father claims rights denied

What a complete joke.

quote:

of course if you love your kids you will automatically provide for them. you'll buy them school clothes and food and all the things that they need. but the court doesnt recognize this...they consider those things as gifts, he said.

Unless those kids live with you, you are not buying them all that they need to survive and thrive. If it pains you to not have those gifts deducted from your financial obligations, then stop buying the stuff and just give the checks.

Sometimes I wonder if people like this were ever in the picture. It's like they don't have a full comprehension of how expensive it is to raise children... like they don't know that children need things daily, they don't follow some kind of rigid daily budget. That is either one helluva disability check or, much more likely, it doesn't cover more than a fraction of what the child actually needs.

quote:

in fact he said plenty of fathers in this situation said they would rather not work...what would be the point if CS was going to take all they had.

"The point" is that you have a financial obligation to your children. The money has to come from somewhere. Why should my tax dollars go to it? I wasn't the one having sex and producing that child. "Best you can do" sure sounds nice, but it's alltogether worthless in the grand scheme of things. I can't offer the grocery store "the best I can do" for my groceries. I can't give my landlord "the best I can do" for my rent. My boss damn sure can't pay me "the best he can do" for the job I've completed. Sometimes, you just have to do more. No "A" for Effort.

Who is RAISING these people?? What nonsense.

Yea, he's not telling the whole truth. During most child support/custody hearings ample time is alloted the non-custodial parent to spend with his/her kids; and oh, about how child support took his entire disability check, by law disability cannot be garnished for the purpose of child support . . .

quote:

During most child support/custody hearings ample time is alloted the non-custodial parent to spend with his/her kids;

And this means that the other parent "complies" with the court order?

Just becasue the court says the father has rights to see the child doesn't mean the mother complies no more then when the court orders the father to pay child support that he complies.

And it can get expensive taking someone to court all the time to fight for you rights.

quote:

Unless those kids live with you, you are not buying them all that they need to survive and thrive

Any why is that? I'm sure most may say it is not the norm but I watch my brother in law get f*cked by the courts. And he DID provide ALL of the childrens needs. When he finally had enough of his wife's b.s. he left her but continued to pay the mortgage, the car note, the utilities, pay for private school, etc while his wife sat our here lazy ass.

When he got to court NONE of that was taken into consideration and his wife, her female laywer along with the female judge and HIS female lawyer conspired to screw him. They painted him as a dead beat dad. Took most of his salary. They left him with $300 dollars a month to live off of. When he picks the kids up from home for visitation they are FILTHY I mean look like they came from playing in a sand box dirty....they have NO discipline...and are both doing poorly in school. They need to be with him but the courts always side with the mother for no other reason then she is female... regardless of how trifling she may be.

The problem is that there is no accountability for the money paid via child support. The custodial parent does not have to prove they are using the garnishment exclusively for the care of the children. I think the custodial parent should have to produce receipts, verifying proper usage of the support payment.

Additionally, anytime the custodial parent wants to request a change in custody status or support payments, you have to show up (with representation if you don't want to get screwed) or face default judgement.

I have a good friend MLM that had the same experience with his ex-wife. Eventually, he had to show his children his paychecks with the garnishments, so they knew he wasn't a deadbeat like the mother told them. Many courts are still reluctant to give custody to the father, even if he is in a better position to care for the kids.

Sorry, but men whether they are good fathers or bad get screwed on child support. The Bad need to get screwed and I have no problems putting them in jail, yes I said jail. I had a man arrested the second he walked into the courtroom, but that is another story. Good fathers get truly screwed because they want their kids but the mothers use the children as pawn for money. It is totally discretionary for the mother. But men, unlike women will not usually fight for their children.

Our paternalistic society has made men weak when it comes to fighting for their rights. As some of you already know, I practice family law here in New Jersey. Most of my clients are men, all have children with soon to be or alrealdy ex-wives or baby mamas. Either way it is drama.

I just tried a case on monday where a woman, straight out lied to the court to gain custody of her children. I slapped her with each lie, will it make a difference. We shall see, right now my client has custody of both his sons, but at trial the mother brought in witness after witness, I only had my client.

My point, she was doing everything she could to get her kids back. My client had really good stuff on her, but would not let me use it, he tied my hands because she is the mother of his children. She on the other hand had no problem telling the Judge that his mother was a drug addict, his sister was a convicted drug addict and that they lived in a filthy home with 10 other unrelated people. All false but that is what she testified to in open court, and yes I slapped her with the facts and then she still made excuses. She would go to any length to get her kids back.

Until men fight as hard and as dirty for their children as women do, men will continue to pay child support. Simple as that and women will continue to get thier hair and nails done with that money. Now are all mothers bad, no of course not, but then again, I do not represent people who can get along rasing their children separately.

Wake up men, when you leave her, take your kid with you. If she left you she would not hesitate to take your child. If their are no custody papers, then the kid is just as much yours as her. Don't give up your power.

I went all the way to eighteen years old and there are still no custody papers on me, so as far as the legal system was concerned I was at all times 100% in my mothers custody and 100% in my fathers. Why should your child be any different.

quote:

Originally posted by MidLifeMan:

quote:

During most child support/custody hearings ample time is alloted the non-custodial parent to spend with his/her kids;

And this means that the other parent "complies" with the court order?

Just becasue the court says the father has rights to see the child doesn't mean the mother complies no more then when the court orders the father to pay child support that he complies.

And it can get expensive taking someone to court all the time to fight for you rights."
_________________________________________________________________

There is legal services agencies, and prose representations ---you may not have been told the WHOLE story. If the custodial spouse denies the non-custodial spouse/parent visitation, then that parent in in contempt of a court order, which is punishiable by fine and/or imprisonment; to my knowledge, you do not need legal representation to offer proof to the courts that that court's order is being violated; usually the court order is proof enough for a police escort to enforce the order.

__________________________________________________________________

quote:

Unless those kids live with you, you are not buying them all that they need to survive and thrive

Any why is that? I'm sure most may say it is not the norm but I watch my brother in law get f*cked by the courts. And he DID provide ALL of the childrens needs. When he finally had enough of his wife's b.s. he left her but continued to pay the mortgage, the car note, the utilities, pay for private school, etc while his wife sat our here lazy ass.

When he got to court NONE of that was taken into consideration and his wife, her female laywer along with the female judge and HIS female lawyer conspired to screw him. They painted him as a dead beat dad. Took most of his salary. They left him with $300 dollars a month to live off of. When he picks the kids up from home for visitation they are FILTHY I mean look like they came from playing in a sand box dirty....they have NO discipline...and are both doing poorly in school. They need to be with him but the courts always side with the mother for no other reason then she is female... regardless of how trifling she may be.

_________________________________________________________________________

Often this may be the case when there has been a long marriage and an agreement for the wife to be a stay at home mom, etc., the court takes into consideration the number of years the wife could have been either educating herself and/or working, but instead stayed at home and maintained the household and raised the children while the husband worked and establish an avenue of independent livelihood outside the home. Also, the law does, recognize a stay at home spouse/spouse's right to "continue to live the life which she(he) had become accustomed to" during the marriage --- which basically means separation and/or divorce should not drastically change what the family was accustomed to during the marriage, i.e., his wife and children should not have to move to the projects and get on welfare because he is not longer in the home; besides, the way the courts see it, he was paying the mortgage, etc., while was in the home, if he chooses to leave or has did something the make stayig with him unaccceptable/unbearable, then why should the spouse and children suffer?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nikcara:

"Good fathers get truly screwed because they want their kids but the mothers use the children as pawn for money. It is totally discretionary for the mother."
--------------------------------------------
This is not a totally true statement, though I am sure, no I know that there are some mothers out there like that, but usually, court ordered childsupport has a formula for computing childsupport, which takes into consideration both parents incomes which leaves each parent responsible for a proportionent share of the childsupport for the child(ren).

Usually the mothers that use their child a pawns for money from the fathers, the father are not paying under court ordered child support and are just either stupid or still so in love with the mother that he is going to give her anything that she wants anyway.
------------------------------------------


"But men, unlike women will not usually fight for their children."


----------------------------- Well, there you go . . .
---------------------------------------



"She would go to any length to get her kids back."
_______________________________________________

Well, there you go again . . .

---------------------------------------



"Until men fight as hard and as dirty for their children as women do, men will continue to pay child support. "
_____________________________________________

And until men show more by their actions that they love and care for their children as much as the mother does, not much will change. The courts in America know that usually children are going to be better off with their mothers in most cases (not all), because they also know that as you said above in so many words, a mother (at least most) will do ANYTHING to have her children with her and to take care of them, no matter what.
--------------------------------------------

quote:

Our paternalistic society has made men weak when it comes to fighting for their rights

That is what other female lawyer friends of mine have said but when you don't have a lot of money to begin with AND you are still trying to do right by your children paying laywer fees can be overwhelming. And I understand their are suppose to be free and pro bono legal services but most times the representation is poor or they are hard to find.

Most laywers will throw out $5000-8000 retainer fee right off the bat...my brother in law payed the first laywer (female) 5000 and the second lawyer (male) 8000. And my brother in law had info to use against her but HIS lawyer never presented it. From what he and my wife said, and even the second laywer agreed, that his, hers and the judge "made a deal" prior to the case being heard.

By Sunnubian

quote:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nikcara:

"Good fathers get truly screwed because they want their kids but the mothers use the children as pawn for money. It is totally discretionary for the mother."
--------------------------------------------
This is not a totally true statement, though I am sure, no I know that there are some mothers out there like that, but usually, court ordered childsupport has a formula for computing childsupport, which takes into consideration both parents incomes which leaves each parent responsible for a proportionent share of the childsupport for the child(ren).

Usually the mothers that use their child a pawns for money from the fathers, the father are not paying under court ordered child support and are just either stupid or still so in love with the mother that he is going to give her anything that she wants anyway.
------------------------------------------


"But men, unlike women will not usually fight for their children."


----------------------------- Well, there you go . . .
---------------------------------------



"She would go to any length to get her kids back."
_______________________________________________

Well, there you go again . . .

---------------------------------------



"Until men fight as hard and as dirty for their children as women do, men will continue to pay child support. "
_____________________________________________

And until men show more by their actions that they love and care for their children as much as the mother does, not much will change. The courts in America know that usually children are going to be better off with their mothers in most cases (not all), because they also know that as you said above in so many words, a mother (at least most) will do ANYTHING to have her children with her and to take care of them, no matter what.
--------------------------------------------
Posts: 1223 | Registered: August 23, 2003

I am not sure where you practice law, but in NJ, child support is calculated based on both incomes, thereafter, the non-custodial parent, pays in cash or check directly to the cusotidal parent or to the child support office[in NJ it is called the Probation Department], who converts the cash into a check that is either deposited directly into the custodial parent's account or mailed to him or her. The Custodial Parent has the discretion to spend the money as he or she see fit. There is no judical review of how the money is spent.

NJ has even come up with pretty names for the parties, the parent who has the kids the most is the Parent of Primary Residence or PPR and the parent who has the kids any other time is called the Parent of Alternate Residence, PAR.

Also I disagree that fathers that pay directly get screwed more. Actually, they get screwed less because no one can make them pay a specific amount or at a specific time. Moreover, it is usually that the mother wants the father back and he'll say if you take me to court, I will never come back to you, so she does not. Kinda like those women who are perpetually engage and refer to the man she has been shacking with for year or has multiple children by as her fiancee.

Also, I do not think that lying about the facts of your case is a good thing. Nor do I think that taking one parent away from kids for the sake of money is good for those kids.

Finally, I do not agree that children are necessarily better off with thier mothers than with their fathers or both parents for that matter. I do not think women are better parents because they give birth. Men cannot give birth so that could never be judged fairly on that matter. I think that the nasty saying we have Mamma's baby, Daddy's maybe. Says more about what our socieity feels about women than the quality of care the child will receive. MOst of the children that live below the poverty level live with their mothers,I wonder what would happen if the children lived with thier fathers. I cannot immagine growing up without my father, thus I think it is important that fathers are around to raise thier children and not just partisipate like fans at a stadium. Each parent gives a child a unique perspective on life and everyday events. To delete one side for the sake of money is not in the childs best intersts. I think I now have my closing argument for the case I just finished trying.

Midlife Man: I would suggest that you tell your brother in law 1.to go to an attorney that specializes in family law, family law, at least in NJ is a specailty, just like criminal and civil law. You can even be certified as a matrimonial attorney here in NJ. Your brother in law should as any attorney if he or she is a member of the Academy of Matrimonial Attorney [nationwide organization] or on the State or County Bar's Family Law Executive Committee to get a feel for that attorney's experience in the Family Law area. 2. Start to take pictures of his kids when he picks them up at thier mother's house, ideally, right in the front yard, 3. Go to the school and talk to thier teachers, get them on his side so that when he wants to take her back the teachers will testify on his behalf 4. Take the kids to doctors, and dentists regularly so that he can show the Court that he pays attention to those medical concerns as well. While I do not know what happened in that case, if your brother in law has the evidence you are suggesting then I am pretty sure he would have won in NJ at the trial level or on appeal.

quote:

Originally posted by Nikcara:
By Sunnubian

[QUOTE][QUOTE]Originally posted by Nikcara:

"Good fathers get truly screwed because they want their kids but the mothers use the children as pawn for money. It is totally discretionary for the mother."
--------------------------------------------
This is not a totally true statement, though I am sure, no I know that there are some mothers out there like that, but usually, court ordered childsupport has a formula for computing childsupport, which takes into consideration both parents incomes which leaves each parent responsible for a proportionent share of the childsupport for the child(ren).

Usually the mothers that use their child a pawns for money from the fathers, the father are not paying under court ordered child support and are just either stupid or still so in love with the mother that he is going to give her anything that she wants anyway.
------------------------------------------


"But men, unlike women will not usually fight for their children."


----------------------------- Well, there you go . . .
---------------------------------------



"She would go to any length to get her kids back."
_______________________________________________

Well, there you go again . . .

---------------------------------------



"Until men fight as hard and as dirty for their children as women do, men will continue to pay child support. "
_____________________________________________

And until men show more by their actions that they love and care for their children as much as the mother does, not much will change. The courts in America know that usually children are going to be better off with their mothers in most cases (not all), because they also know that as you said above in so many words, a mother (at least most) will do ANYTHING to have her children with her and to take care of them, no matter what.
--------------------------------------------
Posts: 1223 | Registered: August 23, 2003

"I am not sure where you practice law, but in NJ, child support is calculated based on both incomes,"
-----------------------------------------------

I could have sworn that I stated that, but anyway, since that is how it is caculated, how can it be unfair to either party, especially to him or whichever parent does not actually have the children?
--------------------------------------------

"thereafter, the non-custodial parent, pays in cash or check directly to the cusotidal parent or to the child support office[in NJ it is called the Probation Department], who converts the cash into a check that is either deposited directly into the custodial parent's account or mailed to him or her."
-------------------------------------------
No, in New Jersey, it is called Family Court, parents that have to pay court ordered child support, whether directly or through wage garnishment are not automatically on probation. They may eventually come to be on probation for violation of the court order to pay in the first place.
__________________________________________



"The Custodial Parent has the discretion to spend the money as he or she see fit. There is no judical review of how the money is spent."
_______________________________________

This is what the custodial parent is supposed to do, spend the money as he or she sees fit for the benefit of the children, which may include making her car payment which is needed to get to work and the children to school, or yes, even her hair, clothes needed to be presentable on a job that she works on to support the children, because no matter what, if you are the custodial parent you are likely spending far more than the non-custodial parent in most cases: Non-custodial pays 500.00/mo child support; however, the rent or note on the house is 950.00 + utilities + groceries + clothing + medicine + gas + entertainment + school supplies + insurance + missellaneous; so, the non- custodial parent still get off on the better end of the bargain.
---------------------------------------



"Also I disagree that fathers that pay directly get screwed more. Actually, they get screwed less because no one can make them pay a specific amount or at a specific time."
_________________________________________

I did not say they get screwed more, I said, as above, they more often get the better part of the deal.
------------------------------------------



"Moreover, it is usually that the mother wants the father back and he'll say if you take me to court, I will never come back to you, so she does not."
-----------------------------------------

Women like this are stupid and I would question whether or not even they need to have custody of their own children, you know, if they will let their children suffer just for the possibility of 'getting back with' their father who does not want to pay child support.
___________________________________________


"Kinda like those women who are perpetually engage and refer to the man she has been shacking with for year or has multiple children by as her fiancee."
---------------------------------------------

I don't know what this has to do with a father's parental duty to support his children, but I do know women who fit that description.
_____________________________________________


"Also, I do not think that lying about the facts of your case is a good thing. Nor do I think that taking one parent away from kids for the sake of money is good for those kids."
-----------------------------------------------

I don't think people should lie to the court about the facts either, since, causing the children to come up lacking in some way or another or using the children as spite pawns only hurts the children.
___________________________________________



"Finally, I do not agree that children are necessarily better off with thier mothers than with their fathers or both parents for that matter. I do not think women are better parents because they give birth. Men cannot give birth so that could never be judged fairly on that matter."
--------------------------------------------

I know that some women are lousy parents, but in the majority of cases the mother does make the better parent because often, once a man is not longer living in the same house with his children, he will often times be out there too busy making another life (or family) for himself to be bothered with his own children from the estranged marriage/relationship.
-------------------------------------------


"I think that the nasty saying we have Mamma's baby, Daddy's maybe. Says more about what our socieity feels about women than the quality of care the child will receive."
--------------------------------------------
Well, society has been feeling that way for a looooong time now, since I have heard this phrase all my life, and really thought is was only a southern saying until now, however, with dna, now that saying no longer has any merit.
________________________________________________


"MOst of the children that live below the poverty level live with their mothers,I wonder what would happen if the children lived with thier fathers."
-----------------------------------------------
Most of the children that live below the poverty level were living there when their parents were together. If they lived with their fathers who are making poverty level wages, then they would remain below the poverty level. If they did not live below the poverty level before their parents broke up, then his proportionate share of child support and/or spousal support would keep them afloat.
_____________________________________________


