were suddenly going to
change
into responsible people and send you money? You knew what you were
getting
into and yet now you whine about how haaarrdd it is. Jeez.

Another strawman--

No-- when I took the kids, I didn't expect and was not aware of any
government support that the kids would be eligible for. I did not want or
expect money for me from their bio parents. It is a hard and mentally
challenging to raise 3 kids alone, especially at my age and with a lack of
parenting skills--and I have new and profound respect for solo parents. But
I and the kids got through that difficult period where the courts were
involved--- money was never a problem for me---time to do the necessary
things was the issue. Yes, any money coming in is good-- but it goes
exclusively for the kids. As for whining-- I wouldn't have mentioned the
hardships except in response to the "whining" about all the stress a non
custodial parent had so that he could take a less pressure job. But yeah, I
want the best deal these kids can get from their bio parents **because** I
have to represent the kids--- they can't do it for themselves yet.

And for the all hardships of rearing 3 children who would otherwise likely
be in foster care, the rewards are great. I considered adoption but I
wanted the kids to fully retain their heritage and I make sure that the kids
spend time with responsible relatives from time to time. The fact is,
government funding won't last forever for these kids and the likelyhood of
collecting anything significant from the bio parents for the children is
remote, but that won't stop me from trying.

The whining comes from those who will not see beyond their own selfishness
or can't forgive an ex. As a result, the children pay the price for those
who can't sacrifice a few years of work to ensure that their offspring have
a healthly, productive life that will benefit us all.

I don't expect to convince you or others -- you have an agenda and you
won't open your mind to the concept of what the child needs versus what
**you** think is the fair share of one parent or the other. I guess we will
just agree to disagree. It's okay-- we just can't accept each other's
philosphy. Perhaps you will eventually prevail upon the powers that be to
make the changes you desire.

I thank the group for the information I received. It was very helpful. I
hope you all get a fair shake or at least an equitable shake for you and
those involved.

Tippy

"Tippy" wrote in message
news:x0P1d.47143$mu.16230@okepread07...


//snipped//
Actually cs wasn't set up to include enough money to "put away for
college".
If a cp has enough cs money to put away for college after paying for the
things that are supposed to be paid for then that's proof that they are
getting more money than is needed. And that is wrong. But what you
don't

That is ridiculous..."proof that they are getting more money than is
needed." If the custodian wants to make sacrifices to put money away for
college for the child-- that is supposed to be proof they have too much
money! The selfishness of people never ceases to amaze me.

seem to get is that many ncps are forced to pay for their adult kids to
go
to college, (by threat of imprisonment), while parents of kids in intact
families have no such requirement. In an intact family once a kid turns
18
they can toss him/her into the street and nobody can do anything about
it.
In a divorced family a ncp can be held liable for an adult kid as long as
they are in college. And no, the cp is not held to these same standards
either.

A bit unfair but so what. The right thing to do is help those kids go to
college if they have the desire and appitude. You may also ignore that
many
parents help their children to college-- and what would happened whether
the
"family" stayed intact is open to speculation so to err to the benefit of
the child is certainly no sin.


And to me, just because you came by these kids through some 'unselfish
act'
of your own it's not much different than a woman who chooses to have kids
they can't afford and then expects everyone else to pick up the tab.

Again, the woman perhaps wanted the kids-- but she needed help. If he
didn't want kids, he could have prevented it-- options abound. If he was
a
fool, is the child supposed to suffer! Don't take it out on the child.
He
is stuck, and whether you want to admit it, she is stuck, too.

You
knew the situation with them and their parents and you still chose to
take
them. Did you think that somehow these people were suddenly going to
change
into responsible people and send you money? You knew what you were
getting
into and yet now you whine about how haaarrdd it is. Jeez.

Another strawman--

No-- when I took the kids, I didn't expect and was not aware of any
government support that the kids would be eligible for. I did not want or
expect money for me from their bio parents. It is a hard and mentally
challenging to raise 3 kids alone, especially at my age and with a lack of
parenting skills--and I have new and profound respect for solo parents.
But
I and the kids got through that difficult period where the courts were
involved--- money was never a problem for me---time to do the necessary
things was the issue. Yes, any money coming in is good-- but it goes
exclusively for the kids. As for whining-- I wouldn't have mentioned the
hardships except in response to the "whining" about all the stress a non
custodial parent had so that he could take a less pressure job. But yeah,
I
want the best deal these kids can get from their bio parents **because** I
have to represent the kids--- they can't do it for themselves yet.

And for the all hardships of rearing 3 children who would otherwise likely
be in foster care, the rewards are great. I considered adoption but I
wanted the kids to fully retain their heritage and I make sure that the
kids
spend time with responsible relatives from time to time. The fact is,
government funding won't last forever for these kids and the likelyhood of
collecting anything significant from the bio parents for the children is
remote, but that won't stop me from trying.

The whining comes from those who will not see beyond their own selfishness
or can't forgive an ex. As a result, the children pay the price for those
who can't sacrifice a few years of work to ensure that their offspring
have
a healthly, productive life that will benefit us all.

I don't expect to convince you or others -- you have an agenda and you
won't open your mind to the concept of what the child needs versus what
**you** think is the fair share of one parent or the other. I guess we
will
just agree to disagree. It's okay-- we just can't accept each other's
philosphy. Perhaps you will eventually prevail upon the powers that be to
make the changes you desire.

I thank the group for the information I received. It was very helpful. I
hope you all get a fair shake or at least an equitable shake for you and
those involved.

I think it is admirable that you have taken in and are raising your three
children, Tippy. But I also think that your experiences have made you quite
narrow minded. You are thinking only about the children to whom child
support is owed. You do not seem to understand that there are non custodial
parents that have been driven into poverty by some of the actions taken by
the family court system. Are the children so important that their fathers
deserve to live in poverty so the kids can have their Nikes? Do you think
that society is teaching these children the values we want them to have by
telling them that their *wants*come far and away before the *needs* of
others? I certainly don't want my children raised with that idea.

To bring up my situation again, you said you feel that a college education
should be provided to those who have the desire and aptitude. In our case,
if my husband is forced to provide a college education for his oldest
daughter, our 2 daughters will have to take out loans and work to make it
through. There will be no money left for us to provide for them. Do you
think it is fair that our children should be put in this position because
the family court system favors the child receiving child support. And that
brings me back to the point that it was this child's MOTHER who made the
decisions that led to this. Why should SHE not have to pay a penny toward
her daughter's education? That is the way it is, Tippy. In this system,
some children are far more important than
others.....................................