Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: child support  (Read 10315 times)

LadyKD

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1297
  • And so it began..
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: child support
« Reply #30 on: July 18, 2007, 10:27:11 PM »

ole girl seems trifling as hell.. one of her chickenhead friends told her to take him to court to see if she could get more money to get her hair and nails did and the jokes on her now :D :D :D


lol and probably like this



Now Son goes home to this:

Her: So what did you do at Daddy's
Son: It was fine Dad got me (insert whateva)
Her: Where is it let me see
Son: He said I could only keep it at his house
Her: Blood pressure now up to stroke level...oh he did did he? That blah blah son of a bytch.
Son: sitting there taking all of that hostile in..

Winner no one - Loser everyone involved...

The child is going to suffer regardless because s/he is growing without two loving parents in the home. You're right that they could both stand to be more mature, but the truth is they're probably not. I'd rather this be the interaction than for them to be in contact and constantly fighting in front of their kid

Considering my son leads a pretty happy, well adjusted life as the kid of a single parent and I am familar with dozens of single parents (male and female) who have raised kids that are not the spawn of satan I would say I disagree with the bolded statement. But that is not the discussion here.

I'm living proof that children from single-parent homes can lead happy, well-adjusted lives, but I think we can agree that two loving parents is still the ideal. In this case the kid is not going to get that ideal whether the parents stay together or not. It's basically a sunk cost; there's no reason to force interaction if it's going to be negative

I didnt say anything about force interaction. If anything I said both parents are at fault for not putting outside their petty differences and looking at what is best for their child and not what will soothe their egos.

Special Agent Dana Scully

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8991
  • aka MCB
    • View Profile
Re: child support
« Reply #31 on: July 18, 2007, 11:08:38 PM »

ole girl seems trifling as hell.. one of her chickenhead friends told her to take him to court to see if she could get more money to get her hair and nails did and the jokes on her now :D :D :D


lol and probably like this



Now Son goes home to this:

Her: So what did you do at Daddy's
Son: It was fine Dad got me (insert whateva)
Her: Where is it let me see
Son: He said I could only keep it at his house
Her: Blood pressure now up to stroke level...oh he did did he? That blah blah son of a bytch.
Son: sitting there taking all of that hostile in..

Winner no one - Loser everyone involved...

The child is going to suffer regardless because s/he is growing without two loving parents in the home. You're right that they could both stand to be more mature, but the truth is they're probably not. I'd rather this be the interaction than for them to be in contact and constantly fighting in front of their kid

Considering my son leads a pretty happy, well adjusted life as the kid of a single parent and I am familar with dozens of single parents (male and female) who have raised kids that are not the spawn of satan I would say I disagree with the bolded statement. But that is not the discussion here.

I'm living proof that children from single-parent homes can lead happy, well-adjusted lives, but I think we can agree that two loving parents is still the ideal. In this case the kid is not going to get that ideal whether the parents stay together or not. It's basically a sunk cost; there's no reason to force interaction if it's going to be negative

I didnt say anything about force interaction. If anything I said both parents are at fault for not putting outside their petty differences and looking at what is best for their child and not what will soothe their egos.

to me, it seem like homegirl is guilty of that.  jarhead already said that when things happen with the kids, he talks to the girl, but wrt to exchange of funds he doesn't.  she was just being petty and being spiteful. she's the one who set this in motion with her pettyness.
Columbia 3L

One Step Ahead

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6465
  • you say you want a revolution
    • View Profile
Re: child support
« Reply #32 on: July 19, 2007, 04:30:08 AM »
wow you guys are a piece of work.  all you've heard is the guys side and you are already callin homegirl all kind of names.  What if you found out his version of "half" is $25 a week cause thats enough to buy peanut butter and jelly and balony and cheese to last a week, that he pitched in half for the dental appointment but not the actually cost of the braces, that the clothes were 4 for 10 "I love NY" tshirts etc etc?  Or to use another scenario what if homegirl's mom is triflin and has been pocketing 50% of the money?  In either of these cases I can easily see why homegirl took him to court. 
Frankly, nobody in this mess is an angel. 

