Start Your Divorce Today - Premium Divorce Online


Divorce Source Community Forums >> Child Support

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | >> (show all)
Danicori
newbie


Reged: 07/23/08
Posts: 35
non custodial parent in jail
      #557508 - 07/22/09 08:32 AM

I went back to court yesterday due to the enforcement hearing , and he has made no payments in 6 months that they gave him to make some kind of payments, he did go to jail. They set his bond and sentanced him to 180 days of jail, the bond is no longer showing onine and i found out last night that he has a warrant in another county. Can they revoke his bond for the child support conempt because of a warrant in another county?

Now if he is in there for a while, do i have to let the kids go to his parents during his vistitation time ? No right ?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Danicori]
      #557513 - 07/22/09 08:59 AM

First of all - congrats to CSE for enforcing their rules. Maybe he'll shape up when he gets out. What's the other warrant for?

<<Now if he is in there for a while, do i have to let the kids go to his parents during his vistitation time ? No right ? >>

No, it's dad's visitation time, not grandparents' visitation time. Do you have a good relationship with them? Do your children?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Danicori
newbie


Reged: 07/23/08
Posts: 35
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: JennyLynn]
      #557520 - 07/22/09 09:15 AM

the other warrant is for a speeding ticket back in nov of 2007,

I didnt have a real good relationship with them , and certainly after having his son locked up i wont have any better relationship with them , it will be worse now.

the NCP lives with his parents, so everytime he had his visitation the grandparents saw the kids


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Danicori]
      #557523 - 07/22/09 09:18 AM

I understand. Well, you are under no obligation to send your children to their dad's parents house during what would be his visitation or any other time if you choose not to.

I wouldn't think a warrant for a speeding ticket would override your case, but I'd assume it wouldn't be dealt with until after he gets out, but I'm not sure on that. How long will he be in jail for for nonpayment of CS?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Danicori
newbie


Reged: 07/23/08
Posts: 35
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: JennyLynn]
      #557531 - 07/22/09 09:40 AM

well he was sentanced to 180 days and bail was set at $1320 ( he owes over $20000 ), but now when i check online ...his bail says zero

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Danicori]
      #557534 - 07/22/09 09:42 AM

Hmmm that's odd. Can you call CSE to see if he bonded out possibly?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Danicori
newbie


Reged: 07/23/08
Posts: 35
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: JennyLynn]
      #557590 - 07/22/09 11:04 AM

and now online it is showing that he has been moved from the jail to our local low and high security prison type place .. i guess i will need to call and see wahts going on

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Avaya
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 02/09/06
Posts: 9850
Loc: Arkansas
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Danicori]
      #557593 - 07/22/09 11:05 AM

[quote]the NCP lives with his parents, so everytime he had his visitation the grandparents saw the kids [/quote]

You absolutely do not have to send your kids to his parents during his visitation time, BUT remember that the kids love their grandparents and many kids spend a lot of time with their grandparents. I would treat his parents the way you would WANT him to treat your parents in your absence.

--------------------
Eternity is too long to be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Avaya]
      #557614 - 07/22/09 11:33 AM

[quote][quote]the NCP lives with his parents, so everytime he had his visitation the grandparents saw the kids [/quote]

You absolutely do not have to send your kids to his parents during his visitation time, BUT remember that the kids love their grandparents and many kids spend a lot of time with their grandparents. I would treat his parents the way you would WANT him to treat your parents in your absence. [/quote]

Well, it appears the OP is so full of rage and hate for her ex, I don't think that will happen


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Danicori
newbie


Reged: 07/23/08
Posts: 35
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #557641 - 07/22/09 12:02 PM

I do know that they love their grandparents, and i am contemplating letting them see them , it all depends on what happens..

I just thought of something .. he owes the IRS some money , now would that be a reason they could revoke his bail? He owes about $10000, and this has been since 2001, and also he has not filed taxes in the last 6 years ,,, he didnt work much in that time but he did work...

I do not hate my X , It did break my heart a little to see him getting hand cuffed, but that is normal we have kids together and we have history ... I am not heartless... but what else was is suppose to do ? He wasnt paying he cant/ wont hold a job... he came to court chaging his story about having a job .. he told the enforcement office one thing then told the judge something different. He has not held a job for more than 4 months in the last 6 years how am i suppose to believe that he actually had a job and was going to keep it.. especially since he had 6 months to find a job , but claims that he found on on the day before we were suppose to go to court.

Edited by Danicori (07/22/09 12:02 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sherron
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 11/25/06
Posts: 20634
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Danicori]
      #557669 - 07/22/09 01:02 PM

"and certainly after having his son locked up i wont have any better relationship with them "

You didn't have anyone locked up. Your ex's repeated bad choices got him locked up.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Sherron]
      #557673 - 07/22/09 01:15 PM

[quote]"and certainly after having his son locked up i wont have any better relationship with them "

You didn't have anyone locked up. Your ex's repeated bad choices got him locked up. [/quote]

If you say so. Now the kids geting to see him in "the pen". How exciting


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #557686 - 07/22/09 01:26 PM

<<If you say so. Now the kids geting to see him in "the pen". How exciting
>>

Not paying CS and supporting children you chose to have is no different than any other crime when it comes to having to live w/ the consequences.

Not mom's fault dad didn't live up to his responsibilities - or the law.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: JennyLynn]
      #557711 - 07/22/09 01:46 PM

Kind of like a field trip, except with barn wire and orange (or whatever) suits....any kid would love that

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #557732 - 07/22/09 02:03 PM

Heck yeah ;)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Danicori
newbie


Reged: 07/23/08
Posts: 35
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Danicori]
      #558135 - 07/23/09 12:58 PM

ok so i called the jail. and it says for his bond that there is no bond.. so when he was arrested at the child support hearing his bond was set at #1320, but now there is no bond, so something must have happened for him to have no bond now ...

and since his sentance is 180 days in jail , then i guess i will see how his parents act towards me and that will determine if i will allow them to see the children.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sherron
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 11/25/06
Posts: 20634
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #558150 - 07/23/09 01:12 PM

"If you say so. Now the kids geting to see him in "the pen". How exciting"

Yeah, I guess he should have followed the court order. If I break the law, I chance getting caught and arrested. Most people are aware that breaking laws comes with certain consequences. Even if she had PUSHED for bf to get arrested - it was HIS screw up that left him wide open for the consequences. Too bad, so sad. Not all ncp's who are jailed for non-support are poor innocent victims persecuted by their evil ex-wives.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Sherron]
      #558270 - 07/23/09 02:28 PM

[quote]"If you say so. Now the kids geting to see him in "the pen". How exciting"

Yeah, I guess he should have followed the court order. If I break the law, I chance getting caught and arrested. Most people are aware that breaking laws comes with certain consequences. Even if she had PUSHED for bf to get arrested - it was HIS screw up that left him wide open for the consequences. Too bad, so sad. Not all ncp's who are jailed for non-support are poor innocent victims persecuted by their evil ex-wives. [/quote]

All in the best interest of the child. BAER


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Danicori]
      #558276 - 07/23/09 02:32 PM

[quote]I went back to court yesterday due to the enforcement hearing , and he has made no payments in 6 months that they gave him to make some kind of payments, he did go to jail. They set his bond and sentanced him to 180 days of jail, the bond is no longer showing onine and i found out last night that he has a warrant in another county. Can they revoke his bond for the child support conempt because of a warrant in another county?

Now if he is in there for a while, do i have to let the kids go to his parents during his vistitation time ? No right ? [/quote]

How much, in the form of earned dollars, with no state help, do you contribute to the raising of the kids?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Danicori
newbie


Reged: 07/23/08
Posts: 35
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #558290 - 07/23/09 02:53 PM

I am assuming that question was for me .. and i am guessing that because i am a woman , and that i posted a question on here about receiving child support from a father ( who, by his own fault hasnt held a job in 6 years ) that is why you are assuming that i am lazy and in it for the money only...

I do not recieve any state help.. I work a full time job, and have for the last 9 years , my paycheck goes towards all the bills, and i dont see any reason why i need to tell you in earned dollars how much i spend...

house payment, car payment
bills ( electric, water , gas, food )
clothes and supplies for the children
child care
school

when me and the x split up .. he left me and the children the house.... at that time I was making enough to pay my house rent and my daycare, so i applied for state help and guess what i made too much money to get any state help.. so dont imply here that i am the lazy one and that all i want is money ... I want him to take some responsibility for the 2 children that he helped make


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
4Summer
veteran
**

Reged: 07/14/09
Posts: 1508
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #558460 - 07/24/09 05:33 AM

Yes Dad, if the NCP had broken the law in some other way, should he be let go because he has a child to take care of?

While I do agree that if the NCP is making every attempt possible to help support their child but still fall short, then they shouldn't be punished. BUT....if the NCP is deliberately running away from his/her responsibility to the child/ren then there should be consequences for that just like anything else in life.

--------------------
"Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Danicori]
      #558479 - 07/24/09 07:24 AM

[quote]I am assuming that question was for me .. and i am guessing that because i am a woman , and that i posted a question on here about receiving child support from a father ( who, by his own fault hasnt held a job in 6 years ) that is why you are assuming that i am lazy and in it for the money only...

I do not recieve any state help.. I work a full time job, and have for the last 9 years , my paycheck goes towards all the bills, and i dont see any reason why i need to tell you in earned dollars how much i spend...

house payment, car payment (yu live there and drive the car..don't count

bills ( electric, water , gas, food ) You use these utilitites..don't count

clothes and supplies for the children 0 Fine
child care - Fine

school - They go to private school?


Again, in hard dollars, what do you pay, aside from scohol, CC (which is usually seperate from CS) and their regular school...what is your cash out lay? Can't count the house or utilities as you live there too


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #558480 - 07/24/09 07:25 AM

The child learns that if you commit a crime, you go to jail. The child, the ex...they didn't make the one who dodges the court order (and doesn't pay his taxes BTW), act in the way he did. HE did that to himself. You can teach kids one of two messages...there are no consequences for our actions, or there ARE. Perhaps his parents taught him that there were no consequences. So maybe THAT is why he ultimately ended up in jail.

BTW, my ex went at least twice I know of. His daughter knew he was in jail too. But not for CS...for cocaine. Think they should've just dropped those charges because he had a kid? What would she have learned from it?

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Hey idiot.... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #558481 - 07/24/09 07:30 AM

Yes, you. And if you don't like the term, stop acting like one. I think you're just trying to rile people up lately with these lame arguments. IE:

>>>>>(yu live there and drive the car..don't count

KIDS live there, KIDS get transported in that car.

>>>>>You use these utilitites..don't count

Of course not! Why should the kids use utilities or eat food? Moron.

>>>>>They go to private school?

Does it matter if they eat lunch at school or have a list of school supplies to purchase each year, and have to have new clothese that fit before school each year? No, it doesn't. But you purposely overlook the obvious and go for the argument because you just like stirring shyt.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Hey idiot.... [Re: almostheaven]
      #558496 - 07/24/09 08:04 AM

[quote][/quote]

Didn't even read your answer. How many rats you have nesting in that hair-do of yours?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sherron
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 11/25/06
Posts: 20634
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #558661 - 07/24/09 01:00 PM

"All in the best interest of the child. BAER"

Yes, to attempt to force him to support the children he helped create, since he won't voluntarily do so (so much for HIM looking out for the best interest, huh? But that's okay, he's a guy, so we should overlook him being a deadbeat). This poster didn't create the laws he broke or the punishment he may receive.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Sherron]
      #558928 - 07/25/09 06:52 AM

When CP's are held to the same standards (and they are not), it's still a BAER.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #558929 - 07/25/09 06:57 AM

If a CP can't prove EVERY tax free dime they receive is accounted for as going to the kids, then you can convice me jail is approriate for CS arrears. We DON'T have a debtors prison in this country, except for this. EVERY person who misses a house payment, is late on a credit card or utility bill should go to jail. So should CP's who can't account. And all the public programs that help people pay those bills needs to be eliminated. Every single fncking one of them.

