Start Your Divorce Today - Premium Divorce Online

Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#874 - 07/16/04 03:23 PM Interlectual CP Reading with a lot of good facts.
rayc1 Offline
recently joined

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 9
http://adrr.com/law1/csp11.htm#1

Here is a link to a very informative page. I find that it offered a lot of background information on why so many people have so many problems from every side of the Child Support Systems of every state.

It may make the term deadbeat dad pale quite a bit in meaning.

Please understand that the system has about a 20 year + history in it's current state, so the document is somewhat lengthy. It has several sections, and each can almost stand alone, but I went back and read it from the first line to the last and got a better understanding of where the systems are now, and why I have trouble paying rent and car payments on the same month in a shared custody arangement, and why i find myself counting pennies and dimes to feed my children while my ex gets to go on long vacation trips alone several times a year.

We all need to know this information and force it into the political front pages if this system is to get fixed. My children deserve to be the center and beneficiaries of this program.

Lets do a joint garnished account and let the custodial parent use a debit card to pay for expenses. I shared custody families, the father should be able to submit receipts for a limited amount of his cost. The kids need to see reality of divorce, and two successful parents. Not one custodial parent who gets it all and the second parent who lives close to poverty.
Divorce should lower the living standards of both parents and the children because it is the reality of the thing. It should not be an easy out of a lifelong commitment that merely removes the physical father from a home and tries to allow the mother to live at the standard of living as if she had remained in the bond, including giving her his future increased income.
If she can not handle the raising of their children without putting the cast out dad into poverty, then he should be raising the children directly in many cases. Remember that finances break up a lot of families. Kicking the bread winner out of the faamily, but trying to keek his money in is divorce bait for wives.

Top
#875 - 07/16/04 05:41 PM Re: Interlectual CP Reading with a lot of good facts. [Re: rayc1]
Gecko Offline
Carpal \'Tunnel

Registered: 06/02/04
Posts: 20602
Loc: Third rock from the sun
I read the article and honestly...it is nothing new. I am not trying to dissuade you, but Gay and Palumbo have been writing for many years now and anything prior to 2000 is pretty much "old news" when you consider that every state is required, by federal law, to update their guidelines every four years. Not that updating the guidelines to use "net" income and have a "self-reserved test” really means anthing when you consider that the State has only to increase the amounts to offset the “net income” and the “self-reserve” is below federal poverty standards.

I have spent a considerable amount of time trying to come up with an “equitable” solution to the child support issue and I have been stymied because of societal views AND a lack of equal protection under the 14th Amendment.

You say, “My children deserve to be the center and beneficiaries of this program” and then decry the fact that it’s “one custodial parent who gets it all and the second parent who lives close to poverty.” Do you understand that it is because of the first, that the second is happening?
_________________________
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!

Top
#876 - 07/17/04 02:20 AM Re: Interlectual CP Reading with a lot of good facts. [Re: Gecko]
almostheaven Offline
Carpal \'Tunnel

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
Greg and Rog have been indeed writing for many many many many...many...years. Oh, and they've been at it for a long time too. :grin:
_________________________
Char Fox

Top
#877 - 07/19/04 08:44 PM Re: Interlectual CP Reading with a lot of good facts. [Re: almostheaven]
rayc1 Offline
recently joined

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 9
I agree that this is probably old news to people in this system and well read. I want to make it all common knowledge for everybody, absolutely everybody. I want to make it easier for everyone to understand what and why we have come to where we are, and maybe start making it an issue when we elect judges in my state.
Maybe I can get fathers to see the system and want to fix it because the divorce rate is 50%, and it needs to be fixed before they get to see it from the inside.

Please comment on the idea that is probably not new, but to have bothe parents pay into the custodial account at child support. The cpcan get a debit, and the ncp can get the ability to submit receipts for the expenses that are approved by the account custodian that sends the cp checks.

Seems like everyone would be satisfied. There would also be a lot of great data to use on which would be indexed state by state. We would know how much it really cost to raise a child.

In any case, with the divorce rate hovering at 50% for decades, and the number of un-wed fathers, there have got to be plenty of great minds to get this organized and on a ballot referendum somewhere.

Please comment. I would love to hash this out here and come up with a smooth debit card idea or some better idea to rally the ncp's behind. I am even hearing a lot of complaint from the ladies that I meet who have married NCP's.

There had got to be wa way to get this addressed in an election period, ot two.

rayc1

Top
#878 - 07/19/04 09:01 PM Re: Interlectual CP Reading with a lot of good facts. [Re: Gecko]
rayc1 Offline
recently joined

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 9
I agree that the excuse used to keep ncp in poverty is that it goes to the children, and that the charts can be adjusted by the states on a whim or a federal mandate whenever they please and without any data to support the changes.
I just wonder when the false premise that a child only needs one parent, and the ncp should be prevented from trying to improve his or her situation in life just because a mariage did not last in the past.
Two can not live a cheaply as one. We all have always known it. There are very few good reasons that there should not be equally shared custody from the moment one parent walks out the door, not years late, after a college fund busting fight.
We can get a robot to jupiter. Why can't we figure out how to doccument the support payment of 2 parents, and the expenditures for the children of the all money paid.
I agree that there is no 14th amendment protection granted, but there was no sufferage not many elections ago either. NCP's have about the same numbers as CP's, and the numbers are pretty high overall. There should be 14th amandment protection, just as women should have always been allowed to vote, and slavery should never have been tolerated, and the death penalty should be challenged if it is not applied equally.

Top
#879 - 07/20/04 02:43 AM Ok, first off... [Re: rayc1]
almostheaven Offline
Carpal \'Tunnel

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
I've asked these same questions myself many many times when this idea has been suggested. However, this time, I was requested to ask on behalf of someone who can't seem to get into the boards. She keeps getting an error message that DS hasn't been able to fix yet, so I'm posting for her.

Her questions:


"I've seen this suggested on other sites before. I am curious about a few things. How would this account be handled in the cases of NCP's that regularly fail to pay even minimal amounts of support? Would the CP still be required to pay into this account even though they are carrying the financial obligation of the NCP? Would the NCP still be able to submit receipts to the account for reimbursement without having paid into the account? Would there be any financial accountability on the part of the CP in these situations? How long would a CP have to wait for their own money to be available to them after having to pay into the account? "

And add one of my old additional questions to that mix:

Could the CP withdraw cash from this account in order to pay for the minute expenses that cannot be paid for using a card (i.e.: team fees, ice creams, etc.)?

Edited to say: If DS isn't going to allow the UBB Code, why do they leave the codes on the posting page? :-(


Edited by almostheaven (07/20/04 02:48 AM)
_________________________
Char Fox

Top
#880 - 07/20/04 02:51 AM Re: Ok, first off... [Re: almostheaven]
almostheaven Offline
Carpal \'Tunnel

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
This actually belongs under your post below.
_________________________
Char Fox

Top
#881 - 07/21/04 08:45 PM Re: Ok, first off... [Re: almostheaven]
rayc1 Offline
recently joined

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 9
Both parents pay into the same acount.
Only the custodial has easy access to the money for the prescribed amounts of payments to the child. The non custodial parent who does not pay would still have to submit receipts for consideration to get paid on expenses. Payments would be denied to NC parents who have not paid up to date. The Custodial parent would never be blocked from getting the child's money to support the child, even if the custodial parent failed to pay. The benefit to the child would be that there is a record of the parent that did not follow the payment for care of the child. The term deadbeat dad can be joined by other non-sexist terms like deadbeat parent, and most children would really get the benefits in a provable way.

What would happen if both parents have an interest in getting the tables fixed to what it actually cost to raise a child? Not just the one who is broke and the other who always wants increases to lifestyle.

Also, either parent not paying would have a legal issue to deal with, as is the case now for the non custodial parent.

The child would get whatever is in the account. If neither parent pays into the account, then we have to remember that there is a judge in all of these cases, and he or she has the power to decide on contempt of court cases.

The U.S. Constitution 14th amendment of equal treatment would be almost satisfied, but for the decisions of the past, and the resistance of family courts to stop activly punishing the male gender.

Combined middle incomes that produce support numbers of 3K-4K a month that get divided by the two parents by proportion of gross wages usually lead to the majority of that being paid by the father, sometimes 3000 of the total or more from his net income. This can leave the father living just above poverty. You might see the 4k number get reduced if the custodial had to pay her share of 1K-2K into the same account. Even though the money is sill going back to her, she migh be willing to admit that it does not take 4K a month to raise a child, and that her $65K job can afford a few things that she should not have to pay into an acocunt to provide.

All of a sudden we begin to realize that in a shared custody arangement, the child should have two equally nice places to stay, and the living standard of the child should not be placed above the fact that we all must live in reality, and have to adjust down when parents double our expenses by splitting the household into two locations, whatever the grown-up's reason for the split.

I hope that this helps. Keep the conversation going. I have Internet at home for now. In a few months all of my reserve money will be gone, and since what's left of the payroll won't pay for an apartment and a car at the same time, I will have to figure who I'm going to get my messages posted through. I guess the system dosen't account for the higher tax brackets of upper middle income. At the bottom of the highest tax bracket, after tax child support at the federal guidelines can move you into your car. Of course the 1500 a month after taxes garnished to my ex, and the over 65K she makes a year gives her a take home equivilant to a person making well over 100K a year gross.
My kids need to be successful, but do they need their dad to live in his car to get their success?

Top
#882 - 07/21/04 09:12 PM Re: Ok, first off... [Re: almostheaven]
rayc1 Offline
recently joined

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 9
I forgot to answer a few of your questions. The non card expenses can still be paid for with cash. A card can work in an ATM machine if set up to do so. You probably not be set up to just pull all the money out at one time because you could then be called in to verify the proper expenditures, just as you would if you wrote a large check for cash when managing a senior citizen's money under a court order to do so.
As far as when you can get your money out? Well the whole point of this is that it is not your money if it is supposed to be child support. It is the child's money, and to be used as such. If a NCP has to forfeit any use of the money on himself to put it up for his child, then the equally court ordered mother must give up her share of the money to be spent only on the child.
If we deduct out what it would cost for you to live at the adveraged income of you and your ex at the time of the divorce. Half the additional amount to add the child's room, plus a small share of utilities (1/2 the increase over you living alone is the child's share to each parent) and a share of food cost. A child does not owe mom a house and a car. If you were going to have a car without the child, then the car is yours, and should not be included in child support. Now the difference betewwn the single person's car and one to carry 5 kids in might be considered.
This is not the 60's where mom's wern't allowed to work. Day care is a child support chargable dollar amount.
If the money that is given up and dedicated to that purpose is so high that it can leaves an otherwise healthy income crippled, then CP's will get the message. It does not take 100K a year to raise a child, especially if one parent has to loose everything.
The charts are not correct.
Both parents must provide certain things for themselves, and there is plenty of money to do just that. But when the state takes all of the money and gives it to one parent, falsly calling it child support, based on some silly idea that healthy working mothers that make good money should get it all for untrackable personal use, the system becomes tyrany to ncp's. Children ulltimately suffer.
Besides, many mariages break up over money. This system only agrivates the problem. The state bates mothers out with the promise that they will get all the money.

What a mess it leaves.

Please ask your friend to comment back. I like the discussion.

Top
#883 - 07/22/04 03:04 AM Re: Ok, first off... [Re: rayc1]
almostheaven Offline
Carpal \'Tunnel

Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
This doesn't help....

[quote]The non custodial parent who does not pay would still have to submit receipts for consideration to get paid on expenses. Payments would be denied to NC parents who have not paid up to date. [/quote]

If they're not paying, why waste court time, CP time, [b]anyone's[/b] precious time and resources to even [b]look[/b] at their case, much less deny it?

[quote]The Custodial parent would never be blocked from getting the child's money to support the child, even if the custodial parent failed to pay. [/quote]

Nothing government has ever worked 100%. There is [b]always[/b] a delay to process money changing hands. So a CP not getting support from an NCP is being asked to go yet another extra mile...and who's paying the banking/atm/check fees BTW?...that they will never be reimbursed for. Not only that, but if they're on a limited budget and cannot afford to wait a few days for the account processing to show the money in the account, and say they have to buy groceries...they send $200 to the account, then spend $200 on groceries and they're $200 short on the rent which is due 2 days before the account money becomes available, and are charged a late fee.

I could never understand why anyone would want to make this a mandatory for all ruling, as it won't work for all because of just such situations. If there was leeway to work with it where it were needed...or not...it would be more widely received.

[quote]The benefit to the child would be that there is a record of the parent that did not follow the payment for care of the child. The term deadbeat dad can be joined by other non-sexist terms like deadbeat parent, and most children would really get the benefits in a provable way. [/quote]

I already have such a record. CSE shows all payments made/not made. It is CO'd to go through CSE. But I don't feel a parent should be showing this to a child. Too bad my ex didn't feel the same.

[quote]Also, either parent not paying would have a legal issue to deal with, as is the case now for the non custodial parent. [/quote]

If they truly had legal issues to deal with, we would have a lot fewer true deadbeats. My ex went 18 years without paying. He never was threatened with license revocation, jail, nada. He's never had his bank accounts siezed. He's never been in court.
_________________________
Char Fox

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

Moderator:  dsAdmin 


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: