[GV70]

"Retroactive support" is a support amount established for a time before the start date (or effective date) of a child support obligation. The start date is the date when the first payment is due. Support that is effective on or after the start date is considered to be "ongoing support". A retroactive support amount is owed to the state when clients assign their rights to support to the state when they receive Public Assistance for their children. A retroactive support amount is owed to the client if CSE establishes a support amount based on the NCP's fair share of specific expenses that were incurred by that client for the child(ren) prior to the start date of the support obligation, or by establishing an amount pursuant to the guidelines for the time for which support is sought.

Since June 30, 1975, acceptance of Public Assistance on behalf of a child creates a debt due and owing the state. Under the authority of 110-135, if child support was required to be paid for a period when Public Assistance was received, that support is owed to the state. CSE must address retroactive support owed to the state if Public Assistance was received for a child whenever an ongoing support obligation is being established.

If an ongoing obligation is not established, CSE does not pursue retroactive support owed to the state. (For example: The court establishes paternity but does not order ongoing support because the NCP is 17 years old and in school, or the client and NCP reunite after the establishment process has begun and no ongoing support is established. In these situations, an obligation for retroactive support that is owed to the state should not be established.) If ongoing support is established at a later date and the statute of limitation has not been reached, CSE addresses the establishment of retroactive support owed to the state.

Retroactive support is owed to the state for a time prior to the start date of the order because Public Assistance was paid on behalf of the child. When clients receive Public Assistance, they assign their rights to support to the state. Because of the legal principles of "res judicata" and "collateral estoppel", CSE must address the issue of retroactive support owed to the state when establishing child support obligations.

[aliaricam3]

"Retroactive support" is a support amount established for a time period before the start date (or effective date) of a child support obligation. The start date is the date when the first payment is due. Support that is effective on or after the start date is considered to be "ongoing support". A retroactive support amount is owed to the state when clients assign their rights to support to the state when they receive Public Assistance for their children. A retroactive support amount is owed to the client if CSE establishes a support amount based on the NCP’s fair share of specific expenses that were incurred by that client for the child(ren) prior to the start date of the support obligation, or by establishing an amount pursuant to the guidelines for the time period for which support is sought.

Since June 30, 1975, acceptance of Public Assistance on behalf of a child creates a debt due and owing the state. Under the authority of 110-135, if child support was required to be paid for a period when Public Assistance was received, that support is owed to the state. CSE must address retroactive support owed to the state if Public Assistance was received for a child whenever an ongoing support obligation is being established.

If an ongoing obligation is not established, CSE does not pursue retroactive support owed to the state. (For example: The court establishes paternity but does not order ongoing support because the NCP is 17 years old and in school, or the client and NCP reunite after the establishment process has begun and no ongoing support is established. In these situations, an obligation for retroactive support that is owed to the state should not be established.) If ongoing support is established at a later date and the statute of limitation has not been reached, CSE addresses the establishment of retroactive support owed to the state.

Retroactive support is owed to the state for a time period prior to the start date of the order because Public Assistance was paid on behalf of the child. When clients receive Public Assistance, they assign their rights to support to the state. Because of the legal principles of "res judicata" and "collateral estoppel", CSE must address the issue of retroactive support owed to the state when establishing child support obligations.

You still did not tell me how he could have taken care of this 12 years ago

[GV70]

I know your tired of this but, she gets supported by us taxpayeres and all her baby daddys right.

;) You are wrong to think that legal and logical are equal:D

[Synnen]

You want to know how he could have taken care of this from the get-go? By checking back with her for at least 9 months after they hooked up to see if she was pregnant. By keeping it in his pants to begin with. By having better sense than to think that sex and babies aren't linked.

Like I said before... if you don't like the idea of supporting this woman, then go to court and get custody.

[GV70]

You want to know how he could have taken care of this from the get-go? By checking back with her for at least 9 months after they hooked up to see if she was pregnant. By keeping it in his pants to begin with. By having better sense than to think that sex and babies aren't linked.

