| I'm going to expand on this a little further. For all of the bickering and arguing that people caught up in the family Court system typically do, the whole of Family law is quite cut-and-dry ; in fact, there are only 2 basic premises (and, as a non-attorney I'm paraphrasing, not necessarily quoting, the philosophy of the law):
1. Every parent has the obligation to support his/her children
2. Every parent has the right to take part fully in the raising and nurturing of his/her children.
That's really what it all boils down to and every lawyer and judge in the country knows that. Now individual circumstances may vary, therefore necessitating different methods for each parent to exercise his/her rights and obligations. It is true that a parent has to initiate legal action in order to enforce his/her rights and also to enforce the other parent's obligations. And when one parent initiates a motion in court, the other parent has the right and responsibility to respond to that motion, thereby insuring that his/her rights are protected and his/her obligations are fulfilled. This, of course applies mostly to those situations where the parents are not domiciled together. All said, there is really nothing under the sun that can relieve a parent of his/her obligations nor deny that parent his/her rights, except such an extreme circumstance as his/her death or total and permanent disability or something similarly traumatic. People can argue, coerce, threaten and disparage all they want, hire the best lawyers,etc. But at the end of the day, nothing changes ; the law is what it is. Every parent is going to be pursued to the utmost to support his/her children and every parent is going to be given every opportunity to exercise his/her rights. So trying to get out of paying child support or trying to stop a parent from having contact with his/her children is all just a huge waste of time, money and effort. |