In addition, 50/50 should be the law and NO CS exchanged.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
googledad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/31/05
Posts: 10213
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: almostheaven]
      #559192 - 07/26/09 11:05 PM

BTW, my ex went at least twice I know of. His daughter knew he was in jail too. But not for CS...for cocaine. Think they should've just dropped those charges because he had a kid? What would she have learned from it?

>>>>>>> Know any CPs who went to jail for contempt for failure to provide visitation ?

--------------------
Careful. We don't want to learn from this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: googledad]
      #559388 - 07/27/09 11:31 AM

[quote]BTW, my ex went at least twice I know of. His daughter knew he was in jail too. But not for CS...for cocaine. Think they should've just dropped those charges because he had a kid? What would she have learned from it?

>>>>>>> Know any CPs who went to jail for contempt for failure to provide visitation ? [/quote]


No and you won't see any. In cases like this, custody is just changed rather than jailing the mother. AH lives in a strange world and she has NO concept of reality. In addition, contempt is not a felony offense.

Jailing a man (I said a man because there is NO WAY they would jail a woman for non-payment of support) for non-payment is ridiculous and egregious act. If it went that far, it's because the woman (who certainly 100% spends at least a portion of the CS on herself or to enhance her lifestyle) wanted the man jailed. EVERY situation can be worked out. I can see taking someones license or whatever (which is also stupid, as it just prevents the payor from earning a living to pay support) but jail? CS and taxes are the only jailable debt offenses in this country.

Ya, go ahead an jail Dad. And let the kids know. And see how they feel about you when they are adults. If a woman can't support the kids she squirted out, she should have never had the kids to begin with. That is not to say the father shouldn't pay his support. God knows I did. Always. But if you are so uneducated or such a loser you couldn't support them on your own if you had to, get a better fncking job or go back to school instead of living off CS and the state. It's pure laziness or mental illness or both.

I will gaurentee you 100% if you are a woman who jailed the kids father over CS, your relationship with the child will be sh!t when they become adults. My olders kids opinion of their mother (and their step father) changed INSTANTLY once they read all the various motions their mother did (needlessly). One minute they loved their mother. The next, they thought she was a first class [censored].


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Hey idiot.... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #559610 - 07/28/09 07:53 AM

You took the time to respond...you read it. Moron.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #559612 - 07/28/09 07:56 AM

50/50 has nothing to do with parents who run from their responsibilities to their family. One CP proving what THEY spend has nothing to do with the OTHER CP who didn't receive CS. Going to jail for not paying CS isn't considered debtor's prison, it's considered ignoring a court order.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: googledad]
      #559613 - 07/28/09 07:56 AM

YUP!

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
BTW... [Re: almostheaven]
      #559614 - 07/28/09 07:57 AM

Know of some that lost custody too. Stick that in your pipe...

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #559619 - 07/28/09 08:08 AM

>>>>AH lives in a strange world and she has NO concept of reality.

No, AH LIVES in reality, but obviously not the single-minded reality you live in. I haven't seen these issues from only one side. With a large family base to draw from, I've seen it in various forms. So I didn't close my mind and decide that one scenario is the end all and be all of child support just because its what I personally experienced...like you have.

>>>>>(I said a man because there is NO WAY they would jail a woman for non-payment of support)

Gee, I read a news article once of a woman who refused to pay support and spend TWO YEARS in jail. Judge wouldn't let her out until she agreed to pay. If you ever read such an article, you'd claim it was false, even from a reputable news source because it doesn't fit your scenario of everything being prejudiced and nothing EVER going against the woman.

>>>>>If it went that far, it's because the woman (who certainly 100% spends at least a portion of the CS on herself or to enhance her lifestyle) wanted the man jailed.

Shows what assinine statements you're capable of making, because most NCPs don't get jailed unless they haven't PAID CS. That means the woman certainly didn't spend even .01% of the CS on herself...BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T GET IT.

>>>>>And let the kids know.

Even when the CP won't let them know but the NCP is bitter enough to make sure they know, you'd still find reason to vindicate the poor male NCP. You wouldn't put up the effort if it were a female NCP. Your bias is showing yet again.

>>>>>If a woman can't support the kids she squirted out, she should have never had the kids to begin with. That is not to say the father shouldn't pay his support.

No, that is EXACTLY what you said in that first sentence. SHE squirted, SHE should never if SHE can't support them. You did NOT say if she can't support her HALF of this debt. You contradict yourself.

>>>>>But if you are so uneducated or such a loser you couldn't support them on your own if you had to, get a better fncking job or go back to school instead of living off CS and the state.

Certainly if you can't support them on your own, you need to work towards that goal, but "living off CS"? Again, contradictions. Living off the state, absolutely. But if by living off CS you mean a CP shouldn't even depend on getting the CS that they put towards their kids...which is how it sounds...then you continue to contradict what you say.

>>>>>I will gaurentee you 100% if you are a woman who jailed the kids father over CS, your relationship with the child will be sh!t when they become adults. My olders kids opinion of their mother (and their step father) changed INSTANTLY once they read all the various motions their mother did (needlessly). One minute they loved their mother. The next, they thought she was a first class [censored].

YOU are not EVERYONE. And no you cannot make that guarantee because you'd be 100% wrong since I know of kids who did NOT end up hating their mothers because their fathers ended up in jail for non-payment of CS. Generally its because these particular fathers were "first class [censored]". But in your mind, such a man doesn't exist.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RJ1
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/19/05
Posts: 5164
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: almostheaven]
      #559725 - 07/28/09 12:28 PM

My son would hate me if I had his Dad jailed no matter the reason. I think jail is a bit extreme personally. "Jail" is just such an unknown word in our household and family and not something my son would take lightly and not something our family could get used to. I couldn't live with myself...and my ex is over two years behind at $20,000. But I can afford to do it on my own. I do think women should educate themselves, and be able to support alone the children they have...it makes life easier for everyone. I do think NCPs should help support the children, but jail is not in my vocabulary.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #559735 - 07/28/09 01:00 PM

And yet it is breaking the law, and it is in a judge's vocabulary. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, or that it isn't. It depends on the circumstances and each individual situation. I can say for me - I tried everything I felt right in doing to keep XH out of jail. In the end, it was up to him, and he did come through by joining the military. Although sometimes, it's not up to the other parent. Many times it's in the law's hands by that point. Although I do believe it should be an absolute last resort.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #559768 - 07/28/09 01:54 PM

[quote]And yet it is breaking the law, and it is in a judge's vocabulary. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, or that it isn't. It depends on the circumstances and each individual situation. I can say for me - I tried everything I felt right in doing to keep XH out of jail. In the end, it was up to him, and he did come through by joining the military. Although sometimes, it's not up to the other parent. Many times it's in the law's hands by that point. Although I do believe it should be an absolute last resort. [/quote]

It's the wrong thing to do. I didn't read any of AH's responses because she is delusional but Jenny, as RJ said, the kid will end up hating the parent that has the other parent jailed. I've never been but I know the reaction I got when my kids were old enough to read the truth.

Like I said, yanking someones professional or drivers license is one thing. Getting them thrown in jail is another.

CP's that act in an egregious manner towards the NCP are in for a big shock once the child is no longer a child. I have kids who are kids and I have kids who are now adults so I can speak from EXPERIENCE. It's part of the reason ex#2 tries extremely hard to co-parent. She was the stepmother of my kids for 12 years and they bonded and still talk. She knows what will happen if she continued on her previous course (in addition to me being able to take the kids when I want or am well enough to do so). She saw it all and the aftermath. My kids still visit her. The ex-stepmother. Which is fine with me. She is the exact opposite of ex#1 in all regards, especially the kids.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #559772 - 07/28/09 01:59 PM

I completely agree with you Yes Dad, and I think someone's intentions are what will show in the end, ESPECIALLY to the child.

I would never try to put my XH in jail, and there have been many times I could have, not only for nonpayment of CS.

But then again, like I said - it's not always in the other parent's hands, it gets to a point when it's in the law's hands. Did I ask the judge to throw my XH in jail? No, in fact I asked him NOT to throw him in jail. But what I think isn't always what the judge will listen to and feel right in doing.

If a parent - mom or dad - ends up in jail for nonpayment of CS or for anything else, I also feel that as children get older, they will see the truth no matter what that parent has to say about it when they are younger. The truth always comes out eventually. If our judge ever did throw XH in jail, or if he ended up getting into trouble b/c of his lack of responsibility and it was reported to his commanding officer and he went to military jail - I would not be responsible. I think it's extremely important for parents - moms and dads alike - to NOT take responsibility for the lack of someone else's actions.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RJ1
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/19/05
Posts: 5164
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #559795 - 07/28/09 02:33 PM

In my state, DHR/judge wouldn't even KNOW my ex was behind until I told them. I got the ball rolling...and if my ex was threatened with jail time it was because of a direct relation to me calling them. So yes it would be my fault...as I'm sure it was in yours. You seem to forget that phone call you made to the county DHR office to get that ball rolling. They are just following through on your phone call. Anyway, I couldn't sleep at night knowing I had anything to do with my son's Father being jailed. I don't have enough hate for him I guess.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #559798 - 07/28/09 02:35 PM

RJ - I didn't get the ball rolling for him to be thrown in jail. You seem to forget I got the ball rolling for them to find out where he was working. CSE already had hold of the case, and filed contempt the first time WITHOUT me contacting them. YOu also seem to forget me telling the judge, and CSE attorney, and even XH SPECIFICALLY that I did not want him in jail. And if he ended up there? It wouldn't have been my doing. I took responsibility for him for long enough. If I continue to do so, I will be enabling him and that would be poor judgement on my behalf.

It has absolutely nothing to do with hate RJ - I have anything but hate towards my exhusband.

I have no doubt your XH will continue to fail at his responsibilities b/c you have enabled him to do so. That doesn't make you wrong for that - nor does it make me wrong for expecting a father to actually be a father - and that doesn't only mean financially.

You don't have to agree w/ my choices - I certainly don't agree with yours. But if it works for you and your son - that's what's important. I would never have enough gall to tell someone who hasn't received CS that it's their fault their X is in jail for it. Or that it's a battered spouse's fault her husband was thrown in jail for beating her. Thik a child wants to know that about his father? Of course not. But it isn't her fault. At some point others have to take responsibility for their choices. And in that, I agree with the laws that are in place.

Sometimes as parents, we have to take it upon ourselves to at least attempt for both parents to take responsibility for their children. And while I cn't force him to do other things, CSE can at least attempt to force him to take financial responsibility. It's not for me, it's not for anyone but my son - if I hadn't taken the steps I have taken, my son would have a lot less than he does. I'm not the kind of person to sit back and whine that I receive nothing, when I haven't attempted to do anything about it. And sometimes it takes a good threat of jail for someone to step up and do what's right - as XH did in our situation.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RJ1
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/19/05
Posts: 5164
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #559814 - 07/28/09 02:57 PM

Nobody will ever convince me jail is the appropriate course of action. And anyone who contacts the courts in any way for contempt of failure to pay CS KNOWS that jailtime could occur. I don't enable my ex to do anything because I walked free and clear from him 10 years ago. I pursued CS one time six months ago after two years of non-payment because of this economy but after having regrets about it I'll never do it again. (He still doesn't know I had anything to do with it so we still have a good working coparenting relationship) And his check was cut Friday to start it up again after changing jobs. Maybe all he needed was a nudge. It's not your fault...never said it was...but you are old enough to know what the courts are capable of. If you are OK with jailtime, that's on you. I'm not.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #559820 - 07/28/09 03:01 PM

I'm not trying to convince you of anything - I'm stating my opinion, which happens to be different than yours.

You aren't wrong for taking the approach that works best for you and your son - nor am I wrong for taking the approach that works best for me and my son.

And yes, I am very well aware of what the courts are capable of - and I'm glad I went the route I did, b/c it forced him to man up and do something about it, so that he wouldn't go to jail.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sherron
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 11/25/06
Posts: 20634
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #559871 - 07/28/09 04:30 PM

"the kid will end up hating the parent that has the other parent jailed. "

Wow, so I better apologize to my kids for calling the cops on their dad when he beat the $hit out of me. I mean, I'd hate to be at "fault" for having the poor guy jailed because HE broke the law, but I was the evil biatch who called the cops, so clearly - it's all on ME... wow... my kids will just hate ME. BAER.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Sherron]
      #559874 - 07/28/09 04:34 PM

I never have understood that way of thinking.

And people wonder why men like that continue to do what they do. Men/people like that WILL continue to behave as they do when those around them enable them to do so. Often times having serious consequences to face will make a person think twice about doing it again. Then again - sometimes not. My exhusband is lucky he didn't go to jail before I was even in the picture. He's escaped consequences many times - and I've been a part of that enabling. I will continue to be fair and do what's right, but I will no longer enable him to be the "man" he's become.

I don't feel very sorry for people who play the victim only when it comes time to face the consequences to their actions and decisions.

And while, as CP's we know what the court's feelings are on teh matter - so do the parents ignoring the law.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RJ1
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/19/05
Posts: 5164
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Sherron]
      #559879 - 07/28/09 05:02 PM

You took it out of context. Someone beating someone up is different than non payment of CS. Nobody says an NCP Dad going to jail is the CP's fault...but you have to admit we have a lot of control over it.

And JL I am not responsible for making my ex realize his failures of responsibilities. THAT is the main difference between us and I do not call that enabling. Personally, the less I have to do with the man the better off I am. I'm not his Momma, or God, or Karma...that will ultimately teach him his lesson. I've got enough to do than to keep up with him, or to stay in court every two months. And thankfully I don't feel the need to make him man up and I don't need his money. It's nice too.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #559882 - 07/28/09 05:31 PM

I would never want my kid's father to end up in jail, hell I wouldn't want any kids parent to end up in jail regardless of who they are, what they have done. Yet it happens. We all make choices. The NCP's that end up in jail know the consequences of NOT paying CS. If the courts decide to punish them- a possible punishment is jail time. The CP does not control the NCP's choices... Obviously if they did they would much rather see the NCP financially support their children. Works out for everyone if they do. If the NCP doesn't- he/she is FULLY aware of the consequence.

Going to jail is the NCP's CHOICE.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #559888 - 07/28/09 05:40 PM

I completely agree with you Cassie.

I wouldn't wish harm or jailtime on anyone - not my XH, not anyone. But we are all adults - and we all know the consequences to our actions and choices before we make them.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #559892 - 07/28/09 06:00 PM

http://www.cffpp.org/publications/pdfs/crimstat.pdf

Found this interesting. It divides the punishments by state, etc.

(Notice it also states that not all CS agencies enforce them - which is where a lot of problems arise I believe - I think it needs to be equal across the board)

Edited by JennyLynn (07/28/09 06:04 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Goodmom
Pooh-Bah
*

Reged: 06/17/07
Posts: 2084
Re: non custodial parent in jail [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #559899 - 07/28/09 06:48 PM

Yesdad:

house payment, car payment (yu live there and drive the car..don't count

My response:

They absolutely DO count. Of course, only the portion that is for them. Which is easy to find. Find out how much it costs to rent a one bedroom apartment and deduct it from what is currently being paid for the the extra rooms needed for the kids.

Yesdad said:

bills ( electric, water , gas, food ) You use these utilitites..don't count


My response:

Not all of it would count. But a portion of it WOULD count.

Yesdad said:

Again, in hard dollars, what do you pay, aside from scohol, CC (which is usually seperate from CS) and their regular school...what is your cash out lay? Can't count the house or utilities as you live there too

My response:

Considering that the father isn't paying ANY of the court ordered child support, it is safe to assume that SHE is paying ALL of the children's expenses, including the added cost of housing and utilities.

You don't get to determine what counts and what doesn't.

And the only amount that she is paying that is relevant is the amount that she is COURT-ORDERED to pay. Because if she fails to follow a court order, she can go to jail for contempt. You know, like the father did for being in contempt.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #559901 - 07/28/09 06:53 PM

It's rare any are enforced.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Goodmom
Pooh-Bah
*

Reged: 06/17/07
Posts: 2084
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #559907 - 07/28/09 07:01 PM

Yesdad said:

It's the wrong thing to do.

My response:

Not following a court order is the wrong thing to do. The father was given 6 MONTHS to make some type of payment. He chose not to. His actions led him to be convicted of contempt of court. Which could lead to jail.

Yesdad said:

I didn't read any of AH's responses because she is delusional but Jenny, as RJ said, the kid will end up hating the parent that has the other parent jailed.

My response:

One parent didn't have the other parent jailed. The father in this case failed to follow a court order. It was his actions and his actions alone that led to him being jailed. His ex is not responsible for his behavior, he is.

Yesdad said:

I've never been but I know the reaction I got when my kids were old enough to read the truth.

My response:

Bragging about how you abuse your children is pathetic. Involving them in your divorce, even if they are 18 is abuse. Plain and simple. One day, that will bite you in the a$$. And rightfully so.

Yesdad said:

Like I said, yanking someones professional or drivers license is one thing. Getting them thrown in jail is another.

My response:

Failing to follow a court order is called contempt. And that is punishable by sending the person who is disregarding the court order to jail. And just so that everybody else is clear (you are hopeless): ONLY A JUDGE CAN ORDER CONTEMPT OF COURT AND JAIL TIME. The other parent can't.

Yesdad:

CP's that act in an egregious manner towards the NCP are in for a big shock once the child is no longer a child.

My response:

And ncp's who fail to pay their court ordered child support are in for a shock when the child support arrears don't go away when the child is emancipated.

Yesdad said:

I have kids who are kids and I have kids who are now adults so I can speak from EXPERIENCE.

My response:

My dad, the ncp, found that out the hard way. He badmouthed my mom, told us details about the divorce that he shouldn't have. There are 5 of us. He has 10 grandchildren that he has never met. Why? Because none of his 5 kids talk to him. And haven't since the day we turned 18.

You know, kind of like what you did on their 18th birthday.

You really don't have a whole lot of room to talk given that you did what you accuse CP's of doing.




It's part of the reason ex#2 tries extremely hard to co-parent. She was the stepmother of my kids for 12 years and they bonded and still talk. She knows what will happen if she continued on her previous course (in addition to me being able to take the kids when I want or am well enough to do so). She saw it all and the aftermath. My kids still visit her. The ex-stepmother. Which is fine with me. She is the exact opposite of ex#1 in all regards, especially the kids. [/quote]


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #559913 - 07/28/09 07:13 PM

They are very much enforced in my county. As is denying visitation.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RJ1
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/19/05
Posts: 5164
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #559926 - 07/28/09 07:46 PM

But that's my entire point, I don't agree with jailtime. And I also agree it's not the CP's fault, but I don't agree with the punishment being jailtime. Period. I don't have the answers for nonpayment, but jailtime is something I will never agree with.

We have a lot more to lose than gain by my ex going to jail. The constant presence of my ex in my son's life is way more important to me than the coins I could squeeze out of him. And DHR/court/judges make me wanna puke. Not something that makes me happy and I avoid it at all costs.

I want peace, peace for my son and my family. My son doesn't miss CS, but he would sure miss his Dad. And if his Dad went to jail, he would feel responsible in his own way I'm sure.

My ex is a great Dad, he paid faithfully for 7 years, he has never missed a weekend in almost 10 years, and my son loves him to death. I will not jeopardize that, and I will not force the issue. I can't disengage in that way, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing my son's Dad was in jail. We are all tied together and I just couldn't do it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #559933 - 07/28/09 08:01 PM

If the CP isn't responsiblr, who is?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BeckaLeigh
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/08/05
Posts: 6876
Loc: Texas
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #559937 - 07/28/09 08:15 PM

The CP isn't responsible for the NCP failing to follow the CO and help support their kids. We do get to deal with the consequences of the irresponsible NCP's failure to pay the CS. If the NCP doesn't want to go to jail, they need to make sure they do what they are Co'd to do. I don't think jail is the answer, either, but I see my X heading in that direction. The effect jail will have on him is very nill compared to the effects of his failure to be a father in ANY way has on our kids.

--------------------
I tried being normal once. Worst five minutes of my life.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: BeckaLeigh]
      #559941 - 07/28/09 08:25 PM

I completely agree BL. It's not about money really. It's about taking responsibility for a child you helped create. If my exhusband were a "good father" but truly couldn't afford child support I'd feel completely different. Unfortunately that isn't the case.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
googledad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/31/05
Posts: 10213
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #559943 - 07/28/09 08:54 PM

AH lives in a strange world and she has NO concept of reality.

>>>>>>>>>> Yup , it's called West Virginia . Here's a few stats about the state , maybe it'll explain her just a little .

W. Virginia :

Dead last ( of all states ) in % of the population with a college degree 15.3% .

Dead last in & of married couples with both husband & wife in the labor force 41.6%

Dead last in employment ratio 61.8%

#1 in % of population with diabetes 10.9%

#1 % of population with high blood pressure 33.6%

#1 % of population who've lost their natural teeth 42.8%

#1 in overweight and obesity rate 61.2%

#1 in smokeless tobacco users 31.2%

&

#1 in Percent of People 21 to 64 Years Old With a Disability 21.5%


From these facts it can be discerned that AH is most likely morbidly obese with diabetes and high blood pressure , a high school graduate , toothless , unemployed while hubby brings home the bacon , disabled and has several spittoons around her trailer .

--------------------
Careful. We don't want to learn from this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #560004 - 07/29/09 06:31 AM

I want peace, peace for my son and my family. My son doesn't miss CS, but he would sure miss his Dad. And if his Dad went to jail, he would feel responsible in his own way I'm sure.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Oh I get that, but then when should an adult be held accountable for their actions or non actions? I understand you don't agree with the form of punishment, but if that is the law in regards to CS and the NCP is mentally capable of understanding it then it seems to me that the NCP doesn't care enough to make sure his @ss stays out of jail for his kid. As a CP I understand that you care enough to keep your X out of jail for your son, why doesn't he?

Although he is a great guy, he seriously has something missing...because why doesn't he see that NOT paying could take him away from his kid? You would think that would be enough for him to want to stay out of jail. Why should he rely on you to keep him out? He has the choice, and it just doesn't seem to me he is making the best one for his kid and himself.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #560006 - 07/29/09 06:37 AM

It's not about money really. It's about taking responsibility for a child you helped create. If my exhusband were a "good father" but truly couldn't afford child support I'd feel completely different. Unfortunately that isn't the case.
_____________________________________________________________

I think there are SOME CP's (I won't say all because I know some CP's are very money hungry) that would be willing to decrease the amount of CS so that the NCP's can afford CS without CSE having to go after him and forcing him to pay. Thus keeping them out of jail.

So for those not willing to send the NCP to jail over CS, why not just forgive arrears and accept $0 CS? That way NCP isn't racking up arrears and the NCP won't possibly go to jail for not paying? If you don't like the punishment for not paying, then don't have them pay. You could have something between the both of you- that when he does have money pay as you want, when you want.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: BeckaLeigh]
      #560010 - 07/29/09 06:57 AM

[quote]The CP isn't responsible for the NCP failing to follow the CO and help support their kids. We do get to deal with the consequences of the irresponsible NCP's failure to pay the CS. If the NCP doesn't want to go to jail, they need to make sure they do what they are Co'd to do. I don't think jail is the answer, either, but I see my X heading in that direction. The effect jail will have on him is very nill compared to the effects of his failure to be a father in ANY way has on our kids. [/quote]

The CP is responsible for putting the guy in jail. A law that needs to be changed, or if not, equity up the CP's egreious offenses as jailable. And as we know, they are rarely punished for anything


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: googledad]
      #560012 - 07/29/09 06:59 AM

[quote]AH lives in a strange world and she has NO concept of reality.

>>>>>>>>>> Yup , it's called West Virginia . Here's a few stats about the state , maybe it'll explain her just a little .

W. Virginia :

Dead last ( of all states ) in % of the population with a college degree 15.3% .

Dead last in & of married couples with both husband & wife in the labor force 41.6%

Dead last in employment ratio 61.8%

#1 in % of population with diabetes 10.9%

#1 % of population with high blood pressure 33.6%

#1 % of population who've lost their natural teeth 42.8%

#1 in overweight and obesity rate 61.2%

#1 in smokeless tobacco users 31.2%

&

#1 in Percent of People 21 to 64 Years Old With a Disability 21.5%


From these facts it can be discerned that AH is most likely morbidly obese with diabetes and high blood pressure , a high school graduate , toothless , unemployed while hubby brings home the bacon , disabled and has several spittoons around her trailer . [/quote]

I still maintain that hairdo of her's is a literal rat's nest.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #560013 - 07/29/09 07:00 AM

[quote]They are very much enforced in my county. As is denying visitation. [/quote]

Cite the case numbers and county. I'll check it out.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560014 - 07/29/09 07:04 AM

or if not, equity up the CP's egreious offenses as jailable. And as we know, they are rarely punished for anything
____________________________________________________________

1000% agree!!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560015 - 07/29/09 07:15 AM

Interesting case as the NCP finally received a custody reversal due to the CP's contempt in allowing visitation and following the CO. It was FINALLY deemed PAS...but get this took 5 years! Ridiculous! The court gave the CP 5 years of chances... UGH

http://www.pigcircus.com/Appellate_Decision.html


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560016 - 07/29/09 07:24 AM

I'll PM you the county we're in. I can say that I've been IN court while a mother was threatened by our judge for denying visitation.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #560017 - 07/29/09 07:24 AM

Yup - ridiculous. I do agree denying visitation should hold just as much consequence as nonpayment of CS, as should not taking visitation.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560018 - 07/29/09 07:26 AM

<<The CP is responsible for putting the guy in jail. A law that needs to be changed, or if not, equity up the CP's egreious offenses as jailable. And as we know, they are rarely punished for anything >>

I call BS. The COURTS are responsible for putting NCP's in jail, just as the COURTS are responsible for not giving CP's who deny visitation harsher consequences.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #560020 - 07/29/09 07:29 AM

I think there are SOME CP's (I won't say all because I know some CP's are very money hungry) that would be willing to decrease the amount of CS so that the NCP's can afford CS without CSE having to go after him and forcing him to pay. Thus keeping them out of jail.

----Oh I wholeheartedly agree Cassie, which is exactly what I did in my case. I lowered it, so that he wouldn't rack up more arrears and give him the chance to pay it off. He was originally put on a payment plan in Nov. 2007 - between Nov. 06 and Nov 07 I received 2 1/2 months of CS. That was even when he had the good job at the bank, he had little excuse. If he had started doing THEN what he should have been doing all along, now - almost 3 years later, he wouldn't be in this situation (even after attempting to forgive half his arrears and cut his CS in half over a year ago - as you know)

So for those not willing to send the NCP to jail over CS, why not just forgive arrears and accept $0 CS? That way NCP isn't racking up arrears and the NCP won't possibly go to jail for not paying? If you don't like the punishment for not paying, then don't have them pay. You could have something between the both of you- that when he does have money pay as you want, when you want.

----I agree with you. If a CP absolutely 100% doesn't care if the NCP financially supports their child, have CS completely diminished and taken out of the CO, like BM#1 did for XH.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RJ1
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/19/05
Posts: 5164
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560040 - 07/29/09 08:32 AM

If I went to court and my ex ended up in jail...I would feel responsible. Because it was the direct action of me taking him to court that caused it. But ultimately I understand the concept of what everyone is saying and some don't feel as I do. And Cassie if CPs just forgave CS and arrears, why go to court anyway? Just forget about it and leave court out of it. The action of going to court opens a can of worms. And now that I think about it...maybe it's not about hating the NCP...for me it's more about having compassion for him as the Dad to my son. And I don't need CS...that certainly helps. I feel no bitterness towards him. I have no axe to grind. We are not suffering. I'm not the oh so powerful one to make him do anything or control him or make him own up to his responsibilities. Not my job. So that's exactly what I plan on doing...leaving court and him alone and moving on with my life plan...with or without CS. Makes no difference to me, because I do not let my ex get under my skin. And we all know that as a general whole, despite scattered case files anyone may find, CPs are not put in jail for failure of visitation.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #560042 - 07/29/09 08:35 AM

It has nothing to do with an Ex getting under your skin, it has to do w/ him taking responsibility. If you don't care if he does - and you're able to get along fine without it, that's awesome. There are a lot of women (and men who are owed CS) who can't say that. Their children have to go without, b/c the OP doesn't care enough to support them.

If it's a CP's fault that an NCP is a lazy, irresponsible parent - then I suppose it's the NCP's fault when a CP denies visitation? If we're going to compare the two - we have to compare it all the way.

If it's not the courts fault, if it's not the NCP's fault - it's the CP's fault. If the NCP doesn't take responsibility - it's the CP's fault when the NCP has to face the consequences. Therefor the reverse would also be true? I can't be convinced of any truth in that.

I suppose it's my fault if I see someone committing a crime, and that person ends up in jail? I suppose it's one of my best friends fault that she called the cops on her husband for beating the crap out of her, the state pressed charges and he wound up in jail?

We are all responsible for our own choices. And I strongly feel CP's SHOULD be held to the same standard.

It's no more the NCP's fault when CP isn't given consequences for withholding visitation than it is the CP's fault for NCP not financially supporting their child. There are laws in place for a reason. There are courts involved for a reason, and that's to enforce the law. I find no shame in that. NCP's know the consequences if they choose to disobey the law.

Edited by JennyLynn (07/29/09 08:45 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #560051 - 07/29/09 08:46 AM

Yes if you have a choice in the matter...I can see choosing against jail time, I guess I just don't understand why the NCP wouldn't choose that as well?

I am sure there are cases though where the NCP has been thrown in jail for non payment and the state decided to do that on their own regard. Surely those cases are probably mostly because the CP is on some type of state aid.

I guess, in my thought process, if I was a CP receiving or not receiving CS- I wouldn't feel as though I was the one who put the NCP in jail for non payment. There are laws and if they aren't followed there are consequences. Our children, as a whole, learn that at a very young age. I want my child to understand that as they are growing up, so when they become an adult they realize making good choices often leads to rewards, while making bad choices leads to punishment.

Of course I do understand the compassion you have for your son's father. I just don't see why he would break a law knowing it could lead to jail time and his own absence from his son's life?

Edited by Cassie23 (07/29/09 08:49 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #560053 - 07/29/09 08:48 AM

<<There are cases though where the NCP has been thrown in jail for non payment and the state decided to do that on their own regard. Surely those cases are probably mostly because the CP is on some type of state aid.>>

Here, CSE completely takes over the case, even if you aren't on state aid. While I'm very involved in our case - I don't have to be. Yet if I weren't, he would have been in jail quite a while ago. That's the approach BM has taken - he owes her about $2K, maybe less now after his tax return - she has no idea what's goign on in the case. CSE filed contempt and was going to take his license, she had nothing to do with it. She didn't even know until after the fact.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sherron
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 11/25/06
Posts: 20634
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #560139 - 07/29/09 10:05 AM

"And I don't need CS...that certainly helps. I feel no bitterness towards him. I have no axe to grind. We are not suffering. "

That's great, rj. I don't feel bitter towards him either on most days. I used to not depend on the cs. I am getting to the point where I NEED it, unfortunately. So, yes - I do occasionally get a little pi$$y when unemployed sm goes tanning, has manicured nails and some nice highlights, while I'm trying to figure out how much longer I can go without buying new clothes for me for work, because all my money goes to bills and the kids. I do get pi$$y when I hear that they've gone to yet another concert this month, while I'm skipping lunch because I don't get paid until Friday. I do get pi$$y when he doesn't file taxes because his entire refund would go to cs arrears. I don't thrive on bitterness; most days, I don't give it a second thought. But yes, I will get pi$$y when I read how it's all MY fault if he goes to jail because HE is making the choice that he'd rather spend his money on fun stuff for himself and sm, instead of paying cs.

As far as givin him a break on cs? I have before, I am now. The kids' insurance isn't even calculated into cs. I've previously asked to modify cs because I knew he couldn't afford the amount ordered. I didn't insist on calculating his OT into cs, even though I could have and it would have been granted. I have giving him cs back. I have provided him with groceries when he took the kids for the weekend (once upon a time). I have never held him to the co on parenting time, either - if he was willing to take the kids, I agreed, even if it was "officially" my time - including holidays.

I HAVE TRIED TO WORK WITH HIM ON EVERYTHING. I AM DONE. If he wants to sit his a$$ in jail for non-payment, I will respect his choice.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Sherron]
      #560162 - 07/29/09 10:25 AM

<<If he wants to sit his a$$ in jail for non-payment, I will respect his choice. >>

Yup, and it will be HIS choice, you're not responsible for it, as I know you know :)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #560402 - 07/29/09 01:10 PM

ONE PERSON CITE ONE CASE (COUNTY AND CASE NUMBER OR COUNTY/NAME) WHERE THE MOTHER WENT TO JAIL FOR VISITATION INTERFERENCE. THAT IS MY CHALLANGE TO YOU.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560404 - 07/29/09 01:12 PM

Yes Dad, we've talked about this - it still has absolutely NOTHING to do with NCP facing the consequences.

I agree CP's who deny visitation should also have to face the same consequences.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tweeby
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/05/04
Posts: 7100
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560409 - 07/29/09 01:16 PM

If I remeber correctly, in M5's situation, the BM was sent to jail for keeping the children from M5's husband and they ahd 50/50 custody at the time.

Ask M5 about it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #560425 - 07/29/09 01:31 PM

[quote]I'll PM you the county we're in. I can say that I've been IN court while a mother was threatened by our judge for denying visitation. [/quote]

Threatened? By a judge? Jeez-us H. I want to see a single incidence of a woman being jailed for visitation interference. Jenny, as I told you, Illinois is the ONLY state where visitation interference is actually a crimminal act. There has not been a single woman jailed for it, let alone charged, in the 4 years or so the law has been in effect. And Illinois has 10-12M people in it. Many more than Oklahoma. Yet no one has been jailed for this relatively new law. BTW- It is catagorized as a "petty offense". Other "petty offenses" as an example is spitting on the sidewalk and jaywalking. THAT is how serious they think it is.

Men are continually threatened by judges. Big deal.

As I said, I want to see a single case where the mother spent time in jail for visitation interference. (And not one where the mother is accusing the father of abuse or some non-sense like that). Just regular visitation experience.

Oh, and to be charged here, you have to have 3 previous offenses where the judge found you in contempt.

The law has a heavy bias towards women. Now someone needs to get hopping and show me an instance of it. It would be for my benefit, as I need to be able to cite cases as I still have little ones.

And GoodMom, you can go to hell. This woman spent 12 years fully engaged in attempts at alienation. She told them I never paid any support when in fact, I paid more in CS aloe than you have ever seen in your life. She lied to them, presenting falsehood after falsehood. And continually used them as weapons against me. Until they were of age (and she was over 20 when my daughter first read it) they were under the impression that it was I who screwed them all over in terms of money, etc. While she didn't dare engage in visitation interference, as it would upset the applecart and possibly result in her loss, she used and abused my children on a continual basis. My daughter is a young professional (who btw, is now paying the mortgage on the home equity loans her mother and step father took out to buy him toys) and well beyond the age of "child abuse". You have NO idea how it feels to give away well in excess of a million dollars while they whole time, the kids are thinking I was stiffing their mother. SHE wanted to read it because she didn't believe it. Do you by chance have an extra million dollars laying around you can just throw away?Didn't think so..so STFU


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560426 - 07/29/09 01:32 PM

Seriously, I need to be able to cite cases.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560429 - 07/29/09 01:33 PM

Yes dad, we've discussed it. I'm NOT disagreeing with you.

I completely agree the courts are biased in most cases. That still has nothing to do with an NCP not accepting the consequences to his/her actions. We're talking about 2 different things here.

Edited by JennyLynn (07/29/09 01:33 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #560525 - 07/29/09 02:44 PM

The best thing for all involved is 50/50 with no support being exchanged.

The actual BEST scenario, although out of reach for most people, is "nesting" where the children stay in one home and the parents each spend their portion of their time at the house and an apartment when it is not their visitation, which can also be used by both parents, although when one gets married, that blows it all to crap.

One thing I DON'T like are CO's ordering a house to be sold and the proceeds being split however. A divorce is traumatic for a kid as it is, yanking them out of their house is even more traumatic.

But you are correct where there are NCP's who do not live up to their parental responsibilities, and there are CP's who don't either. IF the CP receives support, it can't do anything but help enhance their lifestyle, unless the amount is really low. Like $300 a month or something. But in many instances, CS allows a CP to live in a house rather than apartment, buy the SUV (got to drag the little ones around) rather than a regular car, etc.

Ok, so my ex and her husband, because of my CS, were enabled to live in a large house where neither were employed for 12 years. Does that not constitute theft? They both used the kids money to pay ALL of THEIR OWN expenses. It's not like they lived on a farm and grew their own food. It's not like they built cars from scratch (a new one every couple of years, plus an additional truck for him). They didn't generate their own electric power nor set up their own phone lines or hauled water from Lake Michigan to the house. No...they used the money meant for the care and upbringing of the children for their own use. So, how does not constitute theft? I would be LAUGHED out of the courtroom if I tried to prosecute on that.

Every single divorced Dad I know in real life see their kids on a regular basis and pay their support. I have never met any man who didn't. It seems like a lot on this board because if you are here, you have some problem of some type.

I have said that before my last court battle, I sat in the courtroom for 2 weeks prior, the entire day and watched maybe 75 or so cases come before the judge. And the man was always painted as the bad guy and the woman as a victim somehow. Many cases were boring as hell. Where usually she was pissed at him over the most inane things and their motions were granted.

I think a father being there for his kids in one way or another is more important than CS. But CS is also important. On both sides.

As shown earlier, the CP's income raises or lowers the bar on CS VERY little. And in MY state, it isn't even used in the calculation of CS, only the NCP, which 85% of the time is a man. If a woman receives $1000 a month in support, she should be required to show she spent not only $1000 on the kids, but an additional $1000 that SHE spent on the kids. But we know it dosen't work that way. Anywhere. Housing is not part of the equation nor should a vehicle, unless she was willing to be homeless and without transportation. Those are things she would have, kids or no kids.

After I basically beat the crap out of her in our last court fight, my ex now lets me have the kids anytime I want. In fact, she goes out of her way now, where previously, she was doing whatever she could to interfere in visitation. She came THIS CLOSE to totally losing custody and it was MY decision to allow her to keep it. So we have no problems. Once again (as I did last week) give up one of my days so their Aunt could bring them to the Indiana Dunes. A very fun outting for kids that age, with the new cousins. I wouldn't interupt that.

But when women start actually going to jail for visitation interference or misuse of funds, I'll say things are equal.

They aren't, the system is broken and needs a complete overhaul in all areas.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560527 - 07/29/09 02:45 PM

<<The best thing for all involved is 50/50 with no support being exchanged.
>>

I agree, in MOST circumstances. I wouldn't agree with it in mine - not that he has ever wanted more than EOW anyay.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
ROFL!... [Re: googledad]
      #560531 - 07/29/09 02:48 PM

Gawd what an idiot. Yeah, I live in WV. I was BORN and raised in Ohio though. Wanna supply those stats?

From these facts it can be discerned that AH is most likely morbidly obese - Nope. Sorry to dissapoint but I'm at my optimum weight and get to the Y at least twice a week.

with diabetes and high blood pressure , - Nope again. NO health problems other than a murmur I was born with. In fact, I'm extremely healthy.

a high school graduate , - Yup. And a trade school graduate, and certified network technician, and have some college courses to boot.

toothless , - Sorry, but no, got my teeth. Though I do have a bridge in one spot.

unemployed while hubby brings home the bacon , - Hmmm, guess that's why I talk about my job so much. Moron. I make more than hubby BTW. Chew on that. ;)

disabled and has several spittoons around her trailer . - Nope and nope. Perfectly healthy and own a tri-level house. But then, you knew all this. Still was fun shattering your fantasy world.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
What hairdo of "mine"?... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560540 - 07/29/09 02:50 PM

Or are you still so stupidly obsessed with the play picture taken in Vegas of my face and someone ELSE'S hair? I bet you got in a lot of fights on the school playground, didn't ya?

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
You didn't read my responses... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560546 - 07/29/09 02:53 PM

Because you CANNOT come up with logical responses. ;)

Other than that:

>>>>the kid will end up hating the parent

Only you would believe you know what goes through every kid's mind.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #560553 - 07/29/09 02:56 PM

You have a lot of control over them going to jail for beating you too...you either call the cops or you don't. Either way, NO ONE, not even Mr. I'm Always Right Yes Dad, can say every kid is going to hold it against the parent for sending the other parent to jail. There is such a thing as circumstances, like the beating. Even with just a CS issue, the circumstances could be such that jail is the last resort and totally warranted.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: RJ1]
      #560559 - 07/29/09 02:58 PM

>>>>>We have a lot more to lose than gain by my ex going to jail.

Problem...we didn't. We had a lot more to gain than lose. My ex was not present in his daughter's life from birth to the age of 15. Once present, within a few years time, he kicked her out on the street, stole money from her, bodily threw her from his home, etc. Being in jail would've meant she'd have been much better off. And maybe actual jail time might have shown him that someone was serious about the support he wasn't paying.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
The state.... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560562 - 07/29/09 03:00 PM

Some states REQUIRE support be paid through the state, so the state KNOWS if they're behind. And if the CP at any point needs to get ANY assistance, the state will definately go after the NCP for a portion of it back. If they get no assistance, the state may STILL go after them as they go through dormant cases.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Didn't happen... [Re: Tweeby]
      #560564 - 07/29/09 03:02 PM

Cause Yes Dad doesn't believe in it, it cannot possibly happen.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Tweeby]
      #560733 - 07/29/09 07:00 PM

[quote]If I remeber correctly, in M5's situation, the BM was sent to jail for keeping the children from M5's husband and they ahd 50/50 custody at the time.

Ask M5 about it. [/quote]

Cite. It's not a jailable offense as Illinois is the only state that the statute makes it one. Contempt is another mstter. anf why would M5 be withholding the children? Abuse? I said without something like abuse

Again, I need a citation that specifically jails a woman for visitation interference, not contempt.

AH- When is the next brood due? Don't rats reproduce every 6 weeks or something.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tweeby
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/05/04
Posts: 7100
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560742 - 07/29/09 07:21 PM

I'm not sure what you are talking about. Failure to pay CS is contempt and so is refusing parenting time.

And read what I wrote, M5 didn't keep the children away, it was her husband's ex, the BM who witheld M5's husband's parenting time.

If you want something that the reason for jail is the withholding of parenting time than you won't find any because it would be under contempt of court. It is the same as CS, not paying CS falls under contempt of court. You are not following a court order.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BeckaLeigh
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/08/05
Posts: 6876
Loc: Texas
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560756 - 07/29/09 09:03 PM

Would you please show me where I have had anything to do with the X failing to hold a job for any amount of time in the last 6+ years? Or where it would put him in a financial bind when his CO'd CS is less then 5% of what he makes WHEN he works?

I shouldn't be punished for anything, as a CP. I have busted my ass to try to keep our kids knowing their dad. HE failed at those things. HE has put everything before our kids. HE has missed over 300 visitations in the last 2 years.

I understand that you are saying the POS CPs should be punished. But, it really pisses me off when POS CPs and PS NCPs are lumped together.

Edited because I am not exact on the number of visits he has missed. He has odd Saturdays, even Sundays, even Xmas for 5 days, and off Thanksgivings for 5 days. He has missed all but one Thanksgiving and one Xmas, and even though he is ordered to do the transportation, I still met him halfway on both of those. AND gave him summer time he didn't deserve and wound up driving to get our kids because the jackass was drunk with our kids in the car.

--------------------
I tried being normal once. Worst five minutes of my life.

Edited by BeckaLeigh (07/29/09 09:18 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6756
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #560788 - 07/29/09 11:35 PM

[quote]Yup - ridiculous. I do agree denying visitation should hold just as much consequence as nonpayment of CS, as should not taking visitation. [/quote]

**************************************************

Just wanted to say that I agree with you JL on jailtime being a possible consequence of nonpayment of CS so that's on the NCP's conscience, not the CP's who just tried to protect the child's financial interests. I also agree with the above quote..unfair withholding of visitation should come with jailtime AND a change in custody.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6756
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560790 - 07/29/09 11:46 PM

[quote]ONE PERSON CITE ONE CASE (COUNTY AND CASE NUMBER OR COUNTY/NAME) WHERE THE MOTHER WENT TO JAIL FOR VISITATION INTERFERENCE. THAT IS MY CHALLANGE TO YOU. [/quote]

*******************************************

I've never heard of a case either, but I think that should be a consequence for CP's who withhold visitation.

I think that punishment should be added. I don't think the punishment for NCP's should be taken away to make things equal. Things should be made more equal (I say more equal because I agree men are usually shafted by the entire custody/CS process) by adding harsher punishment for CP's


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560822 - 07/30/09 07:02 AM

Visitation interference IS contempt moron. Just like non-payment of CS is contempt. Viz & CS are set by the courts. Ignore that order...CONTEMPT.

I only have two hon. Support em both. Can't have no more in case you're really wondering rather than just being an idiot again. Took care of that little issue with my son. And no, not 6 weeks. Took 21 years for this "rat".

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Tweeby]
      #560823 - 07/30/09 07:02 AM

He knows that.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: BeckaLeigh]
      #560824 - 07/30/09 07:04 AM

But its easier to lump them together or imagine that all CPs are POSs so that they don't have to face facts that our exes aren't THEIR exes.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Tweeby]
      #560879 - 07/30/09 08:34 AM

[quote]I'm not sure what you are talking about. Failure to pay CS is contempt and so is refusing parenting time.

---> Failure to pay is NOT simply contempt (although it can fall under that too). Most states have actual laws in regards to failure to pay support. I will bet you 100% your state has state statutes in regards for failure to pay. Contempt is not a felony offense. Where as refusing parenting time is contempt, ONLY if a judge says so and I am asking to cite cases where a mother was tossed in jail for it. Contempt can be enforced by many means. Probation, jail or a fine

And read what I wrote, M5 didn't keep the children away, it was her husband's ex, the BM who witheld M5's husband's parenting time.

If you want something that the reason for jail is the withholding of parenting time than you won't find any because it would be under contempt of court.

----> I am asking for a case, whereas it could be contempt and the mother is jailed. I already said Illinois is the only state where witholding visitation it is a crimminal offense ie: NOT contempt. It's an actual law. And as I have stated, no one in 4 years has been prosecuted for it. In fact, show me a case where the mother was jailed for this type of contempt


It is the same as CS, not paying CS falls under contempt of court.
You are not following a court order. [/quote]

I never said it wasn't contempt. Not following a CO is contempt. Whereas men are punished in a much more harsh manner. Illinois let's you search cases on the appellate
cases which I did, using keywords such as "contempt"+"visitation" and a number of others and nothing came up. I also for the heck of it search google in the same manner and again nothing came up.

You have to be out of your mind to think women aren't treated in a more gentle manner in court than men.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: almostheaven]
      #560881 - 07/30/09 08:35 AM

Didn't even read your drivel. You are on ignore.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: finz]
      #560900 - 07/30/09 08:53 AM

This was apparently in the AZ newspapers:

http://www.holysmoke.org/fem/fem0073.htm

She was jailed for withholding visitation. 5 days in jail.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #560902 - 07/30/09 08:54 AM

Weird- kids getting jailed for not following visitation orders...

Byline: Lindsey Tanner Associated Press Associated Press: see news agency. Associated Press (AP)

Cooperative news agency, the oldest and largest in the U.S. and long the largest in the world.

She gets straight A's and swims like a champion, but Galatea Galatea, in Greek mythology
Galatea (g&#259;l&#601;t&#275;`&#601;), in Greek mythology.

1 Sea nymph, daughter of Nereus and Doris. Kapsimalis is a lot like other teen-agers when it comes to being told what to do.

Not even the threat of jail has persuaded the 15-year-old to visit the father she says deserted her family in a bitter divorce battle.

The threat came from the same court that in July ordered a 12-year-old girl jailed for refusing to visit her father. That girl was released a day later pending the outcome of an appeal that could determine how far Illinois judges may go in trying to resolve visitation disputes.

The two cases have caught the attention of family law experts nationwide.

"Ordering children to obey their parents . . . is, except in rare circumstances, no business of the court," said Benjamin Wolf of the American Civil Liberties Union American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), nonpartisan organization devoted to the preservation and extension of the basic rights set forth in the U.S. Constitution. of Illinois, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the appellate case and is watching the Kapsimalis dispute. He called the judges' decisions in both cases "an intrusion of the privacy of the family."


http://www.thefreelibrary.com/FAMILIES+FURIOUS+OVER+VISITATION+ORDERS%3B+DEFIANT+KIDS+FACE+JAIL-a083904445


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tweeby
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/05/04
Posts: 7100
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560907 - 07/30/09 09:01 AM

[quote]You have to be out of your mind to think women aren't treated in a more gentle manner in court than men. [/quote]

I have seen the bias personally BUT I have also seen Dads that have fought and have won. Heck it happens.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560939 - 07/30/09 09:17 AM

Sometimes they are, but not always. Question is, because some judges still have an ingrained bias to mother = nurturer attitude, you'd have to be out of your mind to think that ALL women should suffer for that...are you?

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Exactly..."fought"... [Re: Tweeby]
      #560946 - 07/30/09 09:21 AM

Most don't fight in the first place, which creates a lot of the problem. Sometimes the bias isn't in the court itself, but just the lawyer the guy goes to. The lawyers quite often tell them they won't win or it'll be too costly, and right off the bat they decide the fight is lost before they fight it. And you cannot say how the court would've ruled in a case they never presided over.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Then why are you responding? [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560947 - 07/30/09 09:21 AM

Besides which, when you hit reply you SEE the post. Idiot. LOL

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #560957 - 07/30/09 09:26 AM

From what I can see though, the CP's that do go to jail do so because they abduct or withhold visitation due to allegations of abuse.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #560958 - 07/30/09 09:26 AM

[quote]This was apparently in the AZ newspapers:

http://www.holysmoke.org/fem/fem0073.htm

She was jailed for withholding visitation. 5 days in jail. [/quote]

You have to be kindding. Holysmoke.org is an anti-hoax site in addition to being about anti-almost everything site. This "case" is 20 years old and was displayed a hoax.

You need to read where your sources are.

Go to www.holysmoke.org

And tell me you believe anything on the BLOG

It's basically a site run by a nutecase.

This only makes me believe it less. You really need to read where your "source" is before you post something like that. I'm going back to the court records here and see if I can find anything


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #560961 - 07/30/09 09:27 AM

[quote]From what I can see though, the CP's that do go to jail do so because they abduct or withhold visitation due to allegations of abuse. [/quote]

I said those cases had to be ruled out.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tweeby
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/05/04
Posts: 7100
Re: Exactly..."fought"... [Re: almostheaven]
      #560966 - 07/30/09 09:29 AM

[quote]Most don't fight in the first place, which creates a lot of the problem. Sometimes the bias isn't in the court itself, but just the lawyer the guy goes to. The lawyers quite often tell them they won't win or it'll be too costly, and right off the bat they decide the fight is lost before they fight it. And you cannot say how the court would've ruled in a case they never presided over. [/quote]

SOOOO True!!!! My husband went through that for years, he went to different lawyers and they told him there was nothing he could do. Most were like the store front or jack of all type lawyers, because that is who he could afford to talk to. Even when he had a consult with higher priced lawyers, still was told nothing could be done. Than when we did find a lawyer who said something may be done, we were very suspious.

I have helped quite a few Dad fight for their rights. They were about to give up but i showed them where to find the laws and they found a lawyer who would help them and majority of them? Well they got what they wanted or close to it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Exactly..."fought"... [Re: Tweeby]
      #560971 - 07/30/09 09:32 AM

Well, I certainly agree lawyers are the biggest blight on divorce there is. The promise the stars and deliver nothing. That's why I go pro-se. I have no financial interest because (at least here) CS is what it is. There is no arguing it and there is no negotiating it. It is a very simple formula.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Exactly..."fought"... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #560984 - 07/30/09 09:41 AM

This is the Illinois site

my keywords were contempt+visitation

These go back to 1996

Zero results were found. Perhaps you all can using different keywords

http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/archive.asp


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561001 - 07/30/09 09:54 AM

I know those cases can't be ruled out I was agreeing with you.

I found that on holysmokes and only threw it out there because I didn't want to actually look for the case...thought someone else might do that! LOL

I agree with you, I think there may be some out there- I just haven't found any yet!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561016 - 07/30/09 10:01 AM

This dude supposedly won some cash: http://www.marylandfathers.org/FUERhist1980s.html

1980/08/08 -- Father wins $25,000 in Visitation Lawsuit
[Virginia] Father Awarded $25,000: Ex-wife Prevented Visitation was a front page article in the Washington Post for 8 August 1980.

A Fairfax County jury, in what legal experts say is the first verdict of its kind, has awarded $25,000, to a divorced father who claims he suffered severe emotional problems because his former wife prevented him from visiting their children.

The verdict was won by Harold H. Memmer, a civilian Army worker at Fort Belvoir, who had become so depressed, his sister testified, that she feared "he would do away with himself."

An official of the American Bar Association's family law section yesterday described the award as "precedent-setting" and predicted it would serve as "a warning" to divorced parents who attempt to evade court orders granting visitation rights to their former spouses.

"I think this is very significant," agreed Paul M. Robinson, acting president of the Northern Virginia-Washington chapter of Fathers United for Equal Rights, a group of divorced fathers. "It's always been difficult to get courts to enforce visitation rights." But it was a bittersweet victory for Memmer, 48, who lives alone in a split-level house in the Woodlawn Terrace area of Fairfax County just north of the Army post. The three children involved in the case shunned him as they left the courtroom of Fairfax Circuit Judge Thomas J. Middleton. a "When I left the courtroom, my daughters wouldn't talk with me," Memmer said yesterday.

In his lawsuit against his former wife, Memmer charged that she repeatedly thwarted his efforts to visit their three daughters despite court orders allowing him visitation rights. Memmer alleged that his wife, who has remarried twice since their 1976 divorce and now lives in Evansville, Ind., had encouraged his daughters not to talk to him, hung up when he called on the telephone and "vilified" him in the children's presence. [...]

The jury [...] decided Wednesday that the former Mrs. Memmer, whose present married name is Day, [...] "intentionally inflicted severe emotional stress upon the children's father."


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
I guess IL isn't the only state... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561028 - 07/30/09 10:13 AM

http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/membersonly/127parentingtime.pdf
Pg 4

Enforcement Through
Contempt Proceedings

Any person with parenting time or visitation rights or subject to a parenting time or visitation order may bring an action for contempt for failure to comply with, or for interference with, the order. A court may impose a fine, a term of imprisonment, or both on a person found guilty of contempt. The maximum fine and *****term of imprisonment***** is $250 and 30 days for a first offense, $500 and 60 days for a second offense, and $1,000 and 90 days for a third or subsequent offense. The court must require the convicted person to pay all court costs and the reasonable attorney’s fees of the other party. The court may award compensatory parenting time or visitation to the person whose rights were affected.16

Also, even Glenn Sacks doesn't delude himself into thinking mothers are "never" prosecuted...
http://www.ilovemychildrentoo.org/myths.htm

#14: “Prosecutions of fathers who violate child support mandates are common, whereas prosecutions of mothers who violate visitation orders are *****rare*****.”

Neil Chethik, “Law Backs the Right to Parental Visits,” Detroit Free Press, May 28, 1995, p.2J.

Cathy Young, Ceasefire!: Why Women and Men Must Join Forces to Achieve True Equality, The Free Press, 1999, page 209.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Hmmm, IN too... [Re: almostheaven]
      #561029 - 07/30/09 10:15 AM

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/rules/parenting/index.html

6. Enforcement of Parenting Time

A. Contempt Sanctions. Court orders regarding parenting time must be followed by both parents. Unjustified violations of any of the provisions contained in the order may subject the offender to contempt sanctions. These sanctions may include fine, *****imprisonment*****, and/or community service.

B. Injunctive Relief. Under Indiana law, a noncustodial parent who regularly pays support and is barred from parenting time by the custodial parent may file an application for an injunction to enforce parenting time under Ind. Code § 31-17-4-4.

C. Criminal Penalties. Interference with custody or visitation rights may be a crime. Ind. Code § 35-42-3-4.

D. Attorney Fees. In any court action to enforce an order granting or denying parenting time, a court may award reasonable attorney fees and expenses of litigation. A court may consider whether the parent seeking attorney fees substantially prevailed and whether the parent violating the order did so knowingly or intentionally. A court can also award attorney fees and expenses against a parent who pursues a frivolous or vexatious court action.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
And FL... [Re: almostheaven]
      #561035 - 07/30/09 10:17 AM

Though they don't mention jail, they leave it open, but they DO have laws governing visitation interference.

http://www.jshawnhunter.com/Interference.htm

Subsection 61.13 Custody and support of children; visitation rights; power of court in making orders.

(c) When a custodial parents refuses to honor a noncustodial parent’s or grandparent’s visitation rights without proper cause, the court shall, after calculating the amount of visitation improperly denied, award the noncustodial parent or grandparent a sufficient amount of extra visitation to compensate the noncustodial or grandparent, which visitation shall be ordered as expeditiously as possible in a manner consistent with the best interests of the child and scheduled in a manner that is convenient for the person deprived of visitation. In ordering any makeup visitation, the court shall schedule such visitation in a manner that is consistent with the best interests of the child or children and that is convenient for the noncustodial parent or grandparent. In addition, the court:

1. May order the custodial parent to pay reasonable court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the noncustodial parent or grandparents to enforce their visitation rights or make up improperly denied visitation;

2. May order the custodial parent to attend the parenting course approved by the judicial circuit;

3. May order the custodial parent to do community service if the order will not interfere with the welfare of the child;

4. May order the custodial parent to have the financial burden of promoting frequent and continuing contact when the custodial parent and child reside further than 60 miles from the noncustodial parent;

5. May award custody, rotating custody, or primary residence to the noncustodial parent, upon the request of the noncustodial parent, if the award is in the best interests of the child; or

6. May impose any other reasonable sanction as a result of noncompliance.

(d) A person who violates this subsection may be punished by contempt of court or other remedies as the court deems appropriate.

Fl. Stat. Subsection 61.34(4) (a) (2001).

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561061 - 07/30/09 10:35 AM

[quote]I know those cases can't be ruled out I was agreeing with you.

I found that on holysmokes and only threw it out there because I didn't want to actually look for the case...thought someone else might do that! LOL

I agree with you, I think there may be some out there- I just haven't found any yet! [/quote]

The site is pretty funny but you have the question the owners mental state. It's basically an anti-everything site with a bit of smoking gun thrown in.

What you put out was just a "letter" from a Usenet user if you remember that (well, it's still around). It's dobutful any newpapers on-line archives would go back that far.

I'd love to see an example, as I know when I do take action for increased visitation, she will panic and revert to her old tricks.

As I have said, Illinois is the only state with a law against visitation interference and it is NOT a contempt of court offense

(a) As used in this Section, the terms "child", "detain", and "lawful custodian" shall have the meanings ascribed to them in Section 10-5 of this Code.

(b) Every person who, in violation of the visitation provisions of a court order relating to child custody, detains or conceals a child with the intent to deprive another person of his or her rights to visitation shall be guilty of unlawful visitation interference.

(c) A person committing unlawful visitation interference is guilty of a petty offense. However, any person violating this Section after 2 prior convictions of unlawful visitation interference is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

(d) Any law enforcement officer who has probable cause to believe that a person has committed or is committing an act in violation of this Section shall issue to that person a notice to appear.

(e) The notice shall:

(1) be in writing;

(2) state the name of the person and his address, if

known;

(3) set forth the nature of the offense;

(4) be signed by the officer issuing the notice; and

(5) request the person to appear before a court at a

certain time and place.

(f) Upon failure of the person to appear, a summons or warrant of arrest may be issued.

(g) It is an affirmative defense that:

(1) a person or lawful custodian committed the act

to protect the child from imminent physical harm, provided that the defendant's belief that there was physical harm imminent was reasonable and that the defendant's conduct in withholding visitation rights was a reasonable response to the harm believed imminent;

(2) the act was committed with the mutual consent of

all parties having a right to custody and visitation of the child; or

(3) the act was otherwise authorized by law.

(h) A person convicted of unlawful visitation interference shall not be subject to a civil contempt citation for the same conduct for violating visitation provisions of a court order issued under the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act


There has yet to be a single conviction. A Class A is also known as a "petty" offense. Other petty offenses are spitting and jaywalking, as I said, so that tells you how seious it is taken. And you have to be found guilty 3 times before they will do anything.

The simple fact of the matter is they aren't throwing mothers in jail for visitation interference. You know, even with a CO in hand, the cops will say it's a civil matter and not do a thing.

The entire point of this thread has become when the laws are equalized, then men should be tossed in the clink for non-payment, otherwise, removing their license is punishment enough. When Mom goes to jail for visitation or misuse of CS, then things will be equal. A LOT of men don't pay CS because they don't love their kids. They don't pay because they don't want to give the mother the money, simply for it to be used for her benefit. When a mother (I say mother because 85% of NCP's are mothers and most men NCP's receive little if any support) has to show the court, upon demand, how the money was spent, then things are equal. The NCP has to show their income from all sources. The CP should also be liable to show how the money was spent. Ok, they have to save receipts and keep a spreadsheet. WHA WHA WHA. It's free money. CS is the only income that is not taxed that also dosen't require how it's spent. In MY case, it was purely obvious that she was using it on herself and her husband (she even paid her husbands CS out of my kids CS).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561083 - 07/30/09 10:57 AM

Yeah it sucks. I would like to hear more from M5 on the case where that BM went to jail... I don't remember specifics.

It sucks the CS laws compared to the laws for withholding visitation, as some states don't have any at all :(


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561106 - 07/30/09 11:21 AM

[quote]Yeah it sucks. I would like to hear more from M5 on the case where that BM went to jail... I don't remember specifics.

It sucks the CS laws compared to the laws for withholding visitation, as some states don't have any at all :( [/quote]

I remember M5 saying this but there was no citation. It certainly would be "news" if it happened, since it's so rare.

Every state has CS laws. My state is the only one with laws regarding specifically to visitation interference and it has the "bite" of a 90 year old man (or any West Virginian). It has no teeth. Someone said "The judge threatens". Well, EVERYTHING a judge does when it comes to a man is a threat because 99% of the time, it's the woman with the complaint of one kind or another.

I am also firmly convinced the lack of CS payment is mostly due to the man thinking the woman is going to use it on herself, as was the case in my case. One of my "ex's" FAVORITE sayings when we were together, especially early on, was "We are on a spending freeze" as she handled the money, meaning nothing frivolus could be purchased.

I've never talked about this before but the amount of money I was making (net) 5 years prior to the divorce (and in the same house) was almost exactly the same I was paying her in support. I spent the first 5 years of our marriage building my career (which she was NO help..in fact, more of a hinderance). I took a huge job 3 years before the divorce that pushed my earnings WAY up. She was getting more in various support in 1995 than I even MADE in 1990. All3 kids in 1990 (same house) were well fed, well clothed, IN DAY CARE at the time (even though she didn't work) etc. Fast forward 5 years, we divorce, she gets more in support than I had made 5 years older and my kids would come out dressed in rags saying "Mom says we are on a spending freeze and you need to buy us some new clothes). Otherwise, they would spend the week in the same ratty clothing. YET, in the garage was either a Corvette, then a Caddilac and in the driveway was a brand new TOTALLY tricked up monster truck. She was using the money to buy her husband this stuff (buying his "love" I guess) and my kids suffered for it. Prior to moving into my 3500sq home, he was living in his parents basement. He didn't work. Neither did she. How do you think I felt picking them up for visitation as seeing THAT? It took every once of strength not to rip their Mom, and I assure you I didn't.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Danicori
newbie


Reged: 07/23/08
Posts: 35
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561151 - 07/30/09 12:13 PM

Man, that is alot to read.. I was the one to post the original post, I come back and check in a few days and OMG there was alot of responces.....

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561153 - 07/30/09 12:21 PM

I've never talked about this before but the amount of money I was making (net) 5 years prior to the divorce (and in the same house) was almost exactly the same I was paying her in support. I spent the first 5 years of our marriage building my career (which she was NO help..in fact, more of a hinderance). I took a huge job 3 years before the divorce that pushed my earnings WAY up. She was getting more in various support in 1995 than I even MADE in 1990. All3 kids in 1990 (same house) were well fed, well clothed, IN DAY CARE at the time (even though she didn't work) etc. Fast forward 5 years, we divorce, she gets more in support than I had made 5 years older and my kids would come out dressed in rags saying "Mom says we are on a spending freeze and you need to buy us some new clothes). Otherwise, they would spend the week in the same ratty clothing. YET, in the garage was either a Corvette, then a Caddilac and in the driveway was a brand new TOTALLY tricked up monster truck. She was using the money to buy her husband this stuff (buying his "love" I guess) and my kids suffered for it. Prior to moving into my 3500sq home, he was living in his parents basement. He didn't work. Neither did she. How do you think I felt picking them up for visitation as seeing THAT? It took every once of strength not to rip their Mom, and I assure you I didn't.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am assuming your state doesn't have a deviation of CS after a certain amount of income. I know NYS can deviate on anything after $80k...

I am just wondering why a judge would THINK that a CP would need this much money in CS? Knowing that the CS would probably just not benefit just the children.

Sad, really. That was horrible to read.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561159 - 07/30/09 12:53 PM

[quote]I've never talked about this before but the amount of money I was making (net) 5 years prior to the divorce (and in the same house) was almost exactly the same I was paying her in support. I spent the first 5 years of our marriage building my career (which she was NO help..in fact, more of a hinderance). I took a huge job 3 years before the divorce that pushed my earnings WAY up. She was getting more in various support in 1995 than I even MADE in 1990. All3 kids in 1990 (same house) were well fed, well clothed, IN DAY CARE at the time (even though she didn't work) etc. Fast forward 5 years, we divorce, she gets more in support than I had made 5 years older and my kids would come out dressed in rags saying "Mom says we are on a spending freeze and you need to buy us some new clothes). Otherwise, they would spend the week in the same ratty clothing. YET, in the garage was either a Corvette, then a Caddilac and in the driveway was a brand new TOTALLY tricked up monster truck. She was using the money to buy her husband this stuff (buying his "love" I guess) and my kids suffered for it. Prior to moving into my 3500sq home, he was living in his parents basement. He didn't work. Neither did she. How do you think I felt picking them up for visitation as seeing THAT? It took every once of strength not to rip their Mom, and I assure you I didn't.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am assuming your state doesn't have a deviation of CS after a certain amount of income. I know NYS can deviate on anything after $80k...

I am just wondering why a judge would THINK that a CP would need this much money in CS? Knowing that the CS would probably just not benefit just the children.

Sad, really. That was horrible to read. [/quote]

The whole Illinois CS system is screwed up

1. CP's income plays NO role in the amount of CS
2. CP BY LAW is NOT required to pay a single cent to the care and upbringing of the child. They are not required to do anything BY statute.
3. Visitation time plays NO role. You can have 49/51 custody and you pay the same as someone who see's the kid once a month.
4. Their is no cap. If you make $1M you pay the same as a percent as someone who makes $10K
5. Their is no law the CP must contribute to health insurance, college, healthcare in general, nor keep a roof over the childs head or feed them

In general, 100% of the cost of the care and upbringing of the child is the NCP's responsibility. It does NOT matter if the amount is exessive. As an example, my ex could have moved out of the house she was in (which was paid for) bought a smaller one and keep the difference.

In 100% of the cases I saw in court and of the 20 or so friends and family, in each case, the man was forced from the home. Even if he had just lost his job and was penniless (2 of whom I know)

It is rare they "impute" an income. The NCP CLEARLY has to demonstrate he is actively looking for a job if he has none (via a job diary).

I was also ordered to pay her around $1000 a month in "rehabilitative maintenence" in which, as the CO CLEARLY stipulates "to be used for educational purposes". She also got married without telling anyone, even her kids, and continued to collect support. She told me, the courts and the kids "he lived there",(cohabitation is not ground for support termination). When at the end of support, she told me she got married. I pulled the cert from the clerks office that showed it was two years earlier. She did NOT go to school, as stipulated. When I motioned for the money to be returned (at least 1/2), the motion was denied.

When I motioned for her to show the money was spent on the kids, the motioned was denied.

The NCP is required to pay 100% of the educational cost. When she motioned that "hot lunches (the kids lived 4 houses from the school), ink cartridges (which the kids told me were for her printer. They didn
t have one, and CLOTHES were "educational expenses" the motion was APPROVED.

All the while, she told them I refused to pay CS (when it was always garnished).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561179 - 07/30/09 01:31 PM

Yeah this definitely makes me sick to my stomach. The laws are not focused on what is in the best interest of the children. They certainly aren't fair by any means.

She sounds like a real piece of work. To this day I don't know how you can even look at her.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561198 - 07/30/09 01:48 PM

[quote]Yeah this definitely makes me sick to my stomach. The laws are not focused on what is in the best interest of the children. They certainly aren't fair by any means.

She sounds like a real piece of work. To this day I don't know how you can even look at her. [/quote]

Well, GoodMom said I was a child abuser when I let my oldest (who is 23) read the court orders but this is the law of the land here. AT LEAST they have an actual law regarding visitation interference that isin't tied to contempt but every single NCP who lead normal lives goes through this here in Illinois. If you are a CP, this is the place to be. We have our fair share of idiot NCP's, believe me but some just can't live with the laws. I can now look at her and have a normal discussion because I did my job and took care of business and confined almost all interaction with her to the court room. She probably brought me to court 10 times or so, over inane things.

I'll give you one more example. My Mom died in January 2004 and I got sick in April the same year. I owned a part of a house (we all split her home). At the time, I was diagnosed with Pancreatic cancer, which you know what THAT means. What did she do? She SUED me trying to get a share of the house. I'm talking to funeral directors and she sues me trying to get a share of my share.

It takes a LOT for me to hate someone, and I could never hate a mother of any of my kids. I might not care about them but I can't hate them. Like I said in another post my kids are everything to me and come before anyone or anything. So I can't hate them. No matter how the treated me.

Some people on this board think I am a total A-hole and that's fine, but stuff rolls off my back pretty easy. I don't hate ex#2 either and I've only been divorced from her for a short realitvely short time and she has been worse than Ex#1 because she know how to "get" me, and that is using my children as weapons against me.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561206 - 07/30/09 02:04 PM

I don't think you are an A-hole at all. Your case is an extreme as in you are a high wage earner, you have had to pay CS and alimony in two different cases. You also did a lot (or all?) of your court hearings pro se. You are not the norm for this site.

I find it a bit refreshing, I would rather see the whole picture than bits and pieces of it. You are a NCP living in IL.

Do you think CS laws should be universal?

As far as showing your son the court papers at 23 years old, I see nothing wrong with that. He must've had questions. His mother was telling him for years things that weren't true- things that could change his opinion of you, if he let it.

SD still talks about this 'Dear John' letter that her Dad left when he abandoned her and her Mom. SD has no idea that BM was having an affair and it was her Dad that found a letter from this guy.

BM also said she was getting no CS, when she did every time, on time, even earlier if she needed it.

I'm glad that you don't hate your X, but considering what she did- I find her actions inconceivable, and to be honest very evil.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Sherron
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 11/25/06
Posts: 20634
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561208 - 07/30/09 02:09 PM

"Some people on this board think I am a total A-hole "

No, not a TOTAL one. I do get irritated when you go off on your tangent about how it's the cp's fault if/when an ncp gets jailed for non-payment. I'm sure I rub a few people the wrong way as well. Life goes on.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Sherron]
      #561213 - 07/30/09 02:16 PM

Some people on this board think I'm a total b*tch - they aren't the say all end all, who cares :). You know who you are Yes Dad, that's really all that matters.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Sherron]
      #561250 - 07/30/09 02:52 PM

I do get irritated when you go off on your tangent about how it's the cp's fault if/when an ncp gets jailed for non-payment. I'm sure I rub a few people the wrong way as well. Life goes on.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I do disagree with that one as well. NCP knows what can happen if decide not to pay CS- NCP's choice. I just wish that the same standards applied to CP's who do NOT financially contribute to their child's wellbeing AND/OR who withhold visitation.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #561252 - 07/30/09 02:53 PM

Some people on this board think I'm a total b*tch

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I really do not know how anyone can think THAT. I mean, I understand someone not agreeing you because of what you do or don't...but thinking you are a B? Nah...that to me is literally crazy! Unless we are calling you a fine a$$ sweet b!tch!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JennyLynn
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/14/05
Posts: 31656
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561254 - 07/30/09 02:54 PM

LOL - awwwwwe *sniffle*

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561270 - 07/30/09 03:31 PM

[quote]I don't think you are an A-hole at all. Your case is an extreme as in you are a high wage earner, you have had to pay CS and alimony in two different cases. You also did a lot (or all?) of your court hearings pro se. You are not the norm for this site.

I find it a bit refreshing, I would rather see the whole picture than bits and pieces of it. You are a NCP living in IL.

Do you think CS laws should be universal?

---> Abso-f-ing-lutely. I have said it many many times that I think CS/custodyshould be a federal issue rather than one reserved for the states. Let's the states do the divorces but what is good for Ohio is good for Illinois is good for Oregon in terms of the kids. Make non-payment a Federal crime along with visitation interference , etc. I think (as I have said) it should be 50/50 with no support exchanged except if a job prevents it. And then go by Federal guidelines. Don't give me the old cost of living BS (not directed towards you) but the percentages are the same of ones income, regardless of where you live. I think if a judged has ordered visitation, then that's what it is. None of this contempt crap that varies from judge to judge. It is what it is. ALL CS should be garnished from the NCP's paycheck (unless selfemployed obviously. Then it's garnished from the company directly) just as taxes are. But they won't do that because who makes money off of divorces? Lawyers. And what constitutes 90% of all state legislatures? Lawyers. Same on a federal level. And what constitutes a majority of court cases in this country? Divorce. They won't change it because some will eventually leave public service and it takes a HUGE amount of potential earnings from them. "Something to fall back on" so to speak. Even with Cook County (basically Chicago and the collar suburbs) most of the court cases constitute divorces. Far more than any crimminal activity. And you take a county like mine, divorces are 3X the amount of any crimminal or other civil cases. The number #2 court action is OP's. In my county, we have one huge courthouse. I mean, it's BIG. One whole floor is devoted to divorce. The #1 "crime" here is DUI. In Cook, there are 7 courthouses, all smaller..but divorce is still the number #1 court action. The lawyers in the state legislature, if voted out, need jobs and the #1 job is divorces/OP's/DUI defenses. Even places like NYC or Houston or LA..along with Chicago, all crime laden places yet divorce is still the main reason for courtrooms. It's a huge money making MACHINE. One CP has been PM'ing me about her case and she has spent over $100K on her custody issue. Murder defense wouldn't cost that much. And lawyers exasperate the problem but egging on the litigants. My sister is a lawyer. A corporate lawyer and she doesn't make all that much. My brother works at a HUGE Top 5 law [censored] in finance and unless you are a partner, you don't make all that much. They just layed off 80 lawyers. Divorce is where the money is. So these various idiots in state legislature will NEVER give up what would probably end up being their biggest money maker if they are ever voted out. I hope I was making sense.


As far as showing your son the court papers at 23 years old, I see nothing wrong with that. He must've had questions. His mother was telling him for years things that weren't true- things that could change his opinion of you, if he let it.

---> It was my daughter but it came about because we were having a "spat" and she was blurting out things her mother had been telling her all these years and I had had enough. As my transplant didn't go so well, I have NO idea how long I am going to be around and I wanted her to KNOW the truth and not spend the rest of her life thinking her father was a dickhead. I didn't do it out of "revenge", I did it because it was the truth and there were obvious resentments. People tend to block out the bad in their parents (usually) but she was blurting out the most insane things. I guess things came to a head. I asked my brother what to do and he said "She's old enough to realize what the truth was" and while you would like to think that, she didn't. She was deflecting or whatever. And ya, she was pissed at her Mom but she didn't turn on her or anything and I didn't expect her to.


SD still talks about this 'Dear John' letter that her Dad left when he abandoned her and her Mom. SD has no idea that BM was having an affair and it was her Dad that found a letter from this guy.

BM also said she was getting no CS, when she did every time, on time, even earlier if she needed it.

I'm glad that you don't hate your X, but considering what she did- I find her actions inconceivable, and to be honest very evil. [/quote]

----> So do my family and friends. So did ex#2 (until we divorced, then it was OK..LOL) but yes, she was pretty evil financially. Like I said though, she never witheld the kids from me. #2 is actually more evil. Money comes and goes. Kids are kids forever and to be quite honest, I have things to worry about FAR greater than her. Or the other one.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561282 - 07/30/09 03:52 PM

I am with you on that whole posting...

I also agree that CS laws should be universal...

Understanding that you have things far greater to worry about than your X's, sometimes I have difficulties getting past the 'past' (that may be a woman thing). However, I would never let my ill feelings work against what is in the best interest of my children. I am able to see, quite clearly, the difference between right and wrong. Even more that, the difference between what are MY issues are and those that can affect my children.

That's why I posted what I did on the SF board:

"Put simply: Imagine that the person who hates you most controls the person you love most?"

That just makes me utterly ill, not even in the sense that the BM in that case would do that, but that our laws as a whole do not PREVENT it from happening. Why not? I think if they did there wouldn't be so many power struggles (where children of divorce are affected) and we would see more parents co-parenting. At least I'd hope---


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561307 - 07/30/09 04:12 PM

[quote]I am with you on that whole posting...

I also agree that CS laws should be universal...

Understanding that you have things far greater to worry about than your X's, sometimes I have difficulties getting past the 'past' (that may be a woman thing). However, I would never let my ill feelings work against what is in the best interest of my children. I am able to see, quite clearly, the difference between right and wrong. Even more that, the difference between what are MY issues are and those that can affect my children.

That's why I posted what I did on the SF board:


"Put simply: Imagine that the person who hates you most controls the person you love most?"

--> That actually struck me hard and I noted it and it's true. I can honestly say there are only three people I hate in this life. Two former business associates and my surgeon. As far as the rest, I either like, am neutral on or dislike but not hate. If you guys knew what I went through with the surgery, you would understand. One of my brothers wives is a total a-hole. Yet, I don't care. If he wants the abuse, it's his life. I have helped a LOT of people in their careers. I have helped a lot of family and friends. I am doing a favor for my brother tonight I prefer not to. The rely on me a lot and I get no thanks and help me very little. But this is important.

That just makes me utterly ill, not even in the sense that the BM in that case would do that, but that our laws as a whole do not PREVENT it from happening. Why not? I think if they did there wouldn't be so many power struggles (where children of divorce are affected) and we would see more parents co-parenting. At least I'd hope--- [/quote]


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561323 - 07/30/09 04:28 PM

I am doing a favor for my brother tonight I prefer not to. The rely on me a lot and I get no thanks and help me very little. But this is important.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Boy that sorta mirrors my life and my siblings.

Your story on your surgeon and your surgery- I can imagine there must be something crazy behind that. Considering you don't hate your X's, the surgeon must have royally f'ed up. I knew a guy who was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. Great guy, older than I am...I think I was 30 at the time and he was probably 40. Lived in a small town, small hospital. He was there for weeks and was getting worse by the minute. A few of us finally pulled his wife aside and told her that she needed to take him out of that hospital and to the city. The small local hospital was against it, they told her he would probably die if she did. Once she did, he got better- slowly yet it happened. I really didn't think he was going to make it. He lost so much weight, strength and will at one point. It was heartbreaking.

He is doing very well now.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561337 - 07/30/09 05:07 PM

Well, condering I was the first in the world to undergo this procedure in the history of the world, and then 3 months ago where the surgeon is out and out lying on his report to cover his ass pisses me beyond belief, in addition to being physically WORSE than pre-transplant. I was used as a lab rat, he and the robot screwed up and he's not only not owning up to it, he is lying outright about it. He needed someone with the balls to do it, and I had them.

You can pretty much guess what my next steps are.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cassie23
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/07/05
Posts: 14759
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Yes_Dad]
      #561338 - 07/30/09 05:08 PM

Wow. What a pathetic man. I don't think there are words for that.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yes_Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 7406
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561344 - 07/30/09 05:33 PM

Well, the problem is he gets grants from the Fed for this, and had to basically erase me from the results or funding woukd slow

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Sherron]
      #561455 - 07/31/09 06:55 AM

>>>>>No, not a TOTAL one.

ROFLMFAO!!!

>>>>>I'm sure I rub a few people the wrong way as well. Life goes on.

I stopped worrying about how I rub people. Public board is for speaking your mind. ;)

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561457 - 07/31/09 06:58 AM

I wish 20 to life meant 20 to life too, and not 5 with good behavior. Doesn't mean I think we should just set all the criminals free because some of them don't get what they deserve.

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Re: Actually, it is... [Re: JennyLynn]
      #561458 - 07/31/09 06:59 AM

>>>>>You know who you are Yes Dad

LOL

I have this song running through my head....

"Why is everybody always picking on me...."

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Sure there is... [Re: Cassie23]
      #561464 - 07/31/09 07:04 AM

They're called "medical malpractice lawsuit".

--------------------
Char Fox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | >> (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 8 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  dsAdmin 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is disabled

Rating:
Topic views: 30606

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us Divorce Source Home

*
UBB.threads™ 6.5.1.1


Resources & Tools
Start Your Divorce Online Start Your Divorce
Several Options to Get Started Today.
Divorce Tools Online Divorce Tools
Keeping it Simple to Get the Job Done.
Divorce Downloads Download Center
Instantly Download Books, Guides & Forms.
Divorce and Custody Books Discount Books
Over 100 of the Best Divorce & Custody Books.
Negotiate Online Negotiate Online
Settle your Divorce and Save.
Custody and Support Tracking Custody Scheduling
Make Sure You Document Everything.

Easily Connect With a Lawyer or Mediator
Have Divorce Professionals from Your Area Contact You!
Enter Your Zip Code: