Missouri child-support law change touches many issues

Judged:

1

disgusted wrote:

<quoted text> I am a woman and I most certainly think the child support should stop at 18. My mom received social security on me til I was 18, then I put myself through school, paid my own way, and believe it made me a better person because it was'nt handed to me. Hopefully both parents will help as they can if their child decides to go to college.

Responder wrote:

BTW Fighting Father - Social Security does pay a benefit to children whose parents have passed away or who are disabled. However, it USED to stop at 18, and if the child went to school, 21. Has THAT changed?

Just Mom wrote:

<quoted text>
Social Security stops at age 18. Doesn't matter if they go to college or not. Why should the laws make the NCP continue to pay support if the Government stops support for children who's parent is deceased? Child support should cease at 18 or after graduation from high school.

Susan in Texas wrote:

<quoted text>
You ladies are great! Now, since the law makers of MO are not reading these posts, what can we do maybe as a united front. I don't live in MO, so they won't listen to me. Any suggestions? We've come up with some great points. Ones that truly make sense and can be understood and not shut down, even by the most liberal person. Let's fight together. I think that KidsFirst is wrong, and there is more that we can do.

BAden wrote:

Also, I can never better myself, I sacrificed my job of 7 years for a job I hated just to make more money,...then came along the ex wife and remodified it, now she gets more and I still am where I was with a job I hate. My wife cheated on me, divorced me and took the kids and my money. Perfect plan and Missouri feeds this kind of behavior.

Judged:

1

Mom of 3 wrote:

<quoted text>
You don't know anything about what you are speaking of. He responded to something that was unjust and unfair and it wasn't about votes. He did this into his second term and wasn't planning on running again...no election involved! He did it because he's a good man and believes in equality for all parents and children. He's a Pastor with love for his country and fellow men and women! It is so nice how you think you know how every NCP is and how you know the intentions of someone you don't know and have never spoken to. I was talking to Rep. Baker and he told me the other day that he has had many phone calls to his office about this issue and the vast majority are in support of what he's done. Go ahead and fight your fight and we'll fight ours but for God's sake get informed before you spout off.

Responder wrote:

<quoted text>
Dear Mom,
I know exactly about what I speak on. There was a law, Brian Baker changed. It was voted on and passed by Missouri legislators, all of whom should be identified as having voted for the change that helped to create hardship in the lives of a lot of people.
You, too, might pay attention - I never received child support, food stamps, or welfare. I rasied my children to adulthood without those things, which why I understand what a difference that money makes in the lives of those families.
You had it rough, so your children should have it rougher? Actually - and I hope Fighting Dad's daughter reads this - based on the information he gave abuot her circumstances and the statute, that child qualifies as someone who should receive the child support until age 21.
We obviously have two different parenting styles; I believe in unconditional love, honesty, and that a child's studies are more important than a job at Sonic. My children reached adulthood without drug, legal, or psychiatric issues and each one today has their own productive goals and famiilies. They work hard and contribute to their communities.
Obviously, from what you say about your family, it just is not going so well there, heh? I am sorry for that, because it is a very difficult world these days and requires everyone to keep their wits about them. But making life for your daughter more miserable just is not the answer. Making life miserable for people who receive and need that child support money is not going to help anyone either - regardless of your own circumstances.
BTW, Mom, let me introduce you to Sheila (not her real name). She graduated high school 2 years ago, at 17, like most teens. Unlike most teens, she is autistic, the child of a single parent who once received support for her; now does not, because She is graduated high school, remains functionally and mentally disabled, and is not qualified to hold a job. Sheila's mom has to wait until she is 21 because there are no programs post-high school for Sheila that qualify under the law you geniuses worked out.
Good thing Baker is not running again - though his phone # is still listed on the state repreeentative site. Everyone of those state legislators who voted for this change, should be voted out. There is a reason that the majority of Missourians did not know about that legislature.
I am going mail and e-mail every woman in Jackson County this statute and tell them to be sure to thank Mr. Baker by not voting for him.

Susan in Texas wrote:

<quoted text>
You ladies are great! Now, since the law makers of MO are not reading these posts, what can we do maybe as a united front. I don't live in MO, so they won't listen to me. Any suggestions? We've come up with some great points. Ones that truly make sense and can be understood and not shut down, even by the most liberal person. Let's fight together. I think that KidsFirst is wrong, and there is more that we can do.

Judged:

1

Mom of 3 wrote:

<quoted text>
You are still not paying attention! Of course he still has a phone number, session is still in...he's not running for another term! Email all the people you want...you'll just look like an idiot! I never said I had a rough life, I said I paid my own way... BTW, you made my point for me...you said you never had child support to help you or your children and you earlier said what productive members of society your children are and how successful they are. Do you not understand that not having everything handed to them enabled them to be who they are today. Again...pay attention, this statute has nothing to do with people like, "Sheila," that is a completely different issue!! This is about post majority support for college!!! My husband's daughter did get $ until she was 21, she's 22 now and she did not meet the qualifications set by the statute...she failed 3 semesters...you think that warrants support?

Judged:

1

1

Responder wrote:

Also, Mom of 3, you said that hardship builds character a few posts back; I think the prison populations demonstrate that hardship breeds poverty, breeds anger, breeds crime. While your hardship=character=success formula might have a few success stories, those are the exception and not the rule to that formula.
You are living in your own little world. Try sharing that world with others and it might be different, as might be your perspective on hardship of others.

Judged:

1

1

Susan in Texas wrote:

<quoted text>
You have got to be kidding!!...maybe the people who go to prison create their own hardship by being arrested in the first place. You are really reaching to make your pitiful point. Millions of kids work and go to school at the same time. It's not 'hardship'. Which one would you rather be going into a job interview...The one with or without work experience? My daughter had the experience, and she got the job. In 'our little world' as you say, that IS the reality.

Judged:

1

1

1

Responder wrote:

<quoted text>
"My husband's daughter," I think this explais it all. Also, you don't pay attention, I said that because of what I went through, I understand how important that money is to those families. And you can blow off the issue of Sheila all you like, but the fact remains that you discounted a needy sector of the population that has no options.
The good thing is, I can't look any more like an idiot than you do. You are not Mom of 3, you are PO'ED 2ND WIFE. Let me me know when he starts his third family and you're crying about child support.

Mom of 3 wrote:

I am a Christian, I believe the Bible is 100% true and according to God it is a parents responsibility to train their child in the way they should go. This statute takes that ability away...I have a fundamental issue with taking a parents rights away along with the fact that they are no longer a "child," in any other governmental definition except for college support. Unconditional love - who said there wasn't love? Someone who doesn't love...doesn't care. My husband cares enough to not want his daughter to end up with her hand out expecting the world to provide for her. For that matter...our government was established by Christian men who believed in protection for the people, not provision...

Susan in Texas wrote:

<quoted text>
#1. Don't insult my friend.#2. There are other programs out their for functionally and mentally challenged people. The key about 'child' support is that it is for a 'child'. Period. If Sheila's mother needs money for her care, she should talk to her ex about it instead of getting the government involved.

Responder wrote:

<quoted text>
"My husband's daughter," I think this explais it all. Also, you don't pay attention, I said that because of what I went through, I understand how important that money is to those families. And you can blow off the issue of Sheila all you like, but the fact remains that you discounted a needy sector of the population that has no options.
The good thing is, I can't look any more like an idiot than you do. You are not Mom of 3, you are PO'ED 2ND WIFE. Let me me know when he starts his third family and you're crying about child support.