To ALL fathers Custody

"Werebat" wrote in

To make a rough analogy... I'm sure that many American Whites treated
American Blacks with nothing but respect and dignity before the Civil
Rights Movement... That doesn't mean that the Civil Rights Movement never
needed to happen, and that many laws didn't need to change.

What the government never learned from that era is you cannot trample on the
civil rights of one segment of the population to give power over another
segment of the population. What the government needs to do is get the hell
out of our personal lives and quit dictating what standard of living we
should all have to abide by. All these deadbeat windbag polititians that
use C$ issues as a cheap grand stand to build their political careers should
be held accountable for all the misery they have caused. Please, name me one
successful government program that is not completely botched up?

Why the hell do we let these bloody fools have so much power?
Keep them all busy trying to figure out the best ways to get the roads
repaired, lets see if they can do that before they start medling in people's
private affairs. There has to be a way to limit their authority?

OK...to clear up why the courts got involved...the one thing hubby and I
really didn't do was...communicate very well...we were both to blame for
that...and apparently that is still the case. I had an attorney who decided
the first step was to get support...I had moved out in January and it was
now October and I had recieved nothing..now mind you...I buy EVERYTHING for
my son...shoes, clothes, meds, toys...I was even paying for preschool..and
now looking back I dont think it is something the ex did on purpose..its
just I ALWAYS took care of that stuff..he really doesn't know how to. What
I am asking for is a lil help here...do we have our days where we would
sooner spit on each other than talk to each other? We sure do!! But once
again, our son comes first. Ex is now paying, not nearly 17%, which is what
NYS mandates...but he is helping...and thats all I'm asking for. I was
drowning trying to do it all myself...I really was...We actually go to court
for support for the first time on Monday..but we are going to talk before
then so we can come to an agreement and tell the court what its going to be
versus the court telling us what its going to be.....hope that clears it
up!!!
"Werebat" wrote in message
news


Jeff Guay wrote:

OK...speaking as the divorcing mom here...not ALL women are assholes. I
loved my son's dad and more importantly, my son loves his dad. I would
NEVER
EVER even consider any of the things in this article. My son loves his
daddy
and looks forward to spending time with him. We are still his parents,
we
just don't live under the same roof, that doesnt mean that rules
change..they dont. We DO NOT speak of each other to or in front of our
son,
regardless. We are going thru the whole support/custody issue right now
because yes...there are a few things we dont agree on...but this I can
tell
you..I am NOT out to destroy him or take him to the cleaners...Just the
response from the other side....Good luck all..

As many have already pointed out, it's good that you are acting in a
mature way (although I too wonder why you wanted to even get the courts
involved with your kids). However, what distresses many of the fathers
here is the fact that the law can grotesquely favor that subset of
mothers who DO do the horrid things described in the article.

To make a rough analogy... I'm sure that many American Whites treated
American Blacks with nothing but respect and dignity before the Civil
Rights Movement... That doesn't mean that the Civil Rights Movement
never needed to happen, and that many laws didn't need to change.

- Ron ^*^

"Jeff Guay" wrote
---------------
Ex is now paying, not nearly 17%, which is what
NYS mandates...but he is helping...and thats all I'm asking for. I was
drowning trying to do it all myself...I really was...We actually go to
court
for support for the first time on Monday..but we are going to talk before
then so we can come to an agreement and tell the court what its going to
be
versus the court telling us what its going to be.....
==
Well, that's the trouble--Once you turn your kids over to the courts, the
courts
say "what it's going to be" not you. The courts often take the position that
parents do not have the right to "negotiate" the
"child's" support. Yep, the courts become the decider above the parent. This
is what I meant by turning your
kids over to state control. For two parents who have their kids' interest at
heart, the courts are nothing but
intrusive pirhanas. My ex and I had no custody or support orders. He didn't
help nearly as much as the state
would have required but the kids had open access to both parents. He covered
the expenses when they were with him, and I mostly covered the
expenses when they were with me. I say mostly because he contributed to my
heating oil bill, food and bought the kids' school
clothes. He also paid half their bicycle costs and other things. While I was
single parenting (I was the one who left the marriage, against
his will, so I knew I carried the greater financial responsibility), he went
to Nicaragua and Russia for months during which I received
no help from him. No matter, he sent the kids emails and letters and brought
them great stuff. I do not buy into
the idea that dads must provide mothers with XX of their income or the
mothers and kids are being cheated. BS! That does nothing
but alienate fathers and cause stress for chidren. Kids are no more
divisible property after a split than they are during the marriage.
The split is between the parents and the parents should decide the welfare
of their children. If there are differences in the parents
perceptions of support, so be it. Deal with it and move on. No amount of
money handed to the mother is going to make things
better for the kids--What makes things better for the kids is to have their
parents act like parents after divorce. Mothers
do not have the right to dominate custody/money/education/healthcare. These
are parental matters, and fathers are parents, too.

The courts are so biased to the mothers its sick

"Jeff Guay" wrote in message
...
OK...to clear up why the courts got involved...the one thing hubby and I
really didn't do was...communicate very well...we were both to blame for
that...and apparently that is still the case. I had an attorney who
decided
the first step was to get support...I had moved out in January and it was
now October and I had recieved nothing..now mind you...I buy EVERYTHING
for
my son...shoes, clothes, meds, toys...I was even paying for preschool..and
now looking back I dont think it is something the ex did on purpose..its
just I ALWAYS took care of that stuff..he really doesn't know how to.
What
I am asking for is a lil help here...do we have our days where we would
sooner spit on each other than talk to each other? We sure do!! But once
again, our son comes first. Ex is now paying, not nearly 17%, which is
what
NYS mandates...but he is helping...and thats all I'm asking for. I was
drowning trying to do it all myself...I really was...We actually go to
court
for support for the first time on Monday..but we are going to talk before
then so we can come to an agreement and tell the court what its going to
be
versus the court telling us what its going to be.....hope that clears it
up!!!

It really sounds as if you think you are trying to be fair. But there is an
unfortunate trap you seem to be about to walk in to. The "but I only want
what he owes me" trap. Why is 17% a fair amount? Who determined that?
Have you actually sat down and figured out an amount that would get you
through the month without a shortfall? Is it *really* a full 17% of his
pay? Does your child spend time with his father? If so, dad needs to have
everything you need for the child. It isn't as if his expenses have
disappeared.

Also keep in mind that you have some great tax advantages. You pay no taxes
on the child support. And YOU get to claim the child on you taxes. I
believe you also get to file as head of household, which further decreases
your tax burden. He will be paying taxes at the higher single rate.

Oh, another thing. Are you going to be telling the court that he has not
paid you a thin dime in 10 months? If so, he will have an outomatic
arrearage, with all the joys of having even more money taken straight from
his paycheck, plus interest charges, and a big fat black mark on his credit
report. And if he is ever injoured or laid off, the arrearages will grow
and grow and grow. You, however, can be injured or laid off without any
consequence other than being short of cash.

Do you have a written budget? My suggestion is that you prepare one, and
take a good hard look at it. I know that there are things that you want to
be able to provide for your son that you maight consider to be
indispenseable. But, being very honest, divide your budget into essential
items and negotiable items. Then have your child's father take a look at
what you really need, and give him a voice in the negotiable items. That
way he will be a part of the decision making, and will see that you are not
trying to gouge him, but truly do need the money. And make sure that you
recognize his expenses, too. Say it over and over so he knows you
understand. Communication isn't something that just happens--sometimes you
have to work at it--sometimes you have to work harder than you've ever
worked in your life. But your son is worth it, right?

And, above all, don't fall into the "he owes me" trap. The fact that the
state of NY says is doesn't make it true.


"Werebat" wrote in message
news


Jeff Guay wrote:

OK...speaking as the divorcing mom here...not ALL women are assholes. I
loved my son's dad and more importantly, my son loves his dad. I would
NEVER
EVER even consider any of the things in this article. My son loves his
daddy
and looks forward to spending time with him. We are still his parents,
we
just don't live under the same roof, that doesnt mean that rules
change..they dont. We DO NOT speak of each other to or in front of our
son,
regardless. We are going thru the whole support/custody issue right
now
because yes...there are a few things we dont agree on...but this I can
tell
you..I am NOT out to destroy him or take him to the cleaners...Just
the
response from the other side....Good luck all..

As many have already pointed out, it's good that you are acting in a
mature way (although I too wonder why you wanted to even get the courts
involved with your kids). However, what distresses many of the fathers
here is the fact that the law can grotesquely favor that subset of
mothers who DO do the horrid things described in the article.

To make a rough analogy... I'm sure that many American Whites treated
American Blacks with nothing but respect and dignity before the Civil
Rights Movement... That doesn't mean that the Civil Rights Movement
never needed to happen, and that many laws didn't need to change.

- Ron ^*^

It really sounds as if you think you are trying to be fair. But there is an
unfortunate trap you seem to be about to walk in to. The "but I only want
what he owes me" trap. Why is 17% a fair amount? Who determined that?
Have you actually sat down and figured out an amount that would get you
through the month without a shortfall? Is it *really* a full 17% of his
pay? Does your child spend time with his father? If so, dad needs to have
everything you need for the child. It isn't as if his expenses have
disappeared.

Also keep in mind that you have some great tax advantages. You pay no taxes
on the child support. And YOU get to claim the child on you taxes. I
believe you also get to file as head of household, which further decreases
your tax burden. He will be paying taxes at the higher single rate.

Oh, another thing. Are you going to be telling the court that he has not
paid you a thin dime in 10 months? If so, he will have an outomatic
arrearage, with all the joys of having even more money taken straight from
his paycheck, plus interest charges, and a big fat black mark on his credit
report. And if he is ever injoured or laid off, the arrearages will grow
and grow and grow. You, however, can be injured or laid off without any
consequence other than being short of cash.

Do you have a written budget? My suggestion is that you prepare one, and
take a good hard look at it. I know that there are things that you want to
be able to provide for your son that you maight consider to be
indispenseable. But, being very honest, divide your budget into essential
items and negotiable items. Then have your child's father take a look at
what you really need, and give him a voice in the negotiable items. That
way he will be a part of the decision making, and will see that you are not
trying to gouge him, but truly do need the money. And make sure that you
recognize his expenses, too. Say it over and over so he knows you
understand. Communication isn't something that just happens--sometimes you
have to work at it--sometimes you have to work harder than you've ever
worked in your life. But your son is worth it, right?

And, above all, don't fall into the "he owes me" trap. The fact that the
state of NY says is doesn't make it true.


The 17% is determined by State law, but adjustable. Getting through the
month without a shortfall is not up to him alone. If there is a short
fall, the custodial parent needs to search for more lucrative
employment.

"Relayer" wrote in message
oups.com...


It really sounds as if you think you are trying to be fair. But there is
an
unfortunate trap you seem to be about to walk in to. The "but I only
want
what he owes me" trap. Why is 17% a fair amount? Who determined that?
Have you actually sat down and figured out an amount that would get you
through the month without a shortfall? Is it *really* a full 17% of his
pay? Does your child spend time with his father? If so, dad needs to
have
everything you need for the child. It isn't as if his expenses have
disappeared.

Also keep in mind that you have some great tax advantages. You pay no
taxes
on the child support. And YOU get to claim the child on you taxes. I
believe you also get to file as head of household, which further
decreases
your tax burden. He will be paying taxes at the higher single rate.

Oh, another thing. Are you going to be telling the court that he has not
paid you a thin dime in 10 months? If so, he will have an outomatic
arrearage, with all the joys of having even more money taken straight
from
his paycheck, plus interest charges, and a big fat black mark on his
credit
report. And if he is ever injoured or laid off, the arrearages will grow
and grow and grow. You, however, can be injured or laid off without any
consequence other than being short of cash.

Do you have a written budget? My suggestion is that you prepare one, and
take a good hard look at it. I know that there are things that you want
to
be able to provide for your son that you maight consider to be
indispenseable. But, being very honest, divide your budget into
essential
items and negotiable items. Then have your child's father take a look at
what you really need, and give him a voice in the negotiable items. That
way he will be a part of the decision making, and will see that you are
not
trying to gouge him, but truly do need the money. And make sure that you
recognize his expenses, too. Say it over and over so he knows you
understand. Communication isn't something that just happens--sometimes
you
have to work at it--sometimes you have to work harder than you've ever
worked in your life. But your son is worth it, right?

And, above all, don't fall into the "he owes me" trap. The fact that the
state of NY says is doesn't make it true.


The 17% is determined by State law, but adjustable. Getting through the
month without a shortfall is not up to him alone. If there is a short
fall, the custodial parent needs to search for more lucrative
employment.

My impression is that she does work. And I most certainly did not say
anything about his making up shortfalls. I said to look at what is really
needed, and proceed from there. Work together to come up with a plan that
is mutually agreeable--not get into the "I am owed" mindset. It will
probably come out to far less than the 17% decreed by law.

"Jeff Guay" wrote in message
...
OK...to clear up why the courts got involved...the one thing hubby and I
really didn't do was...communicate very well...we were both to blame for
that...and apparently that is still the case. I had an attorney who
decided
the first step was to get support...

This statement is very telling and belies all your other statements.
Anytime a CP makes a statement like - "It was my attorney's idea," or "It
was the state that took the action," or "That's what the court decided" -
they are hiding behind another entity and not taking personal responsibility
for the outcomes in their cases.

And I'll bet your attorney's next ideas will be to go for daycare expenses,
and medical insurance, and unreimbursed healthcare, and life insurance, and
more than half the marital assets, and alimony, and past support, and
attorney fees, and whatever else he can dream up.

Of course, those would all be his ideas and you would have nothing to do
with it, right?

Sorry teachrmama. Misunderstood where you were going with the
statement..

First of all...BOB...my attorney is a she...and NO it was not all HER
responsibility to go for support. I was paying EVERYTHING and even giving
him money towards the house... He makes over twice the amount of money I
make.. fair is fair..HE decided he wanted to keep the house and thats ok
with me..but that is NOT to say that he doesnt have some responsibility
towards his son.. and you bet your bottom dollar I am going for half the
marital assets...I helped pay for them too and they are rightfully...half
mine...once again..fair is fair...Or is it your notion that I should walk
away with NOTHING and have to start all over again while he should get both
houses and everything in them?
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Guay" wrote in message
...
OK...to clear up why the courts got involved...the one thing hubby and I
really didn't do was...communicate very well...we were both to blame for
that...and apparently that is still the case. I had an attorney who
decided
the first step was to get support...

This statement is very telling and belies all your other statements.
Anytime a CP makes a statement like - "It was my attorney's idea," or "It
was the state that took the action," or "That's what the court decided" -
they are hiding behind another entity and not taking personal
responsibility
for the outcomes in their cases.

And I'll bet your attorney's next ideas will be to go for daycare
expenses,
and medical insurance, and unreimbursed healthcare, and life insurance,
and
more than half the marital assets, and alimony, and past support, and
attorney fees, and whatever else he can dream up.

Of course, those would all be his ideas and you would have nothing to do
with it, right?