The mother of my child who is on public assistance recently received a letter stating they want to go after me for child support. Her and I agreed upon me supporting her through other non government means. I'm not on assistance and have a job and have our child on my health insurance. I guess my question is dose she have to respond to them and put us through all this and have them meddel in our affairs when we already have it handled? BTW we live in Michigan.

What if your not a dead beet dad and you do support the mother its just your not married nor going through the government . I support the mother of my child well over $300 a month and I do all the driving. She is happy with that but because she is on medicade and gets food stamps means what? I don't need medicade or food stamps neither does my our daughter. How does a supportive father keep it that way without the court or DSS or whoever meddeling in our affairs?

? Put your though all of this ? You mean paying your proper child support ? Is that what you mean ? You have no issue with her taking tax money, ( my money, other peoples money) but do not like the idea of taking YOUR money.

The government has a right to collect from you, you have a legal obligation to pay. You can not make a out of court agreement not to pay, it is not legally binding.

If she does not assist, they can just cut off her government assistance, the government can still find you and get the money

But, obviously, you haven't already handled it. As Chuck points out if she needs public assistance she is taking taxpayer money. That means the taxpayers are helping to support YOUR child. If you don't want the government to "meddle in your affairs" then give them no cause to by completely support your child so the mother doesn't need to ask for public assistance.

If she does not answer this letter, then its likely they will cut off her assistance or go after you without her help.

P.S. I merged your 2 posts, since the second one was posted to a 2 year old thread.

Thank you for being so blunt about this. Just to clarify. I am not on assistance. I have a full time 60+ hour a week job to pay for my responsabalities. We are not married as of yet but are working on that. I have medical coverage yet she has our child on medicade. She received $800 a month in food stamps for herself as well as our baby who is also on wic. She has a 5 year old child from another father. I pay for my food and I pay for my baby's needs already. My question is if I am already being responsabile for the needs of the mother and the child and she chooses to receive assistance because its "free money" to her. Why should I be responsabile to pay for that when I am already paying for it as you are through taxes. I also am supporting the motherand child so why do iI need to have a agency meddel in my affairs? Last question is our baby in my opinion has insurance and has more then enough clothes and food. I don't believe the mother needs public assistance when she has me paying for it twice. Is there a way or a suggestion one can go about removing his child off public assistance. So I can do my job as a dad and not have to have a agency in my business.
What I was refer to about going through all this is a fight over support. I work my but off I have a house and 3 other children who I take care of all by myself with no aid. If I have a agency tell me I have to pay her x am out of $$ to cover the cost of what ever and I have to payback x amount of $ because she chose to be on assistance. Its going to cause a difficulty that's unnecessary and a hard ship that I work hard to prevent.

Ok, so you are a standup father who is doing what he thinks is proper to support his child. But the mother wants more and is going to the state to get it.

There is nothing you can do except fight it with the state and courts. If you don't want to deal with the state, then you have to stop her from applying. You have to convince her not to continue assistance.

Another option, but one that will still involve the courts, is to get physical custody of the child.

Thanks Scott for the suggestion. Do you think that if we got her off assistance for our child but her and her daughter stayed on it would affect me with the system? Or is it too late for that. She tells methat they came to her and not her to the agence. If she don't reply to them and we get the baby off the unneeded assistance that it will just go away? Please keep in mind mom and I live in two separate households and are working towards marriage but wanted to not rush it. So that's a last question. If we get married sooner than later will this go away also.
Last note my fight here is not about my moral responsibilities as a dad. Its more about me doing the best as a father and not being subjected to the system and being classified as case # when I can and want to do it with out the government.
Ok, so you are a standup father who is doing what he thinks is proper to support his child. But the mother wants more and is going to the state to get it.

There is nothing you can do except fight it with the state and courts. If you don't want to deal with the state, then you have to stop her from applying. You have to convince her not to continue assistance.

Another option, but one that will still involve the courts, is to get physical custody of the child.

I understand that you just don't want the government involved, not that you are trying to dodge your responsibilities. But the facts here are that since she applied for public assistance, the state wants to make sure that she has exhausted all private means of support before they support your child with taxpayer funds.

Yes getting married will help, they won't go after you for support if the child is part of your household. Also it will also be less expensive for you both than maintaining 2 separate households.

Thanks Scott. I guess I will need to get her to drop assistance which she won't like but oh well. There isn't no free lunch. I may have to pay back for the money she has took and that sucks but oh well its not fair in life. Do you know if its possible to refuse the agency's wanting to step in?
I understand that you just don't want the government involved, not that you are trying to dodge your responsibilities. But the facts here are that since she applied for public assistance, the state wants to make sure that she has exhausted all private means of support before they support your child with taxpayer funds.

Yes getting married will help, they won't go after you for support if the child is part of your household. Also it will also be less expensive for you both than maintaining 2 separate households.

Nope, they are supposed to be protecting taxpayer interests.

Since the mother is on public assistance, it is very important that OP make all child support payments through the child support agency or through the court.

