Family Court System is a Crock

Judged:

2

2

2

appeal wrote:

<quoted text>
You aren't quite in touch with the situation. This isn't about paying a little more than you should. You have some parents who are being financially destroyed no matter how hard they work as well as having their family destroyed. Not because they did something wrong but - just because.
It happens now and then that all that is a little more than some people can bear.

Judged:

2

2

2

Hey stupid wrote:

<quoted text>Yes, it is about the amount of money to a lot of these men. I would say it is the exception rather than the rule that a father is financially destroyed by paying 17% or 25% of his income. I am not sure how that adds up. Take away that much of my income and I have less spending money but I am not destroyed. That much of his income should have been going to the kids' needs when he was in the relationship anyway. Most courts split the assets in a divorce and try to make it fair. If the woman gets the house the man gets something in return. If you got screwed you either deserved it or had a bad attorney. These things can be appealed. You can get back into court if you have a legitimate case. And the kids are not taken from the father unless his actions cause them to be. Most involved fathers can get more than every other weekend if they ask for it in court. And if they are civil to the ex and treat the kids right most times they can get even more time and the kids will want to be with them. The problem is you guys are taking the exceptions and making it out to be the norm. I can tell you that I personally know a couple of fathers who have custody of their kids. Another gets visitation way more than every other weekend. And the other one I know that doesn't see his kids, it's because he messed up and acted in such a way that the kids don't want to see him and he wouldn't use the visitation he had for months at a time. It was his own doing. I realize that there are individual cases where one party gets screwed but not as often as you would make it out to be. The only ones we are likely to hear from on here are the few that did get a raw deal. You need to take it up with the court on an individual basis if you are truly in the right. Remember, mothers get a raw deal at times too. Take, for example, the father who works under the table to reduce or avoid paying support at all. Instead of blaming the law, or the system, for your problems take a look at your situation and the ones truly to blame- grown men (or women) who can't act like adults, be responsible, and get along for the sake of the kids.

Judged:

4

3

3

larry wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you honestly know anyone who spends 17-23% on one child? IMO that would be financially irresponsible. Furthermore, between taxes and child support, men are being destroyed in a big way as they are being denied opportunities to save for college and retirement with only 50% of their income to survive on. Women who pay taxes have an offset of child support which brings them back to near 100% of their before tax income. The math is the math. You have to be a complete idiot to call this system fair or in most cases you're a woman collecting a check and you feel entitled. Need I say more!

Judged:

2

2

2

anon wrote:

What about the fathers who are and have been paying their child support,Yet are being denied seeing their children ?

Judged:

1

1

1

mom screwed over wrote:

<quoted text>
One thing poeple must know is that child support and visitation are two completely different things. If you are paying child support then kudos to you. If you are a good, loving father who really has his children's interest at heart and are being denied seeing your children, then you MUST go to court and change that. A mother or father cannot keep a child from seeing the other parent just because they feel they can. They need a court order to keep the children away. It's a very tough system out there and you have to fight for your rights. If that means going to the courthouse every single day and driving the people there crazy to get to see your children, then that's what you do. No one has the right to keep any loving parent from seeing their child and that goes for those who don't support their children financially....even then they still have a right to see their children.

mom screwed over wrote:

<quoted text>Well, I know that 90% or more goes to my child, so yes, I do know people who spend that much. And if you don't think it takes taht much to raise a child then you're the complete idiot. I make a good living and my paycheck is usually gone before it even gets here. Forget about college for my children, I'm paying the whole ticket on my own to raise them. And as a woman, single mom, if my ex paid me ANY money towards this child I would not think I'm ENTITLED to it. You're an idiot. My CHILD is entitled to it, not his mother. That money goes towards the child, not the mother. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. You must be a dad who doesn't want to pay ANYTHING to his children

mom screwed over wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, I know that 90% or more goes to my child, so yes, I do know people who spend that much. And if you don't think it takes taht much to raise a child then you're the complete idiot. I make a good living and my paycheck is usually gone before it even gets here. Forget about college for my children, I'm paying the whole ticket on my own to raise them. And as a woman, single mom, if my ex paid me ANY money towards this child I would not think I'm ENTITLED to it. You're an idiot. My CHILD is entitled to it, not his mother. That money goes towards the child, not the mother. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. You must be a dad who doesn't want to pay ANYTHING to his children

Hey stupid wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, it is about the amount of money to a lot of these men. I would say it is the exception rather than the rule that a father is financially destroyed by paying 17% or 25% of his income. I am not sure how that adds up. Take away that much of my income and I have less spending money but I am not destroyed. That much of his income should have been going to the kids' needs when he was in the relationship anyway. Most courts split the assets in a divorce and try to make it fair. If the woman gets the house the man gets something in return. If you got screwed you either deserved it or had a bad attorney. These things can be appealed. You can get back into court if you have a legitimate case. And the kids are not taken from the father unless his actions cause them to be. Most involved fathers can get more than every other weekend if they ask for it in court. And if they are civil to the ex and treat the kids right most times they can get even more time and the kids will want to be with them. The problem is you guys are taking the exceptions and making it out to be the norm. I can tell you that I personally know a couple of fathers who have custody of their kids. Another gets visitation way more than every other weekend. And the other one I know that doesn't see his kids, it's because he messed up and acted in such a way that the kids don't want to see him and he wouldn't use the visitation he had for months at a time. It was his own doing. I realize that there are individual cases where one party gets screwed but not as often as you would make it out to be. The only ones we are likely to hear from on here are the few that did get a raw deal. You need to take it up with the court on an individual basis if you are truly in the right. Remember, mothers get a raw deal at times too. Take, for example, the father who works under the table to reduce or avoid paying support at all. Instead of blaming the law, or the system, for your problems take a look at your situation and the ones truly to blame- grown men (or women) who can't act like adults, be responsible, and get along for the sake of the kids.

PokerFace1 wrote:

Stop wasiting your time with little boys and girls and find yourself a real MAN OR WOMAN and you won't have to worry about this nonsense. Real MEN AND WOMEN take care of their children no matter what, even if you have to go through this bullshit court system nonsense.

appeal wrote:

<quoted text>When you take the position of "no matter what", you're going along with whatever government throws at you. Government should never require a parent to give more than ordinary care for an ordinary child. Giving money to a third party in the hope that THEY might actually take care of your child is exactly the opposite of giving such care.

Going through a bullshit court sytem is the problem - not the solution. What we really need is a fair and equitable court system but the bureacrats won't have it that way. Its all about agenda. Suprised to hear its not about the kids? The catch on all this is the parent who has to work can't run to court everyday and still make a living. And the court will construe that you "voluntarily" got a reduced incone and require you pay the same amount. So now you probably have an arrearage. See how the system is rigged? You're supposed to do it THEIR way.

another screwed Dad wrote:

here is simple math, say a guy who gets paid 100k. then as I do pay %14 for income taxes. And 1 chid =%17 so that is $17,000. NOw take out taxes and I'm down to $86,000 and then take the$17,000 from that and I end up paying about %25 of my salary due to taxes and child support but she gets a %60 raise tax free. NOw thats fair? Bull$hit.

appeal wrote:

<quoted text>
When you take the position of "no matter what", you're going along with whatever government throws at you. Government should never require a parent to give more than ordinary care for an ordinary child. Giving money to a third party in the hope that THEY might actually take care of your child is exactly the opposite of giving such care.
Going through a bullshit court sytem is the problem - not the solution. What we really need is a fair and equitable court system but the bureacrats won't have it that way. Its all about agenda. Suprised to hear its not about the kids? The catch on all this is the parent who has to work can't run to court everyday and still make a living. And the court will construe that you "voluntarily" got a reduced incone and require you pay the same amount. So now you probably have an arrearage. See how the system is rigged? You're supposed to do it THEIR way.

PokerFace1 wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm directing my comments to the people who find douchebags/slobs to date instead of decent people, or get knocked up to keep a man around/fix things....then wonder where they wen't wrong. They're stupid, inconsiderate, selfish assholes. I know plenty of people like this and this is who needs to hear it. Stop having kid after kid with man after man, or woman after woman, and you won't end up paying obscene amounts of money in the end. I get that "accidents happen", but have enough common sense and responsibility for yourself that you'll either make the decision to wait until you are ready, or take ever means necessary to protect yourself. Not just birth control, but condoms on top of that. People who are raped and get pregnant are THE ONLY people that DID NOT have a choice. Remember that.