Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unite For Child Support (MEGA BARF ALERT!!)
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 27 January 2006 | Editorial

Posted on 01/28/2006 8:21:45 AM PST by buccaneer81

Unite for child support Time spent with kids doesn't cut cost of rearing them, so state shouldn't use it as reason to slash payments

Published on: 01/27/06

The women in the state Senate — all seven of them — united this week across party lines and stood up for mothers and kids. Their 35 peers in the House must do the same if Georgia is to limit the damage to single mothers and their children caused by a bill changing how child-support payments are calculated in Georgia.

Under the bill, noncustodial parents can reduce the amount of child support they pay by spending a certain amount of time with their children. The proposal before the Senate set the threshold for the parenting time credit at 91 days a year — the equivalent of 13 weeks. But by joining together, female senators were able to raise that annual threshold to 121 days.

It was a small but significant victory in a father-driven rewrite of state child support laws that will lower basic awards for middle- and upper-income families. In the House, those trying to preserve the higher threshold will face a nimble and stubborn adversary in the bill's prime mover, state Rep. Earl Ehrhart (R-Powder Springs), who is unlikely to budge without political pressure.

However, this is an election year, and a collective stand by female House members — Republican and Democratic alike — could apply that necessary pressure. Gov. Sonny Perdue cannot afford to hand either of his possible Democratic opponents for governor, Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor or Secretary of State Cathy Cox, a ready-made TV commercial: "Every woman in the Georgia House of Representatives — Democrat and Republican alike — voted to protect child support for Georgia's kids, but the Republican leadership voted 'no.' "

Ehrhart has fought for years to overturn Georgia's support laws, claiming that they require child support payments that exceed the actual costs of child rearing. He had no evidence that Georgia awards were out of whack, only complaints from parents paying those awards. In fact, based on the available data, Georgia awards appear in line with the rest of the country.

Last year, Ehrhart succeeded in finally revamping the state's system for calculating support. However, the complex bill lacked specifics and contained legal gaffes, so a commission was appointed this past summer to review it and fill in the blanks, including creating an economic table estimating what it costs people of various incomes to raise children in Georgia. The table is critical because it's how judges will set support.

Commission members, notably Superior Court Judge Louisa Abbot of Savannah, Georgia Court of Appeals Judge Debra Bernes and Troup County Juvenile Judge R. Michael Key, labored for months to mitigate the worst aspects of the bill. Faced with two economic tables, they eventually persuaded the commission to adopt the higher one.

But there was a trade-off. Ehrhart got the commission to agree to lower the parenting time trigger to 91 days.

While the women of the Senate succeeded in forcing a change in that deal, it was a male colleague who spoke most plainly about why the whole concept of linking time spent with children to child support amounts is wrong.

"A day here or there doesn't reduce the monthly expenses of the mothers," said state Sen. Steve Thompson (D-Powder Springs). "It doesn't stop the upkeep of the house and the daily school money. The problem with this bill is that it gives someone economic credit for being a daddy, and that's stupid. You don't need to pay somebody for being a father. "


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; US: Georgia
KEYWORDS: childsupport; feminazis; manhaters; theft; waronfathers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last
To: phantomworker

His schedule is standard for non custodial parents- every other weekend plus one evening a week.


21 posted on 01/28/2006 9:45:54 AM PST by LWalk18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: phantomworker
RULE 27: MODEL PARENTING TIME SCHEDULE LOCAL DOMESTIC COURT RULE 27 / LOCAL JUVENILE COURT RULE 22 MODEL PARENTING TIME SCHEDULE FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMON PLEAS COURT DOMESTIC AND JUVENILE DIVISIONS FOR PARENTS TRAVELING UNDER 90 MILES ONE WAY:

1. Weekends: Alternate weekends from Friday at 6:00 p.m. until Sunday at 6:00 p.m. This alternating weekend schedule shall not change, even when interrupted by holiday and birthday, summer and/or vacation parenting time. (See Section 5a below) 2. Weekdays: One weekday evening per week from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. which shall be Wednesday unless otherwise agreed and designated herein as

5. Holidays (includes birthdays): In odd-numbered years, Mother has Spring Break, Memorial Day, Labor Day, and the first half of Winter Break. In odd-numbered years, Father has Martin Luther King's Day, Fourth of July, Thanksgiving, and the second half of Winter Break. In the even-numbered years, the schedules are reversed.

a. In the event of a conflict between regular parenting time and holiday parenting time, holiday parenting time prevails. The alternating weekend parenting time schedule continues, however, as if the holiday had not intervened. This means that one parent may have the children three weekends in a row. This process equalizes itself over the course of time for each parent

d. Hours for parents who can not agree are as follows: Martin Luther King Day (9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.); Spring Break (6:00 p.m. on the day school is out to 7:00 p.m. the day before school recommences); Memorial Day and Labor Day (6:00 p.m. Friday to 6:00 p.m. Monday); July 4th (9:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. the next day); Thanksgiving (6:00 p.m. Wednesday to 6:00 p.m. Sunday); Winter Break (first half commences at 6:00 p.m. the last day of school before Winter Break begins, until December 25 at 1:00 p.m.; second half commences at 1:00 p.m. December 25 until 6:00 p.m. the day before school recommences).

8. Telephone Access: a. Children can call either parent as often as they wish, at reasonable times, so long as the call is collect, if it is a long distance call. b. In addition, the non-possessory parent shall be entitled to telephone communication with the children not less than three times per week for not less than 15 minutes per call. c. Possessory parent shall not interfere with or stop the telephone communication.

22 posted on 01/28/2006 9:46:53 AM PST by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: phantomworker
It's the stupid fighting with your ex, that makes it so tough on kids...the games we play of getting backatcha! Be a man (or woman), pay your support. Be a woman (or man) and quit holding your ex-spouse hostage to your hate and vengence.

It truly, truly is all about the kids!

My ex-husband never paid one thin dime of support for 3 kids. Because he didn't want to pay, he disappeared (which was okay by me - he was scum and not good for the kids in the first place.)

That was it! Over 25 years have gone and still no contact...but I never went after him, or tried to have him jailed. I supported my kids and was just glad to have him gone. They grew up loved, supported and secure. They are successful adults and I am now a grandmother of four.

Ladies, quit being vindictive. If he's not there then YOU must do it. Life isn't always fair.
23 posted on 01/28/2006 9:51:10 AM PST by colorcountry (Currently not in the process of becoming a God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: phantomworker
That's the standard here in Columbus. I kid you not. The courts stick hard to this unless of course there is shared parenting. In my case shared parenting is impossible because the ex took my son before the divorce was final and shacked up 55 miles away. With the third party that led to the whole mess. You can't be that far away and have shared custody because of school, etc.

The court gave her custody because of my son's age (four at the time) and they said I worked too much! (Yeah..all the better to pay the big support order.)

24 posted on 01/28/2006 9:51:51 AM PST by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LWalk18
A parent under the proposed system can obtain 50/50 custody, not having to pay support.

What state is this, just curious? So in this state, 50/50 custody means no one has to pay support?

25 posted on 01/28/2006 9:52:36 AM PST by phantomworker (Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool...and don't accuse me of your imagination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry
...Ladies, quit being vindictive. If he's not there then YOU must do it. Life isn't always fair.

I respect you for that and I know your kids do as well. What a good feeling to be such a great role model for your kids and grandkids!

26 posted on 01/28/2006 9:57:07 AM PST by phantomworker (Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool...and don't accuse me of your imagination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: phantomworker

Agreed.

He should also stop whining to us and go get himself a lawyer, if his statements are true.

If he really cared about his kids and was a decent man, he would be fighting to see them and not hunting through the internet for stories about how he was wronged.



27 posted on 01/28/2006 9:58:34 AM PST by Dashing Dasher (People who live in glass houses, shouldn't walk around naked... or throw stones....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dashing Dasher

See posts #22 and #24.


28 posted on 01/28/2006 10:00:49 AM PST by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

I am sorry to hear about how it worked out. I understand now. The big paychecks are a problem. Sorry.

Just as a thought, don't know if it is feasible, but can you move closer to your son and petition for shared parenting now that your son is older and maybe the financial situation has changed? Maybe some people forget that the original order can be easily modified.


29 posted on 01/28/2006 10:03:19 AM PST by phantomworker (Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool...and don't accuse me of your imagination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Dashing Dasher
He should also stop whining to us and go get himself a lawyer, if his statements are true. If he really cared about his kids and was a decent man, he would be fighting to see them

I've spent over $30,000 fighting for more time with my son. I'm broke. And I've been to jail for contempt of court (I told the judge she had no moral authority to deprive my son of his father and that she wasn't God.)

So I may be a whiner in your eyes, but I'm not wrong.

30 posted on 01/28/2006 10:05:01 AM PST by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: phantomworker
Just as a thought, don't know if it is feasible, but can you move closer to your son and petition for shared parenting now that your son is older and maybe the financial situation has changed? Maybe some people forget that the original order can be easily modified.

I could do that. But in order to modify custody in this state, its back to the court appointed shrinks and counselors and four to six month intervals between docket positions (if some lawyer doesn't ask for multiple continuances.) My ex can outspend me in court. After all, she gets $800 amonth tax free from me, and she earns $42k herself.

31 posted on 01/28/2006 10:09:24 AM PST by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dashing Dasher

I agree totally! If any dad really cared about seeing his kids more, I cannot imagine any court denying him more visitation rights within the law!!! Given that many dads do shirk their responsibility, the court would welcome it.

And, if any mother denies visitation rights to the dad, or blatantly tries to turn the kids against the dad, she can lose all rights to the kids herself.

I would personally help any dad that wanted more visitation rights with their kids!


32 posted on 01/28/2006 10:16:02 AM PST by phantomworker (Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool...and don't accuse me of your imagination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

When I got a modification to the order, I just filled out paperwork. Of course, my ex- agreed to the modification and signed the paperwork. There were free advocates, especially for child custody cases, available for advice regardless of income. I got the impression in WA anyway, that courts do not favor attorneys either. Maybe your ex- would like you do see your son more now that he is older and would now cooperate more.

Maybe things have changed in the court system since you tried last. It would be worth the effort to look into it. I just can't believe that nothing can be done. If that were me, I wouldn't let anything keep me from my kids.


33 posted on 01/28/2006 10:22:20 AM PST by phantomworker (Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool...and don't accuse me of your imagination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

I'd be happy if the mother were required to provide proof that the child support money was spent for the child.


34 posted on 01/28/2006 10:23:26 AM PST by Doohickey (If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice...I will choose freewill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry

And sometimes the female moves 2,000 miles away while the male is deployed and doesn't tell him about it until the check is due, at which time she is kind enough to provide a P.O. box.


35 posted on 01/28/2006 10:25:57 AM PST by Doohickey (If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice...I will choose freewill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Doohickey

I know. That is the tragedy of the whole thing. I wish we could all had wonderful fairytale lives where everything is fair. But like I said honor your court-ordered duty (if you can't, get it modified)...be as much a father as you CAN be. You'll be better off for it and so will your kids.

I'm sorry the mother of your children cannot be a better mother and person. I'm glad you can be.


36 posted on 01/28/2006 10:29:29 AM PST by colorcountry (Currently not in the process of becoming a God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

That's the Hobson's Choice, isn't it? You can have the kids if you're willing to give up the job you need to support them. Keep the job, and you get to give most of your earnings to a vindictive ex who can do whatever the hell she wants.


37 posted on 01/28/2006 10:30:23 AM PST by Doohickey (If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice...I will choose freewill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: phantomworker
I don't mean to get into personal details, but what was the reason for so little visitation? There had to be something?

I see, you live in Washington. Every other weekend is standard for non custodial parents in Missouri as well. What is standard in your state?

38 posted on 01/28/2006 10:31:13 AM PST by ozarkgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry

Well, my son is 20 now and his mother can no longer interfere in our relationship. We've become very close since he's been able to shed her yoke.


39 posted on 01/28/2006 10:34:51 AM PST by Doohickey (If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice...I will choose freewill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Doohickey

Congratulations! There you go, eventually you will be rewarded for your good behavior...and those without good behavior will suffer.


40 posted on 01/28/2006 10:36:11 AM PST by colorcountry (Currently not in the process of becoming a God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson