Child Support Queens Praise Michigan's Mike Cox

MensNewsDaily.com ^ | February 24, 2004 | MND NEWSWIRE

[EEDUDE]

Read the next paragraph in that post.

You are obviously taking things out of context, or you are incapable of understanding what I have written.

"Talking to some people is like trying to teach a pig to sing. It pisses off the pig and frustrates the hell out of you."

I'm outa here, before I break my keyboard.

See you and your agenda later down the line, I'm sure.

[marty60]

Oh yes my three are grown now, healthy happy, and college educated. He didn't have anything to do with them , and Iam VERY proud of them.

[FreedomAvatar]

I got the same thing from my lawyer. He said not to waste my money. He said the only way I'll get custody is if mom dies. I kid you not.

So, what does super mom do with her time with the kids? She spends it on the phone talking to her boyfriend. My daughters cry when they have to go back to her house.

"Dad, mom is mean to me and all she does is talk on the phone"

"Dad, mom never spends any time with us"

"Dad, mom laughs at me when I come to her with problems"

And there's not a damned thing I can do other than try and make up for it when I'm with them.

The "family" court system in this country is anti-father, anti-child, and positively medieval in its thinking. It is run by souless scum waffles who feed on the pain and misery of the families that they help to destroy.

And like you, I've cried about that many times.

[Orangedog]

it's all about no ACCOUNTABILITY for the money that is paid.

I'll buy that the money is all "for the children" just as soon as these women face HALF of the civil and criminal sanctions for spending that money on themselves or new boyfriends as the father faces if he gets laid off and can't afford to pay it.

This system turns kids into pawns to control parents by means of the biased and currupt courts.

[Quester]

To the first, and very personal, question: $53,000.00/yr.

Well, I guess I figured that since you had no qualms about publishing mom's income, that you would equally as forthcoming in publishing your own.

To the second: As MUCH as it takes, you presumptuous jerk.

Wasn't really trying to get your bile up here ... I was just wondering what you thought a fair amount of support would be ?

Of course ... if you'd rather not ...

In regard to your post #56, ... you do realize that the awarding of custody is highly driven by the mores of our society, don't you ... where the father goes out and makes the money and the mother stays home and takes care of the home and kids.

Those mores will have to change before the trend in custodial awards change.

I am sorry that that custody appears to be a losing proposition for you.

FWIW ... my experience is as a stepdad of two ... whose mother consistently worked (and works) 40-50 hours per week. The kid's biological father (my youngest stepchild calls him the sperm donor) hasn't visited with his children since 1997 and my wife had to take him to court to get him to provide any support for the children.

OTOH ... my brother did receive custody of his (2) kids (his ex-wife didn't want custody) and he has never received a dime of child-support from her.

[Orangedog]

You guys aren't the only ones who have to go through this. Last week my kid was telling that the refrigerator was almost empty but mom's 4th husband just upgraded their PC to 1 gig of RAM. All the while, she's getting checks from me and the 3rd husband for her other kid.

The last time I filed for custody I was told the same thing you guys were. Only it wasn't just my lawyer, it was the lawyer that the magistrate assigned to my kid as well... that I was going to lose because I wasn't a woman.

Men are finally starting to wise up and not get married and start families. More importantly, the first male contraseptive has just begun clinical trials. As soon as it hits the market, expect the birth rate to drop even lower than it already is in the US.

[marty60]

Yes, God is very right. But, you can't live with an adulterer. Well some people can if the money is right. I just happen to be the former.

[Quester]

Yes, God is very right. But, you can't live with an adulterer.

God is right in this instance, as well ...

Matthew 5:32 But I tell you that every man who puts away his wife except on the ground of unfaithfulness causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries her when so divorced commits adultery.

[annyokie]

They are also taught that men are the evil enemy.

Bullshit. My kids are all boys, three of them, and I have never maligned men to them or made them feel their father was a deadbeat, which he is. After all, he and I agreed that I should stay home and raise the children, thus not working, and now he wants to punish the children?

[GOPJ]

I've seen it up close and personal. When they put a man in jail, the money magically appears.

Would you accept a women who let her children starve to death because she "didn't have the money"? Would you let it pass causally? Or would you expect her to do whatever is necessary to keep her children alive?

There wouldn't be mercy for a women who's children starved, and there damn sure isn't going to be much for a man who has children and doesn't support them either.

Many men work under the table to avoid child support. On paper it looks like they don't have the money. That's "on paper". Maybe they're cheating more than just the mother...

66.0% of all support not paid by non-custodial fathers is due to inability to pay Statistical Source: 1988 Census "Child Support and Alimony: 1989 Series P-60, No. 173 p. 6-7. and U.S. General Accounting Office Report" GAO/HRD-92-39FS January, 1992

[RogerFGay]

I might not have read all your posts, and probably don't have your complete view in perspective and context. I got the sense though that you have been commenting about how things used to be back in the olden days before family law was taken over by federal bureacracy. In one post, I remember reading that you thought serious a problem could be fixed by going to court and having a judge correct it --- like back when things worked more or less according to the Constitution.

[tazzcoburn]

The average cost of raising a child from birth to age 18 is 261,512 x 2 (I had 2 children)=523,024. My ex paid 90 a week for 16 years=74,880 and 56 per week for 3 years= 8,736 his total support 86,528 if you take 523,024-86,528= 436,496 not covered by support. My income 35,000 a year max = 630,000 for 18 years. Ex’s income 150,000 per year for 18 years= 2,700,000. So out of that he paid 86,528 for the support of our children which left him 2,613,472. The 436,496 left on the cost of raising our children came out of my 630,000...which means I’ve had 193,504 in 18 years that wasn’t attributed to raising our children. His cost 86,528 vs mine 436,496...if that means I was unfairly rewarded then I really suck at math. The reward I did receive...the unconditional love and respect of my children for my hard work and sacrifices.