A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bucks County Fights For Back Child Support



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 25th 05, 04:25 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bucks County Fights For Back Child Support

And from Pennsylvania, where even anonymous sperm doners get hit with
child support:

http://kyw.com/Local%20News/local_story_206103348.html

Jul 25, 2005 8:51 am US/Eastern
DOYLESTOWN, PA (AP) Officials in Bucks County are intensifying efforts
to collect back child support payments.

The county has issued about 16-hundred warrants for parents who failed
to show up for meetings or court hearings. Collectively, they owe an
estimated 15 (m) million dollars in child support.

The county's domestic relations office collected 78 (m) million
dollars last year in support payments for more than 38-thousand
children, but officials say much more was owed.

Since April, two county deputies have been assigned to tracking down
offending parents. The county has cleared about 230 warrants in the
past three months, up nearly 60 percent over the same period last year.

  #2  
Old July 26th 05, 03:45 AM
Kenneth S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Once again, a supposedly-neutral reporter uses the term "parents" in
regard to those who have to pay child support. I'll bet there are very few,
if any, mothers among this group of "parents." In any other circumstances
where there was such a marked discrepancy between the two sexes, there would
be some mention of it. In this case, there's none.

The use of the term "parents" is one way that CS bureaucrats avoid
having to answer the question of why such Draconian measures are being used
in the enforcement of a payment made almost exclusively by men to women. In
my view, one of the first steps to getting reform of this whole rotten and
corrupt system is to expose it for what it is. The use of the term "parent"
instead of "father" is one of the most effective ways of preventing this
exposure.

Find me a woman who is paying CS to a man, and I'm fairly sure I can get
her into a Ripley's believe-it-or-not exhibition -- along with the
India-rubber man and the bearded lady. My usual 10 percent commission will,
of course, apply to any fees for the woman in question.





wrote in message
oups.com...
And from Pennsylvania, where even anonymous sperm doners get hit with
child support:

http://kyw.com/Local%20News/local_story_206103348.html

Jul 25, 2005 8:51 am US/Eastern
DOYLESTOWN, PA (AP) Officials in Bucks County are intensifying efforts
to collect back child support payments.

The county has issued about 16-hundred warrants for parents who failed
to show up for meetings or court hearings. Collectively, they owe an
estimated 15 (m) million dollars in child support.

The county's domestic relations office collected 78 (m) million
dollars last year in support payments for more than 38-thousand
children, but officials say much more was owed.

Since April, two county deputies have been assigned to tracking down
offending parents. The county has cleared about 230 warrants in the
past three months, up nearly 60 percent over the same period last year.



  #3  
Old July 26th 05, 02:49 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My ex-wife is *supposed* to be paying child support, but hasn't for the
last two and a half years. My sons, 7 and 5, are in my sole legal and
physical custody. At least they live comfortably and don't need to
depend upon payments from their deadbeat mom.

(So there's at least one example.)

  #5  
Old July 26th 05, 08:42 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Well, depending upon when it was considered, it *was* true. She had
been paying her CS obligation up until the start of '03, but stopped it
cold.

  #6  
Old July 26th 05, 10:32 PM
Bob Whiteside
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
Once again, a supposedly-neutral reporter uses the term "parents" in
regard to those who have to pay child support. I'll bet there are very

few,
if any, mothers among this group of "parents." In any other circumstances
where there was such a marked discrepancy between the two sexes, there

would
be some mention of it. In this case, there's none.

The use of the term "parents" is one way that CS bureaucrats avoid
having to answer the question of why such Draconian measures are being

used
in the enforcement of a payment made almost exclusively by men to women.

In
my view, one of the first steps to getting reform of this whole rotten and
corrupt system is to expose it for what it is. The use of the term

"parent"
instead of "father" is one of the most effective ways of preventing this
exposure.


As usual when these types of stories are covered in the media they peak my
curiosity as to why the bureaucrats are crowing about what they are doing.
I always go look at the state box score on the federal OCSE web site to
determine if they are covering up something with a preemptive press release
that delivers "good news."

Sure enough, PA has some dirty laundry. The '04 caseload was down 4.0%,
collections were up 1.1%, and full time employment in CSE was up 7.1%. Cost
of running the state CSE was down 1.8% to $202.1 million.

So the questions the press should ask a

1. If the caseload has declined 4.0%, why is CSE employment up 7.1%?
2. If employment is up 7.1%, why are collections only up 1.1%?
3. Why does it take more employees to collect essentially the same amount
of CS money?
4. Why are collections per employee declining?
5. How much of the $15 million is welfare reimbursement money?
6. If Buck County were to collect all of the $15 million they claim is due,
how much will it cost to reach that goal?


  #7  
Old July 27th 05, 03:28 PM
Tracy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
ups.com...
Well, depending upon when it was considered, it *was* true. She had
been paying her CS obligation up until the start of '03, but stopped it
cold.


My husband's ex-wife pays CS. We give it back to her, but she does pay it.
We don't have to give it back legally, but we do. She wasn't ordered to pay
it when the divorce was finalized because she didn't work while they were
married. It wasn't until the spring of 2004 when she was ordered to pay
child support. It isn't much due to her income level, but it is only $10
less than my ex-husband was supposed to pay and never did.

Thanks,
Tracy
~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OT The "Child's" Point Of View Pop Foster Parents 7 June 20th 05 03:13 AM
Paternity Fraud - US Supreme Court Wizardlaw Child Support 12 June 4th 04 02:19 AM
Sample US Supreme Court Petition Wizardlaw Child Support 28 January 21st 04 07:23 PM
So much for the claims about Sweden Kane Spanking 10 November 5th 03 07:31 AM
So much for the claims about Sweden Kane Foster Parents 10 November 5th 03 07:31 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.