At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
I want to know why some men, that pay child support, just complain that it is way too much. We are talking about men who pay, oh around 200$ a month for a child, when the mother pays a lot more then that raising that child.
Why do men, yes I'm sure there are some woman, complain over such a small amount of money when it comes to a child?
I must stand and applaud the fathers who remain a great father through their child's life, and never complain about money.
I bet more non-custodial parents would be HAPPY to pay more in support if they could just give the STUFF that kids need, and not pay money.
For example, if the NCP were to have to drop off groceries once a week, and provide health insurance, and those two things were equal to 30% of the NCP's paycheck, I bet a lot of NCPs would be happy to do so. It would give them choice in how that money is spent, and it would reassure them that their child support was being used for just that--supporting their child. Or perhaps all clothing and necessary food would be bought by the NCP, leaving the CP with the things like the electric and water bill and rent - things that the CP can affect (which would, in effect, start teaching kids ecological lessons of not wasting water or electricity).
I know that if *I* could not see my kids whenever I wanted, yet in return I was to turn over 1/3 of my income for the kids I couldn't see whenver I wanted--well, dropping off groceries is a chance to see them! Or taking the kids shopping with me so that I can learn some of what they like and dislike!
I'm just saying that some of these "dead-beats" probably wouldn't be such jerks if they could actually choose a bit of where that money was going.
First off I get so tired of hearing about guys complaining about paying child support. It is a two way street. I was a single dad for 11 years, my oldest son is now 22. My ex-wife is a RN in a state hospital. She was making $50,000.00 a year with full benefits. My son lived with me and I provided all insurance, cloths ect.... I was making $25,000.00 a year. She was court ordered to pay me $105.00 per month. At 16 years old my son went to go live with his mother...........the courts ordered me to continue carrying insurance on my son and I had to pay her $425.00 per month. Go Figure ???? My son who was an A-B student and a Boy Scout quit school and was busted for theft in a walmart store with in 6 weeks of being with his mother. He moved in with friends and got a girl pregnate before he turned 17. Guess what.........I still had to pay child support even though he didnt live with his mother !! I guess that makes me a "BAD DAD" for complaining about how much I pay. I need to say one more thing to COOKIEMONSTER..........child support is to help you raise your children..............It is NOT meant to be spent on TOYS. It is to help pay rent,utilities,cloths,food and ect...... I dont much care how some moms want to complain about how hard things are......I was a single dad who raised my son, worked 40+ hours a week, assisted in FFA, was a Boy Scout leader, coached baseball and soccer, cooked all the meals, did all the laundry and cleaning........plus I did odd jobs on the weekends to make ends meet....you know why............because I had to !!!!! AND I would do it all again to have that time with my son !!!! You have your children.......suck it up and make the best of it. If there is any questions I would like to ask it is WHY does a man who makes half the money his ex-wife makes have to pay over 4 times the child support she does ???
Mike
Just think, every time your son shows such great things, you can point out to your ex that you were the one that raised him! You are a one in a million men, and I am one woman who is very proud of you. Your son is a very lucky boy, or man!
Synnen, If more non-custodial parents were doing those things voluntarily (buying groceries, clothes, etc.) then there wouldn't be the need for the child support enforcent system. Child support has nothing to do with visitation (I feel like I'm repeating myself). Most NCP's have visitation agreements but don't uphold their end out of anger and/or resentment.
In a perfect world, it'd be great if once a relationship failed, that everybody did what they're supposed to for the sake of the children but that's not always how it goes. NCPs have rights to visitation just like the custodial parent has a right to receive child support. If they're not being allowed to see their children then they can also seek assistance in having their visitation rights enforced.
So far as paying for health insurance as an alternative to child support... that DOES factor into the amount of support ordered. So if the NCP is the one paying for insurance, then that amount would be deducted from the judgement. The whole "dropping off groceries" idea is only feasible if the NCP is local.
Just to let you know: not EVERY custodial parent is seeking child support for the "wrong reasons". Again on a personal note, I provide ALL of my son's needs without any public assistance or even any help from family. So that means I'm paying for food, clothes, diapers/wipes, daycare, health insurance & dr copays, life insurance, and college savings on top of any incidental needs like medicine, toiletries, and baby furniture that they need as they grow (high chair, bigger car seats, stroller). This doesn't account for the fact that my son lives in my house so he's sharing/increasing utilities because that's more laundry that I have to do weekly, more dishes that I have to wash, more water I'm using. If his father was helping with these things now, I wouldn't have to put them on the affidavit for him to pay half of later!
If a woman wants and is granted custody of a child and limit shared access to the the father she should get nothing(Except for special circumstances). If there is split access to the child or children, the man shouldn't have to pay a cent. In these cases I would complain too
Sorry, but IMHO, only a man would say this. Sorry, what I mean is the "non-custodial" parent.
Please don't be offended as I mean nothing personally to you if I HAVE offended you, it's just that BOTH parties should be responsible for the financial upbringing of their children, no matter who has them at ANY time.
-------------------------------------------
My X tried very hard to limit access to my daughter for her own sick twisted selfish reasons. I was lucky enough to be able to obtain a lawyer expensive enough to get what I wanted, split everything. And thats what is best for my child!!. I pay nothing to that woman! If she had gotten her way, I would see my little girl every second weekend and once every Wednesday. LOL... And then she of course would go for my income to help raise her. I'm tired of so many woman wanting their pie my pie, and government tax breaks, subsidies etc...
Because I was a business owner I was at home for two years with my daughter raising her from morning till night. Her mother had terrible parenting instincts from day one, and it was I who was awake every night doing all the things both parents should have done.
I did find your point to be offencive. If I was to take the deal offered to me, and still told to pay large percentage support payments, I would go crazy!! I couldn't handle it, how unfair is that? Men who want to be there but have had woman use the system to screw them out of their god given right to be great parents should not have to pay if they are being limited access. Only a selfish sick twisted person would hold something so great and powerful away from someone and ask them for a monthly payment to view.
If you wanna do it on your own, use the system against a hard working nonviolent responsible father who would be there as he has always been. Well, DO IT ON YOUR OWN THEN! Thank god I was able to spend so many thousands of dollars to get what is best for my daughter, absolute equality between parents.
If I had limited access, I would think it to be justifiable if I were to only provide finances on those accessed days to feed nourish and pay the cost of living for my daughter.
I am offering constructive solutions for SOME of the issues surrounding child support. In a perfect world, parents of a child would be committed to each other fully and there would be no NEED for child support, frankly.
You say that there are ways to enforce visitation? Well, there are as many flaws with THAT system as there are with enforcing child support.
I realize that YOU are not "all mothers" and that not "all" dads want to be a part of their kids' lives.
But frankly...your bitterness about the whole thing kinda ticks me off. I'd give just about anything to HAVE a child, whether or not I was doing it solo, and trying to support us both on one person's income.
How about being grateful for what you have?
There are two sides to EVERY story, and while everything that's done should be done in the best interest of the child, well...parents are human too, and I bet that every last parent on earth has moments where they put themself ahead of their child, for whatever reason.
This whole thread is moot. The NCP will always have a reason, that, in their opinion, is valid for not paying child support. and the CP will NEVER be satisfied with the child support that they're getting.
Sorry but I disagree........ A man paying child support should have the right to know the money is being spent on their child. There are children out there wearing old filthy cloths and eating dry cereal out of the box for supper because thats all they have in the cubard........what did the money get spent on???? well when there is a case of beer in the fridge and a carton of smokes on the coffee table............My point is this.....child support is for the child, NOT, the for the parent to blow on whatever they see fit. I agree all kids need some toys and educational toys are great......that is not my issue. My problem is when a parent chooses a GI Joe over a pound a hamburger. My son (older now) told me his mother couldnt wait for the check in the mail...........he said she went straight to the liqueur store and then to her "friends house" for a little bag of something she wont share. My son got 2nd degree burns on his fingers trying to cook a box of mac - n - cheese for dinner. It was 1pm and he couldnt wake his mom up to tell her he was hungry. These things are not OK. I am not saying anyone on this site is like that, but those parents are out there !!!
Also no one replied to my question about Moms who dont pay. Turn on the TV and listen to all these commercials about "dead beat dads".............I have never seen one such commercial talking about dead beat moms.
I applaud all moms who are raising their kids alone.........it is hard, especially with out support!! I do however think the parents who receive support money should have to show how it was spent. I dont care if it was a gas bill. food or a toy...........A two year old child should not do with out so mom can get a new hair doo or so dad can by a new fishing pole.
Mike
I am offering constructive solutions for SOME of the issues surrounding child support. In a perfect world, parents of a child would be committed to each other fully and there would be no NEED for child support, frankly.
You say that there are ways to enforce visitation? Well, there are as many flaws with THAT system as there are with enforcing child support.
I realize that YOU are not "all mothers" and that not "all" dads want to be a part of their kids' lives.
But frankly...your bitterness about the whole thing kinda ticks me off. I'd give just about anything to HAVE a child, whether or not I was doing it solo, and trying to support us both on one person's income.
How about being grateful for what you have?
There are two sides to EVERY story, and while everything that's done should be done in the best interest of the child, well...parents are human too, and I bet that every last parent on earth has moments where they put themself ahead of their child, for whatever reason.
This whole thread is moot. The NCP will always have a reason, that, in their opinion, is valid for not paying child support. and the CP will NEVER be satisfied with the child support that they're getting.
This post makes one issue plain: This is NOT a perfect world. So therefore, we DO have the need for child support enforcement, courts, jails, and everything else that makes life difficult. Sure, there are flaws with every system, but both parties still have rights.
I AM extremely grateful for what I have, which is why I work so hard at maintaining it. I work hard at giving my child the things he NEEDS (those things I mentioned in my earlier post). I love my child with everything in me. That does not mean that his father should not be held responsible for helping me to provide for him. I don't think anyone should try to justify not taking care of their children. You can't say that the CP will NEVER be satisfied; I know of many that'd be satisfied if the NCP did what they were ordered; I would. He's NOT doing it voluntarily, so that's where the courts come in. He works. So why shouldn't he have to help? I give EVERYTHING I have to my child, my time, my money, and my love. Heck, he lived in my body and I took great care of him then... don't even get me started on medical expenses incurred from having a baby. Even with insurance, I'm STILL paying off the hospital bill, but unfortunately I can't put that on the affadavit.
You seem to be the bitter one. You mentioned that you had a child and gave him/her up for adoption. That was your decision and apparently the best one for you at the time. So therefore, you don't really know what it takes to raise a child, now do you?? Babysitting isn't the same as being 100% responsible for a baby from day one. When you have a child living with you every day, and you're responsible for providing for every single one of their needs, then you'll know what it's like to feel that the other parent should be doing SOMEthing to help.
-------------------------------------------
My X tried very hard to limit access to my daughter for her own sick twisted selfish reasons. I was lucky enough to be able to obtain a lawyer expensive enough to get what I wanted, split everything. And thats what is best for my child!!. I pay nothing to that woman! If she had gotten her way, I would see my little girl every second weekend and once every Wednesday. LOL... And then she of course would go for my income to help raise her. I'm tired of so many woman wanting their pie my pie, and government tax breaks, subsidies etc...
Because I was a business owner I was at home for two years with my daughter raising her from morning till night. Her mother had terrible parenting instincts from day one, and it was I who was awake every night doing all the things both parents should have done.
I did find your point to be offencive. If I was to take the deal offered to me, and still told to pay large percentage support payments, I would go crazy!! I couldn't handle it, how unfair is that? Men who want to be there but have had woman use the system to screw them out of their god given right to be great parents should not have to pay if they are being limited access. Only a selfish sick twisted person would hold something so great and powerful away from someone and ask them for a monthly payment to view.
If you wanna do it on your own, use the system against a hard working nonviolent responsible father who would be there as he has always been. Well, DO IT ON YOUR OWN THEN! Thank god I was able to spend so many thousands of dollars to get what is best for my daughter, absolute equality between parents.
If I had limited access, I would think it to be justifiable if I were to only provide finances on those accessed days to feed nourish and pay the cost of living for my daughter.
Sorry if you were offended, but BOTH parties are equally responsible for the financial welfare of the child. I did NOT go into specifics, of course it would be more fair if the custodial parent didn't limit the access to the noncustodial's visitation; however, the noncustodial parent CAN go enforce those rights, just as the custodial parent CAN enforce the child support. I don't disagree with you at all on your views, all I am saying is just because you don't have your child ALL of the time, does not mean you should not be responsible at all for financially taking care of your child. As far as only being responsible for the days that you have your child, sure that is a great idea, if you have him/her every other day of the week. Then, it would be equal. But most cases aren't like that. I feel that both parents should be EQUALLY financially responsible for the upbringing of thier kids.
If my childrens father showed up with groceries every other week, I'd be grateful. If he paid only half of everything I have to pay for of their needs, I would be grateful and consider that fair. That's me, that's MY opinion, that is what I consider fair. Not all of the custodial parents are crazy money hungry b**** es. . You should WANT to provide to your daughter no matter where she is at.
Again, I am really sorry that I offended you. I am actually on your side though.
But as great as a father you sound, some of the things you have mentioned above sound a little selfish
"If I had limited access, I would think it to be justifiable if I were to only provide finances on those accessed days to feed nourish and pay the cost of living for my daughter"
Linear Mode