As I read the prior posts, OP has been informally meeting his CS obligations by paying the mother directly. Unfortunately, it is likely that such payments will not be recognized, and he will be obligated to pay again.

Here is a bit of information that I didn't include. The mother and I agrees that it was in the child's best interest that she stay with the mother until we become married and I would do all I can for them. We have not went through anything to do with custody. I am on the birth certificate as the father. Will this affect anything? We have not seen friend of the court talked about parenting time or anything because we agreed to everything. I just didn't realize that her choice to be on assistance word affect my household.

Thank you everyone for your input.
Since the mother is on public assistance, it is very important that OP make all child support payments through the child support agency or through the court.

As I read the prior posts, OP has been informally meeting his CS obligations by paying the mother directly. Unfortunately, it is likely that such payments will not be recognized, and he will be obligated to pay again.

What AK is telling you is that any private agreement made without ratification of a court may not be recognized by the court. Therefore any payments you have made to this date will either be ignored or considered gifts. So, if a court does award child support, they could make it retroactive and ignore any payments you have made.

While I understand you wanting to keep the state out of your life, you are playing with fire. Better to marry her as soon as possible.

What if ur not a dead beet dad and u do support the mother its just your not married nor going through the goverment . I support the mother of my child well over 0 a month and I do all the driving. She is happy with that but because she is on medicade and gets food stamps means what? I don't need medicade or food stamps neither does my our daughter. How does a supportive father keep it that way without the court or DSS or whoever meddeling in our affairs?

Looks like your going to be surprised what your really supposed to be paying. By doing a conservative look at what you might be paying it looks like your getting away with less then 1/2 of what you should be paying. BTW it's a matter of State and Federal law that they come after you for child support if she is on assistance. You really do need to start changing your way of thinking.

Michigan Child Support Calculator - AllLaw.com (http://www.alllaw.com/calculators/childsupport/michigan/)

I suggest you cooperate and pay your child support through your state's disbursement unit and stop paying mom directly. Then you get credit for doing the right thing. The problem is that the mom isn't disclosing the child support you pay and is defrauding the system, mAking people like me support her greedy, lazy a$&!

I suggest you cooperate and pay your child support through your state's disbursement unit and stop paying mom directly. Then you get credit for doing the right thing. The problem is that the mom isn't disclosing the child support you pay and is defrauding the system, mAking people like me support her greedy, lazy a$&!

Another way of putting it is that the mother, who has applied for public assistance, perhaps didn't disclose what OP gave her informally. Thus her income would be reported as being lower than it should be, and the welfare system would have paid her more than she is entitled. Therefore the state will come after OP to recoup what it has paid out. The mother does not have any choice, the state will come after OP.

And, if charged with welfare fraud, she will be highly motivated to deny that he gave her anything.

If he's been smart, he has records of his payments (cancelled checks, I hope). She will probably deny that he paid her anything but if he can prove it, they have no basis to come after him for reimbursement unless he paid less than statutory minimum child support for the jurisdiction.

Of course, it sounds like he's still considering marrying this person, which I would advise against - sir, she's using you to default the government. Is that who you really want to be with? And, if she had disclosed that you've been giving her money when they flat out asked her, "do you receive child support", the state would not come after you. They are doing so because she said, "no, my child's father doesn't help me at all".

Thank you. I'm sure I do support her way under the 900 a month estimated amount.but the point of the mater shouldn't be a $ amount it should be in my opinion that I am supporting the child who is 10 months old. I don't just support the child but I do the mother as well. I have 3 children at home that will suffer tremendously if I have to pay what the estimated amount is. And I don't spend 2700 a month on the 3 of them. Not even close.I guess I'm complaining. The recordsbyoy mention I have not done a good job at. The most of my support was paying her bills and what ever she wantedto purchase wweather its dinner or a toy I paid for to keep her money in her pocket just as I would do as a husband. What I'm gathering is good old fashioned hard working support and honesty don't cut it today.
If he's been smart, he has records of his payments (cancelled checks, I hope). She will probably deny that he paid her anything but if he can prove it, they have no basis to come after him for reimbursement unless he paid less than statutory minimum child support for the jurisdiction.

Of course, it sounds like he's still considering marrying this person, which I would advise against - sir, she's using you to default the government. Is that who you really want to be with? And, if she had disclosed that you've been giving her money when they flat out asked her, "do you receive child support", the state would not come after you. They are doing so because she said, "no, my child's father doesn't help me at all".

She will probably deny that he paid her anything but if he can prove it, they have no basis to come after him for reimbursement.

That's not necessarily true. Even if payments have been made and they are provable, without a court order for payments, the court may simply consider those payments as gifts and not include them in the support award.

That's not necessarily true. Even if payments have been made and they are provable, without a court order for payments, the court may simply consider those payments as gifts and not include them in the support award.

I have a better one for you. Lets say the courts accept them as child support payments. But since they weren't enough to meet the standard level of support he will owe the difference in arrears. All of this could have been avoided had it been taken care of when first starting.

Here is the this g and I don't know if it matters but nothing ever got started. We were engaged when we had the baby then she changed and suposively fell out of love with me but have been goi g back and fourth so I took her and we did some counceling and things been good. But anyway, we never went and had a custody case or anything. We have been doing just fine with our own arrangement. So neither of us has sole or joint anything, she is just our kid and we live in different houses. So no friend of the court no anybody has contacted us or nothing, I'm on the birth certificate and been involved in the baby's life almost every day. So for me to go through the system to pay her would have not made any since. We were handling it as if we were married. Does anyone think this changes things for better or worse?
I have a better one for you. Lets say the courts accept them as child support payments. But since they weren't enough to meet the standard level of support he will owe the difference in arrears. All of this could have been avoided had it been taken care of when first starting.

No it doesn't change anything as far as a court is concerned. I understand your position and why you have done what you have done. But the fact remains that she filed for public assistance. Once she did that, she changed the whole dynamic.

Did she consult with you about giving her more money before filing? But once she filed, SHE got the government involved.

She was on it before I ever met her. She has a child with a bum that won't work but under the table. He pays her $100 a month in support. She had a decent job when I met her but quit it once she had the baby because she had enough money for about 8 months of living.
No it doesn't change anything as far as a court is concerned. I understand your position and why you have done what you have done. But the fact remains that she filed for public assistance. Once she did that, she changed the whole dynamic.

Did she consult with you about giving her more money before filing? But once she filed, SHE got the government involved.

As far as telling me if she filed for child support. No she didn't tell me until after she got a reply from the state.
Shje was on it before I ever met her. She has a child with a bum that won't work but under the table. He pays her 0 a month in support. She had a decent job when I met her but quit it once she had the baby because she had enough money for about 8 months of living.

Not filing for support. She hasn't done that. But did she tell you she was filing for public assistance. It's the state that is going to file for support to be reimbursed for what they are giving her for assistance.

We didn't discuss it because we had 2 primary insurance companies and medicade was a third. I didn't understand it all. I have never used assistance of any sort. I didn't sign up for it and we didn't live together so I never
Asked her about it.
Not filing for support. She hasn't done that. But did she tell you she was filing for public assistance. It's the state that is going to file for support to be reimbursed for what they are giving her for assistance.

In your original post you said she got a letter from the state telling her they want to go after you for support. So she has not filed nor is she planning to. Like I said, it's the state looking for reimbursement of taxpayer money paid to her.

What she told me was she went down and filed for support just in case our relationship didn't work out. That our child would be taken care of as if I would abandon her . This was a surprise to me. I was rather angry that she didn't talk to me about this and took my right as a father to freely support my child as a parent and took it upon herself to do this without my consent. Its really fishy to me because I'm a active and supportive father and partner to the mother. I cook diners and we are always together. I didn't know about the state going after me for reimbursement of the money/support she told them she needed until I was on this site.
In your original post you said she got a letter from the state telling her they want to go after you for support. So she has not filed nor is she planning to. Like I said, it's the state looking for reimbursement of taxpayer money paid to her.

What she told me was she went down and filed for support just in case our relationship didn't work out. That our child would be taken care of as if I would abandon her . This was a surprise to me. I was rather angry that she didn't talk to me about this and took my right as a father to freely support my child as a parent and took it upon herself to do this without my consent.

That's not what you said initially.

My comment here is what makes you think you have a "right as a father to freely support my child as a parent"? You have no such right. You have both a moral (which I think you feel) and a legal OBLIGATION to support your child. Up to now we have only heard your side of the story. Now you have given us a glimpse into her side.

Apparently things are not as amiable as you have portrayed. She feared you might abandon her. Or maybe its just that she has been burned before and is gun shy. I don't know but those are possibilities.

The bottom line here is you wanted to keep the courts out this. I don't know if your motives were pure or you figured it would cost you more if the courts awarded her support. Now she has exercised her right to legally compel you to fulfill your obligation. And you will have to deal with it.

You need to go to Friend of the Court posthaste and have this taken care of legally. Michigan does not take any of this lightly and WILL jail you if necessary.

I have a better one for you. Lets say the courts accept them as child support payments. But since they weren't enough to meet the standard level of support he will owe the difference in arrears. All of this could have been avoided had it been taken care of when first starting.

Yes... I should have pointed out that the court could determine it wasn't enough. As for the amount, the OP should understand that when you already have an obligation to other children, that is typically taken into account in determining the support amount. If they think you are helping her defraud welfare... that's another kettle of fish.

Why not hire a lawyer and proactively fix this before anyone gets in trouble?

Thank you I'm going to do that.
Yes... I should have pointed out that the court could determine it wasn't enough. As for the amount, the OP should understand that when you already have an obligation to other children, that is typically taken into account in determining the support amount. If they think you are helping her defraud welfare... that's another kettle of fish.

Why not hire a lawyer and proactively fix this before anyone gets in trouble?