Like I said before...if you don't like the idea of supporting this woman, then go to court and get custody.

Very well said,Synnen!

[aliaricam3]

You want to know how he could have taken care of this from the get-go? By checking back with her for at least 9 months after they hooked up to see if she was pregnant. By keeping it in his pants to begin with. By having better sense than to think that sex and babies aren't linked.

Like I said before...if you don't like the idea of supporting this woman, then go to court and get custody.

This is a woman who has mutual friends we have seen her at cookouts over the past couple of years and she never mentioned once that he could be the father, that child was calling someone else daddy for 11 years and now that he got a test and it proved he was not the father. So I guess that is my boyfriend fault. She should not have named just any man as the father if she knew she slept with at least 3 people around the same time. My boyfriend is willing to step up to the plate if she is his daughter, But she needs to get off welfare and get a job

[JudyKayTee]

Can you read?

you should layoff the vodka when trying to answer a question

You are rude and ignorant beyond belief.

You asked a LEGAL question, it was answered - and answered and answered. GV70 did a ton of research which he posted... but that's not good enough for you.

What answer do you want from "us?" I already said this is not a debate board - if that is your interest, go post there. Post on the Public Opinion Board and everyone can gather together and discuss injustice in the World - this is most definitely NOT that Board.

This is a LEGAL board and you have the answer to your LEGAL question - an answer which apparently you don't want to hear or believe or understand.

I believe "Mary" is making the point that your "man" has 4 children by 3 women and you are now picking up the pieces after him. That's all. I believe she is also concerned that the taxpayers are going to be taking care of you and your kids at some point down the road.

I guarantee you don't have enough money to pay GV70 for the time he spent on your post(s) and you aren't even grateful to him and you aren't going to find his level of expertise FOR FREE anywhere else.

So retain an Attorney and go and argue with him/her. You asked the question, you got the answer. Enough already.

[GV70]

OK- I am not interested in her sexual experience... I am not interested whether she has a job or not... You wrote,"So I guess that is my boyfriend fault."
Perhaps, but people have to live with the consequences of their actions and lives.

[JudyKayTee]

This is a woman who has mutual freinds we have seen her at cookouts over the past couple of years and she never mentioned once that he could be the father, that child was calling someone else daddy for 11 years and now that he got a test and it proved he was not the father. So I guess that is my boyfriend fault. She should not have named just any man as the father if she knew she slept with at least 3 people around the same time. My boyfriend is willing to step up to the plate if she is his daughter, But she needs to get off welfare and get a job

I trust everyone is getting regular AIDS/HIV testing? The math on the number of partners here could be staggering - and each one carries the sexual disease history of the others.

(Probably not a good subject, by the way, to bring up over hot dogs at a cook out.)

[aliaricam3]

You are rude and ignorant beyond belief.

You asked a LEGAL question, it was answered - and answered and answered. GV70 did a ton of research which he posted ... but that's not good enough for you.

What answer do you want from "us?" I already said this is not a debate board - if that is your interest, go post there. Post on the Public Opinion Board and everyone can gather together and discuss injustice in the World - this is most definitely NOT that Board.

This is a LEGAL board and you have the answer to your LEGAL question - an answer which apparently you don't want to hear or believe or understand.

I believe "Mary" is making the point that your "man" has 4 children by 3 women and you are now picking up the pieces after him. That's all. I believe she is also concerned that the taxpayers are going to be taking care of you and your kids at some point down the road.

I guarantee you don't have enough money to pay GV70 for the time he spent on your post(s) and you aren't even grateful to him and you aren't going to find his level of expertise FOR FREE anywhere else.

So retain an Attorney and go and argue with him/her. You asked the question, you got the answer. Enough already.

I am not rude, I appreciate everyone's answer but did you read what this person wrote, if you did read it again and realize she has no clue what she is talking about, it has nothing to do with the subject

[aliaricam3]

You are rude and ignorant beyond belief.

You asked a LEGAL question, it was answered - and answered and answered. GV70 did a ton of research which he posted ... but that's not good enough for you.

What answer do you want from "us?" I already said this is not a debate board - if that is your interest, go post there. Post on the Public Opinion Board and everyone can gather together and discuss injustice in the World - this is most definitely NOT that Board.

This is a LEGAL board and you have the answer to your LEGAL question - an answer which apparently you don't want to hear or believe or understand.

I believe "Mary" is making the point that your "man" has 4 children by 3 women and you are now picking up the pieces after him. That's all. I believe she is also concerned that the taxpayers are going to be taking care of you and your kids at some point down the road.

I guarantee you don't have enough money to pay GV70 for the time he spent on your post(s) and you aren't even grateful to him and you aren't going to find his level of expertise FOR FREE anywhere else.

So retain an Attorney and go and argue with him/her. You asked the question, you got the answer. Enough already.

Tax payers do not take care of me and never will, I have worked all my life, never on welfare, my boyfriend also works and takes care of his kids, this whole big discussion turned in to a lot more than it should have. Everyone is making him out to be some bad guy, we both had a child from previous relationships when we met and then we had two children together which he supports as well as his oldest son, then this woman comes along and says he may be the fathere of her child, OK that's fine if it is his he does not have a problem taking care of her, its paying back welfare for for 12 years that she received and still receives, How is my boyfriend the bad guy when he was never told about the child until 12 years later, GV70 did do a lot of research and I appreciate it 100% but he kept saying he should have taken care of it 12 years ago, how could he when he had no clue about her

[aliaricam3]

You are rude and ignorant beyond belief.

You asked a LEGAL question, it was answered - and answered and answered. GV70 did a ton of research which he posted ... but that's not good enough for you.

What answer do you want from "us?" I already said this is not a debate board - if that is your interest, go post there. Post on the Public Opinion Board and everyone can gather together and discuss injustice in the World - this is most definitely NOT that Board.

This is a LEGAL board and you have the answer to your LEGAL question - an answer which apparently you don't want to hear or believe or understand.

I believe "Mary" is making the point that your "man" has 4 children by 3 women and you are now picking up the pieces after him. That's all. I believe she is also concerned that the taxpayers are going to be taking care of you and your kids at some point down the road.

I guarantee you don't have enough money to pay GV70 for the time he spent on your post(s) and you aren't even grateful to him and you aren't going to find his level of expertise FOR FREE anywhere else.

So retain an Attorney and go and argue with him/her. You asked the question, you got the answer. Enough already.

I am not rude, I appreciate everyone's answer but did you read what this person wrote, if you did read it again and realize she has no clue what she is talking about, it has nothing to do with the subject

[aliaricam3]

I know this post is done and over with but I want to apologize if I came off rude to anyone, its just almost everyone had to leave a comment along with there advice as if my boyfriend is in the wrong because of the mother not telling him she may have his child which she did not know either, If the first guy never had a test done he would have never known, but I guess he will not know if its his until its his turn for the paternity test, he is next in line. And this woman has no right to receive welfare for 12 years, she is still obligated to support herself and provide half of support for her child.

[talaniman]

And this woman has no right to receive welfare for 12 years, she is still obligated to support herself and provide half of support for her child.

Please focus on your rights and options, and not hers, as your frustration is obvious. While your looking at the worst case scenario, consultation with an attorney may ease your frustration once you have a definite course of action to pursue, after the paternity test. This is a fairly long process to be involved with, so short term solutions will not work. Talk to an attorney. No if's, ands, or but's, as the court only cares who pays, and you must insure your rights are protected.

[aliaricam3]

Just to let everyone know, turns out he was not the father, Good luck to the mother on her journey.

[stinawords]

Thank you for updating us!