child support review objection

"Chris" wrote in :

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. 33.102...
"DB" wrote in
:


"Sarah Gray" wrote in

"Chris" wrote in
:
Sarah Gray said:
I'm really hoping that my ex gets it together; As much as I
cannot stand him, I want my daughter to have a decent
relationship with her dad.

On YOUR terms; "decent" being a matter of opinion.

On MY terms? I did not forcibly remove him to another state,
Chris. He is the one putting a stumbling block in their
relationship.

Personally, I think he's trying to put some real distance between
all of you and has plans to drop out of her life.

Unfortunately, you didn't procreate with a man, this is an immature
boy that needs to be close to his mommy for security. If you
realize that reality, you can better deal with the situation and
don't count on his help.


I am not counting on his help... but if he's going to "drop out" like
that, I see no reason why I shouldn't use the legal means available
to me to ensure he helps support his daughter. I don't think that is
his intention, though, considering that when I brought up our
discussing custody issues at the next court date we have, he alluded
to fighting for full custody himself. Which I think is ridiculous,
considering he is in no position to raise a child (no home of his
own, no car, currently is claiming that he is too broke to afford to
come see his daughter when he has no real expenses and makes $1000 a
month)

Drop this loser and go find a real man to continue your life. To
dwell on this problem is a waste of time & energy, it's not worth
the heart ache.


I'd love to not have to deal with him. He is my daughter's father,
though, and so I'm going to have to for as long as he cares to be
involved in her life.

Then tell him that you are willing to stop the pursuit of his money if
he is willing to be out of your life. Simple.


Whatever, Chris. No matter what you think, he has an obligation to his
daughter.


Frankly, I'm not looking for a man... I need to get my own thing
together for myself and my daughter before I can devote energy to a
relationship.

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. 33.102...
"Chris" wrote in
:

What's ridiculous is your nice lil' twist in what I claimed. The ONLY
thing that she is forcing him into is to pay her free money. I know,
she isn't actually getting the cash from him (now). As if a judgement
that threatens him with prison, not to mention the fact that
eventually it (the extortion of his money) will catch up with him, is
supposed to be any better.....

Now, to remind you once again, her dictation is that he either sees
the child in the mother's town or not at all. These are his ONLY
options as determined by HER!

You don't tell me what I "try" to do; I tell YOU what I try to do. And
making every NCP a helpless victim aint' it.


it's not "the mother's town", it's the *child's* town.

Lol. So now we have the child telling the mother where they shall live.

I have no problem
with her visiting him, as long as it does not interrupt her schooling,

Of course, because you are the SOLE dictator as to what her living
arrangements shall be.


but I am certainly not sending her out of state unless we have a custody
agreement that is relevant to the current situation, which is not the
case at the moment.

Well of course. Why would you do anything against YOUR will?

Why should he be allowed to move out of town and
demand that our child be deprived of an education to see him beyond
school holidays?

You tell me.

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. 17.102...
"Chris" wrote in
:
Sarah Gray said:
I'm really hoping that my ex gets it together; As much as I cannot
stand
him, I want my daughter to have a decent relationship with her dad.

On YOUR terms; "decent" being a matter of opinion.

On MY terms?

Well it certainly aint' on HIS terms.

I did not forcibly remove him to another state, Chris. He is
the one putting a stumbling block in their relationship.

You notice, Sarah, that Chris does not answer the points about the father
leaving the child. It is all about everyone else concerned accomodating
themselves to make sure that the father has a relationship with the
child--as if the father has no responsibility in cultivating this
relationship himself.

Perhaps the nickname "Twist" would be appropriate for you since that is
exactly what you do to my claims. Not ONCE did I ever suggest that ANYONE
accomodate anyone else. But I welcome you to provide your evidence
supporting the contrary.

Hmmm...let's see. Father has child 50% of the time in a split custody
agreement. Father voluntarily moves away--not to a better job, just moves
away. You suggest that the father/daughter bond is more important than the
child's schooling, and ask the mother why she does not give custody to the
father. So tell me, Chris, if that is not accomodating the man who
abandoned his child, what is it? What *do* you think about the guy walking
away from his 50/50 split custody and moving so far away? Whose
responsibility *is* it to make sure that the child spends time with her
father?

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to
have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough
to
have
custody of such child]
"Gini" wrote in message
news:bYp0j.2823$Jy1.2029@trndny02...

"Chris" wrote
"Rob" wrote
...........................

Some women really just irk me, well and to be fair...lol
some
men
are
just
as bad if not worse! (I see it go both ways - people just
need
to
grow
up
and take care of their children and not just walk away!) I
could
never
walk
away from my children for any reason, even if I find out
they
are
not
mine
biologically they are mine in heart.



I will post later tonight as to what happened in court
today.

Robert

So tell me, how does it feel getting FREE money from someone
else?
==
$230. a month is fair and reasonable,

and FREE!

The NCP could save the $230 by living in the area and parenting
their
own
children 50% of the time, Chris.

NOT the issue and you KNOW it too! Why is SHE the one who dictates
his
options? If the shoe was on the other foot....................

I know no such thing, Chris. There is no dictating going on.

SHE has determined his options; NOT he! Sounds like dictation to
me........

Hmmmm.....SHE forced him to give up his 50/50 parenting and move away
from
his child. You try so hard to make every NCP a helpless victim, Chris,
that
you end up making totally ridiculous statements.

What's ridiculous is your nice lil' twist in what I claimed. The ONLY
thing
that she is forcing him into is to pay her free money. I know, she isn't
actually getting the cash from him (now). As if a judgement that
threatens
him with prison, not to mention the fact that eventually it (the
extortion
of his money) will catch up with him, is supposed to be any better.....

Not free money, Chris.

Unearned = FREE! What part of that equation do you NOT understand?

A portion of the child's needs, since he is not
there to provide those needs himself. He chose to abandon his child.


Now, to remind you once again, her dictation is that he either sees the
child in the mother's town or not at all. These are his ONLY options as
determined by HER!

The child is where she always was.

Irrelevant.

But he is not.

Irrelevant.

He left.

Irrelevant.

He chose to
abandon his child.

Correction: SHE chose to NOT allow him to have the child be with him.




You don't tell me what I "try" to do; I tell YOU what I try to do. And
making every NCP a helpless victim aint' it.

Sure sounds like it, Chris.

Could that pesky lil' fact that virtually every NCP is so against their will
have ANYTHING to do with it?

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to
have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to
have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough
to
have
custody of such child]
"Gini" wrote in message
news:bYp0j.2823$Jy1.2029@trndny02...

"Chris" wrote
"Rob" wrote
...........................

Some women really just irk me, well and to be fair...lol
some
men
are
just
as bad if not worse! (I see it go both ways - people just
need
to
grow
up
and take care of their children and not just walk away!)
I
could
never
walk
away from my children for any reason, even if I find out
they
are
not
mine
biologically they are mine in heart.



I will post later tonight as to what happened in court
today.

Robert

So tell me, how does it feel getting FREE money from
someone
else?
==
$230. a month is fair and reasonable,

and FREE!

The NCP could save the $230 by living in the area and parenting
their
own
children 50% of the time, Chris.

NOT the issue and you KNOW it too! Why is SHE the one who
dictates
his
options? If the shoe was on the other foot....................

I know no such thing, Chris. There is no dictating going on.

SHE has determined his options; NOT he! Sounds like dictation to
me........

Hmmmm.....SHE forced him to give up his 50/50 parenting and move away
from
his child. You try so hard to make every NCP a helpless victim,
Chris,
that
you end up making totally ridiculous statements.

What's ridiculous is your nice lil' twist in what I claimed. The ONLY
thing
that she is forcing him into is to pay her free money. I know, she
isn't
actually getting the cash from him (now). As if a judgement that
threatens
him with prison, not to mention the fact that eventually it (the
extortion
of his money) will catch up with him, is supposed to be any better.....

Not free money, Chris.

Unearned = FREE! What part of that equation do you NOT understand?

It is for the child. Anything a child gets is unearned. Do you have a
problem with a child being fed and housed because they are getting it free?
I can understand being upset that $$$ is given to be spent on luxuries--but
not on the basics for a child t hat you chose to have, and spent 5 years
with before abandoning said child.


A portion of the child's needs, since he is not
there to provide those needs himself. He chose to abandon his child.


Now, to remind you once again, her dictation is that he either sees the
child in the mother's town or not at all. These are his ONLY options as
determined by HER!

The child is where she always was.

Irrelevant.

Not so.


But he is not.

Irrelevant.

Not so. You cannot care for a child if you move away from the child. And
you know it.


He left.

Irrelevant.

A choice he made, so not irrelevant at all. And you know it.


He chose to
abandon his child.

Correction: SHE chose to NOT allow him to have the child be with him.

Incorrect. .He was caring for the child 50% of the time, then he abandoned
her.





You don't tell me what I "try" to do; I tell YOU what I try to do. And
making every NCP a helpless victim aint' it.

Sure sounds like it, Chris.

Could that pesky lil' fact that virtually every NCP is so against their
will
have ANYTHING to do with it?

You constantly excuse every choice a NCP dad makes because virtually all
NCPs are NCPs against their will, therefore it is perfectly permissible for
a father with 50/50 custody to abandon his child, putting himself in the
position of being an NCP because he cannot possibly have custody if he is
not where the chld is, and, if the mother doesn't package the child up and
send her along to the father, the mother is evil and the NCP is a victim
although HE made a choice that took him away from his child, so it is ok to
rail against the system just because. OK, if that's how you want to live
your life, you keep right on with it, Chris.

"Chris" wrote in
:
Teachermama wrote:
What's ridiculous is your nice lil' twist in what I claimed. The
ONLY thing
that she is forcing him into is to pay her free money. I know, she
isn't actually getting the cash from him (now). As if a judgement
that
threatens
him with prison, not to mention the fact that eventually it (the
extortion
of his money) will catch up with him, is supposed to be any
better.....

Not free money, Chris.

Unearned = FREE! What part of that equation do you NOT understand?


It is *not* unearned. I am only asking him to recoup his share of the
costs of raising his daughter.

A portion of the child's needs, since he is not
there to provide those needs himself. He chose to abandon his child.


Now, to remind you once again, her dictation is that he either sees
the child in the mother's town or not at all. These are his ONLY
options as determined by HER!

The child is where she always was.

Irrelevant.

But he is not.

Irrelevant.

He left.

Irrelevant.

He chose to
abandon his child.

Correction: SHE chose to NOT allow him to have the child be with him.


That is completely false. I would never keep him from seeing her. He is
keeping himself from seeing her.


You don't tell me what I "try" to do; I tell YOU what I try to do.
And making every NCP a helpless victim aint' it.

Sure sounds like it, Chris.

Could that pesky lil' fact that virtually every NCP is so against
their will have ANYTHING to do with it?


In this case, though, that is simply not the situation.

"teachrmama" wrote in

A choice he made, so not irrelevant at all. And you know it.


He chose to
abandon his child.

Correction: SHE chose to NOT allow him to have the child be with him.

Incorrect. .He was caring for the child 50% of the time, then he abandoned
her.

Why do we think Chris is not Christine?

Her wild irrational logic gives her away every time!

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. 33.102...
"Chris" wrote in :

[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. 17.102...
"Chris" wrote in news:77h2j.9219$Rw3.6760
@newsfe06.phx:


There exists not a snowball's chance in the deepest pits of the
earth
that
you would be willing to allow him to dictate YOUR options.

The only reason I am "dictating his options" is because I was trying
to
give him a break from what the state will demand.

1. The state demands NOTHING unless you tell them to demand.
2. Irrelevant what the state demands since it is in your power to
damonstrate to them a satisfaction of such demand without a single
cent
being taken from the father.
(Please don't ask me to explain how that's possible.)

He is the one who insisted (or rather, his lawyer at the time insisted)
that a child support order be entered.

Any other revelations?

He is the one who is unwilling to
pay half of reasonable costs incurred. You don't think men should
support their children, but should be accomodated in terms of visitation
etc. when they up and leave. That makes no sense, Chris.

It not only makes no sense, it is also NOT my claim.

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. 17.102...
"Chris" wrote in
:
Sarah Gray said:
I'm really hoping that my ex gets it together; As much as I
cannot
stand
him, I want my daughter to have a decent relationship with her
dad.

On YOUR terms; "decent" being a matter of opinion.

On MY terms?

Well it certainly aint' on HIS terms.

I did not forcibly remove him to another state, Chris. He is
the one putting a stumbling block in their relationship.

You notice, Sarah, that Chris does not answer the points about the
father
leaving the child. It is all about everyone else concerned
accomodating
themselves to make sure that the father has a relationship with the
child--as if the father has no responsibility in cultivating this
relationship himself.

Perhaps the nickname "Twist" would be appropriate for you since that is
exactly what you do to my claims. Not ONCE did I ever suggest that
ANYONE
accomodate anyone else. But I welcome you to provide your evidence
supporting the contrary.

Hmmm...let's see. Father has child 50% of the time in a split custody
agreement. Father voluntarily moves away--not to a better job, just moves
away. You suggest that the father/daughter bond is more important than
the
child's schooling,

Where did I make THAT claim?

and ask the mother why she does not give custody to the
father. So tell me, Chris, if that is not accomodating the man who
abandoned his child, what is it? What *do* you think about the guy
walking
away from his 50/50 split custody and moving so far away? Whose
responsibility *is* it to make sure that the child spends time with her
father?

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
7.102...
"Chris" wrote in :

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. 33.102...
"DB" wrote in
:


"Sarah Gray" wrote in

"Chris" wrote in
:
Sarah Gray said:
I'm really hoping that my ex gets it together; As much as I
cannot stand him, I want my daughter to have a decent
relationship with her dad.

On YOUR terms; "decent" being a matter of opinion.

On MY terms? I did not forcibly remove him to another state,
Chris. He is the one putting a stumbling block in their
relationship.

Personally, I think he's trying to put some real distance between
all of you and has plans to drop out of her life.

Unfortunately, you didn't procreate with a man, this is an immature
boy that needs to be close to his mommy for security. If you
realize that reality, you can better deal with the situation and
don't count on his help.


I am not counting on his help... but if he's going to "drop out" like
that, I see no reason why I shouldn't use the legal means available
to me to ensure he helps support his daughter. I don't think that is
his intention, though, considering that when I brought up our
discussing custody issues at the next court date we have, he alluded
to fighting for full custody himself. Which I think is ridiculous,
considering he is in no position to raise a child (no home of his
own, no car, currently is claiming that he is too broke to afford to
come see his daughter when he has no real expenses and makes $1000 a
month)

Drop this loser and go find a real man to continue your life. To
dwell on this problem is a waste of time & energy, it's not worth
the heart ache.


I'd love to not have to deal with him. He is my daughter's father,
though, and so I'm going to have to for as long as he cares to be
involved in her life.

Then tell him that you are willing to stop the pursuit of his money if
he is willing to be out of your life. Simple.


Whatever, Chris. No matter what you think, he has an obligation to his
daughter.

No matter what YOU think, he does not. But I welcome you to support your
claim.




Frankly, I'm not looking for a man... I need to get my own thing
together for myself and my daughter before I can devote energy to a
relationship.