I cannot immagine growing up without my father, thus I think it is important that fathers are around to raise thier children and not just partisipate like fans at a stadium. Each parent gives a child a unique perspective on life and everyday events. To delete one side for the sake of money is not in the childs best intersts. I think I now have my closing argument for the case I just finished trying.
-----------------------------------------------

This is correct and I am glad that you were raised with both parents in a loving home, but I don't think women break up with their husbands (and baby dadies) just to get child support. Child support only becomes and issue after the relationship has been severed. However, I personally believe that the children are not even thought of when couples are doing what ever they do to cause the marriage/relationship to end in the first place.
__________________________________________

Sunnubian: It is clear to me that you do not practice law in NJ because if you did you would know that child support paid via wage execution is monitored by Probation so the case automatically goes there, but you would know this if you practiced law in NJ. At any rate, I do not have the time to constantly check your facts. Suffice it to say, getting your hair done is not what child support is for and if you think that type of behavior is appropriate then we have many things to disagree about on this issue.

quote:

Midlife Man: I would suggest that you tell your brother in law 1.to go to an attorney that specializes in family law, family law, at least in NJ is a specailty, just like criminal and civil law. You can even be certified as a matrimonial attorney here in NJ. Your brother in law should as any attorney if he or she is a member of the Academy of Matrimonial Attorney [nationwide organization] or on the State or County Bar's Family Law Executive Committee to get a feel for that attorney's experience in the Family Law area. 2. Start to take pictures of his kids when he picks them up at thier mother's house, ideally, right in the front yard, 3. Go to the school and talk to thier teachers, get them on his side so that when he wants to take her back the teachers will testify on his behalf 4. Take the kids to doctors, and dentists regularly so that he can show the Court that he pays attention to those medical concerns as well. While I do not know what happened in that case, if your brother in law has the evidence you are suggesting then I am pretty sure he would have won in NJ at the trial level or on appeal.

It's pretty much a done deal now. They finally sold the house and divided the proceeds. He was the only one to pay for the house but she got 70% of the proceeds...a compromise to alimony I think.

He did take pictures but his lawyer didn't present ANY of his evidence.

quote:

Originally posted by Nikcara:
Sorry, but men whether they are good fathers or bad get screwed on child support. The Bad need to get screwed and I have no problems putting them in jail, yes I said jail. I had a man arrested the second he walked into the courtroom, but that is another story. Good fathers get truly screwed because they want their kids but the mothers use the children as pawn for money. It is totally discretionary for the mother. But men, unlike women will not usually fight for their children.

Our paternalistic society has made men weak when it comes to fighting for their rights. As some of you already know, I practice family law here in New Jersey. Most of my clients are men, all have children with soon to be or alrealdy ex-wives or baby mamas. Either way it is drama.

I just tried a case on monday where a woman, straight out lied to the court to gain custody of her children. I slapped her with each lie, will it make a difference. We shall see, right now my client has custody of both his sons, but at trial the mother brought in witness after witness, I only had my client.

My point, she was doing everything she could to get her kids back. My client had really good stuff on her, but would not let me use it, he tied my hands because she is the mother of his children. She on the other hand had no problem telling the Judge that his mother was a drug addict, his sister was a convicted drug addict and that they lived in a filthy home with 10 other unrelated people. All false but that is what she testified to in open court, and yes I slapped her with the facts and then she still made excuses. She would go to any length to get her kids back.

Until men fight as hard and as dirty for their children as women do, men will continue to pay child support. Simple as that and women will continue to get thier hair and nails done with that money. Now are all mothers bad, no of course not, but then again, I do not represent people who can get along rasing their children separately.

Wake up men, when you leave her, take your kid with you. If she left you she would not hesitate to take your child. If their are no custody papers, then the kid is just as much yours as her. Don't give up your power.

I went all the way to eighteen years old and there are still no custody papers on me, so as far as the legal system was concerned I was at all times 100% in my mothers custody and 100% in my fathers. Why should your child be any different.

Nicara is right on.

I fought. I mean I fought hard. Anything thing I could get on my ex wife I did. I had documented everything and anything. I went to court like I was ready for war. And I won. The ex could'nt even put up a fight. When we split I left with the money and a game plan and I executed it; and this is in Ohio where a man has damn near zero chance of getting custody unless he shows he is determined and sincere. Men better start returning to the "hunter" mentallity we're known for if we want equal treatment in the judicial system.