blk_reign

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 7978
    • View Profile
Re: child support
« Reply #33 on: July 19, 2007, 08:28:24 AM »
wow you're being real judgmental about us...

i'm not quick to side with women just because i am a woman...based on the scenario that was given (which i'll assume as fact since jarhead knows more about the situation than anyone else on this board) homegirl is full of it.. the father seemed to have taken pride in his son in spite of the fact that things didn't work out with the relationship with the mother..and for that i commend him as there are many fathers that haven't stepped up..however this scenario shows that there are men that do..

if the woman waited til the son was 8 to take the father to court..after he'd been paying support for his son for 8 yrs  as well as his son's tuition then chances are that she's salty about something and wanted to see if she could get more money.. or wanted to receive the money directly..or wanted to have direct contact with the father...

i'm pretty certain if the maternal grandmother was holding on to some of the cash then the father would have made a different arrangement at some point and time..

let's not assume the worse for this man simply because he's a man...that's just trifling

and true.. no one's an angel however no one is arguing that point either...

wow you guys are a piece of work.  all you've heard is the guys side and you are already callin homegirl all kind of names.  What if you found out his version of "half" is $25 a week cause thats enough to buy peanut butter and jelly and balony and cheese to last a week, that he pitched in half for the dental appointment but not the actually cost of the braces, that the clothes were 4 for 10 "I love NY" tshirts etc etc?  Or to use another scenario what if homegirl's mom is triflin and has been pocketing 50% of the money?  In either of these cases I can easily see why homegirl took him to court. 
Frankly, nobody in this mess is an angel. 
We're not accepting this CHANGE UP in the rules. Period. American presidents have been in the bed with organized crime, corporate pilferers, and the like for years. And all u want to put on this man is that his pastor said "Gotdamn America?" Hell, America.U got off pretty damn well, if you ask me...

One Step Ahead

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6465
  • you say you want a revolution
    • View Profile
Re: child support
« Reply #34 on: July 19, 2007, 08:54:20 AM »
I'm not judging but I don't think I'm the most objective about my friends and wouldn't be surprised if others are the same way.

Nor am I necessarily calling the dude triflin, but without knowing the particular individuals involved I would not feel comfortable calling someone triflin as hell for asking for child support given exigent circumstances.

blk_reign

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 7978
    • View Profile
Re: child support
« Reply #35 on: July 19, 2007, 09:09:39 AM »
I didn't call her trifling solely on the basis of seeking child support.. although that seems suspect to me considering the fact that (with the information provided) the father was taking care of his son..

I called her trifling for giving crazy attitude regarding whatever questions were posed by the father regarding times to pick the kid up etc...

if she's really that catty it's pretty obvious why the father would rather deal with the maternal grandmother instead of the mother directly if he didn't have to..

I'm not judging but I don't think I'm the most objective about my friends and wouldn't be surprised if others are the same way.

Nor am I necessarily calling the dude triflin, but without knowing the particular individuals involved I would not feel comfortable calling someone triflin as hell for asking for child support given exigent circumstances.
We're not accepting this CHANGE UP in the rules. Period. American presidents have been in the bed with organized crime, corporate pilferers, and the like for years. And all u want to put on this man is that his pastor said "Gotdamn America?" Hell, America.U got off pretty damn well, if you ask me...

One Step Ahead

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6465
  • you say you want a revolution
    • View Profile
Re: child support
« Reply #36 on: July 19, 2007, 09:13:24 AM »
Eh I can imagine being catty--maybe homeboys with a nilla.   :o  :D  I'm just sayin is all.

I just think anytime you introduce a third-party in the mix there are likely to be problems unless he was writing a check to her specifically which I doubt happened.

jarhead

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2747
  • "i keeps it reeaal!"
    • View Profile
Re: child support
« Reply #37 on: July 19, 2007, 11:06:00 AM »
wow you're being real judgmental about us...

i'm not quick to side with women just because i am a woman...based on the scenario that was given (which i'll assume as fact since jarhead knows more about the situation than anyone else on this board) homegirl is full of it.. the father seemed to have taken pride in his son in spite of the fact that things didn't work out with the relationship with the mother..and for that i commend him as there are many fathers that haven't stepped up..however this scenario shows that there are men that do..

if the woman waited til the son was 8 to take the father to court..after he'd been paying support for his son for 8 yrs  as well as his son's tuition then chances are that she's salty about something and wanted to see if she could get more money.. or wanted to receive the money directly..or wanted to have direct contact with the father...

i'm pretty certain if the maternal grandmother was holding on to some of the cash then the father would have made a different arrangement at some point and time..

let's not assume the worse for this man simply because he's a man...that's just trifling

and true.. no one's an angel however no one is arguing that point either...

wow you guys are a piece of work.  all you've heard is the guys side and you are already callin homegirl all kind of names.  What if you found out his version of "half" is $25 a week cause thats enough to buy peanut butter and jelly and balony and cheese to last a week, that he pitched in half for the dental appointment but not the actually cost of the braces, that the clothes were 4 for 10 "I love NY" tshirts etc etc?  Or to use another scenario what if homegirl's mom is triflin and has been pocketing 50% of the money?  In either of these cases I can easily see why homegirl took him to court. 
Frankly, nobody in this mess is an angel. 



exactly, that was the other beef we were having all the women that agreed with her point kept with this "what if" stuff we're like what if what...it is what it is we're not  talking about what if we're talking about what is...dude was doing right. his mom wasn't pocketing the money, his mom knows she's being ridiculous but just like him she's doing what she has to do to make sure the boy gets what he needs. court ordered child support is just that court ordered, if dad is doing it already we don't need the courts. the one chick that was on our side had to first find her daughter's father just to be able to take him to court.
...man, you was who you was before you got here

One Step Ahead

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6465
  • you say you want a revolution
    • View Profile
Re: child support
« Reply #38 on: July 19, 2007, 11:26:22 AM »
it rarely is what it is.  in the hypothetical I agree that provided someone is getting all the material support owed, there should be no reason to compel support, but there is no guarantee that the system that works now will always work--nor do I imagine does it necessarily feel empowering to be picking up cash and having to provide bills and receipts through a middle woman who you may or may not like.  heck if we're being real here it would be nice if homeboy had joint custody, then child support probably wouldn't even be an issue.

jarhead

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2747
  • "i keeps it reeaal!"
    • View Profile
Re: child support
« Reply #39 on: July 19, 2007, 01:07:05 PM »
it rarely is what it is.  in the hypothetical I agree that provided someone is getting all the material support owed, there should be no reason to compel support, but there is no guarantee that the system that works now will always work--nor do I imagine does it necessarily feel empowering to be picking up cash and having to provide bills and receipts through a middle woman who you may or may not like.  heck if we're being real here it would be nice if homeboy had joint custody, then child support probably wouldn't even be an issue.

first it's not a hypothetical it's a real incident i'm talking about a real dude, a real child and a real woman. i disagree things are always what they are. if you're trying to say that there is more to the issue of why she would file for child support than yes there is, they broke up, he moved on, met a woman he fell in love with and married her. so now the ex is mad and tries to make his life miserable by using the child as a pawn. he has filed for joint custody by the way. i'm not making light of the child support issue i know there are dudes out there who think they're responsibility ends once they n-t but he's not one of those. he's a stand up dude who takes care of his responsibilities. too many women hold onto stuff long after they should let it go. the relationship didn't work out. if she spent all the time and energy that uses to try and make his life miserable on finding a successful relationship for herself she might not be so bitter.
...man, you was who you was before you got here