I don't have a problem with the basic concept of Child Support.
The basic problem I have is with the unfairness inherent in the current system.
I totally agree that the entire system needs an overhaul.
If I do have a problem with the entire child support system and the concept, it is based in the fact that when I was married, the court said absolutely NOTHING about how I would disperse my funds in support of my children.
There seems to be a basic assumption that because my wife and I could not get along to the extent where we split up, & legally ended OUR marriage (understanding the contract aspect of the institution) that I would refuse to provide monitary support for my child IF she doesn't live with me.
It also appears to presume that I, as a father, would also abandon said child along with her mother.
Please don't muddy the waters of what I'm saying by throwing in the female end of the equation. It should be 100% clear that the current system is designed under the foundational model that Mom get the kids in a divorce and Dad pays for them. Anything else is considered exceptional to that rule of thought.
Besides. I of all people know the flip side. I'm living the opposite where the women did the abuse, abandoning, etc. You can actually just flip the script, substitute male for mfemale.
I believe the entire Child support system is as antiquated in today's society as an IMB 386 computer. We have made certain specific societal advances. I do not believe women should be automatically shackeled with custody of their children any more than men should be automatically shackled with child support.
I have been paying child supoprt faithfully for 15 years myself. The CSEA would say otherwise. The current system was just not set up for people like me. It varies from county to county, state to state and if you don't fit their model, you're in for a world of hurt.
Being unemployed to the CSEA is tantamount to being criminal, in that they use the courts and the precise methodology they use on criminals for enforcement. Said methodology includes the use of Police, who carry guns, and are empowered to kill you under certain circumstances, and the use of encarceration.
The current system can and does create criminals. In some ways it inspires criminal behavior in people who might otherwise never threaten society in a criminal way.
Agencies like the CSEA have blurred the line between being "bad" and being criminal. They have given power to people who are NOT trained and properly educated to wield it as they do. Judges make sweeping decrees that reflect more of a "wild wild west" mentality that best interest of the children.
Who says that men have to provide 100% of all financial support for a family?
I think that everytime that 2 adults take on the responsibility of raising a child, they both are from that point on responsible for that child. In our system men go to prison for their failure to uphold that responsibility; while for a woman to go to jail she would have to be convicted 6 times for endangering that child. Our system does not divide the responsibility of child rearing equally at all.
According to the ‘system’ of our culture a man’s responsibility to provide for his wife and children is purely monetary. So long as you earn the money and pay for their standard of living, then everything is great and all responsibilities are done.
I think that before we developed wage-slaves, it was an entirely different society. This is something that we have developed over many years.
There have been times when I have discussed Proverbs 31:10-31 with ladies and I have been totally amazed.
When I read it, I see about how:
she owns lands and plants vineyards and,
has her own employees and,
runs her own business, and
and provides food and, and
provides clothing for her household.
When I have spoken with ladies about this, and they have read the same passage they see:
she buys food with her husband’s money,
she buys clothing with her husbands money,
she pays servants with her husband’s money,
she steps into her husbands business and tells them what to do,
What we are seeing in these child-support and child-custody issues is the over-whelming idea that a man’s ‘place’ is away at work, while a woman’s ‘place’ is home with children.
Prior to 1930, my relatives were living agrarian lifestyles, store-bought items were a rarity. They grew, raised, or whittled most everything they needed [cotton, wool, milk, cheese, meat]. From talking to my grandparents money certainly existed but it just was not a big concern. They fished, wove clothe, boiled down lard and lye for soap. Two of them were even grammar school teachers, they did it in exchange for eggs and coal.
Now that kind of an agrarian culture would view this entirely differently then we do today.
According to the ‘system’ of our culture a man’s responsibility to provide for his wife and children is purely monetary. So long as you earn the money and pay for their standard of living, then everything is great and all responsibilities are done.
In the marriage, it depends on the what the couple decides. But in divorce, I see that changing a lot. I've known many people who divorce and share custody 50/50. The kids stay one week with mom and one week with dad. No money is exchanged for support. It does, however, limit either one from moving. If they live in a metropolitan area, it requires them either to live in the same school district, or one drives the kids to school on their week. I've seen this work out quite well.
ldo i don't know what you mean by "half truths" i told it straight i have over paid by at least 20 grand to date and i do not appriciate you suggesting i speak with a forked tongue!!!!!!!
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
26
14
19
17
Popular Days
Apr 5
35
Mar 4
24
Mar 9
13
Mar 17
11
Top Posters In This Topic
Galen 26 posts
Steve! 14 posts
Belle 19 posts
HCW 17 posts
Popular Days
Apr 5 2005
35 posts
Mar 4 2005
24 posts
Mar 9 2005
13 posts
Mar 17 2005
11 posts
HCW
I don't have a problem with the basic concept of Child Support.
The basic problem I have is with the unfairness inherent in the current system.
I totally agree that the entire system needs an overhaul.
If I do have a problem with the entire child support system and the concept, it is based in the fact that when I was married, the court said absolutely NOTHING about how I would disperse my funds in support of my children.
There seems to be a basic assumption that because my wife and I could not get along to the extent where we split up, & legally ended OUR marriage (understanding the contract aspect of the institution) that I would refuse to provide monitary support for my child IF she doesn't live with me.
It also appears to presume that I, as a father, would also abandon said child along with her mother.
Please don't muddy the waters of what I'm saying by throwing in the female end of the equation. It should be 100% clear that the current system is designed under the foundational model that Mom get the kids in a divorce and Dad pays for them. Anything else is considered exceptional to that rule of thought.
Besides. I of all people know the flip side. I'm living the opposite where the women did the abuse, abandoning, etc. You can actually just flip the script, substitute male for mfemale.
I believe the entire Child support system is as antiquated in today's society as an IMB 386 computer. We have made certain specific societal advances. I do not believe women should be automatically shackeled with custody of their children any more than men should be automatically shackled with child support.
I have been paying child supoprt faithfully for 15 years myself. The CSEA would say otherwise. The current system was just not set up for people like me. It varies from county to county, state to state and if you don't fit their model, you're in for a world of hurt.
Being unemployed to the CSEA is tantamount to being criminal, in that they use the courts and the precise methodology they use on criminals for enforcement. Said methodology includes the use of Police, who carry guns, and are empowered to kill you under certain circumstances, and the use of encarceration.
The current system can and does create criminals. In some ways it inspires criminal behavior in people who might otherwise never threaten society in a criminal way.
Agencies like the CSEA have blurred the line between being "bad" and being criminal. They have given power to people who are NOT trained and properly educated to wield it as they do. Judges make sweeping decrees that reflect more of a "wild wild west" mentality that best interest of the children.
Edited by hcwalker58Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Who says that men have to provide 100% of all financial support for a family?
I think that everytime that 2 adults take on the responsibility of raising a child, they both are from that point on responsible for that child. In our system men go to prison for their failure to uphold that responsibility; while for a woman to go to jail she would have to be convicted 6 times for endangering that child. Our system does not divide the responsibility of child rearing equally at all.
According to the ‘system’ of our culture a man’s responsibility to provide for his wife and children is purely monetary. So long as you earn the money and pay for their standard of living, then everything is great and all responsibilities are done.
I think that before we developed wage-slaves, it was an entirely different society. This is something that we have developed over many years.
There have been times when I have discussed Proverbs 31:10-31 with ladies and I have been totally amazed.
When I read it, I see about how:
she owns lands and plants vineyards and,
has her own employees and,
runs her own business, and
and provides food and, and
provides clothing for her household.
When I have spoken with ladies about this, and they have read the same passage they see:
she buys food with her husband’s money,
she buys clothing with her husbands money,
she pays servants with her husband’s money,
she steps into her husbands business and tells them what to do,
What we are seeing in these child-support and child-custody issues is the over-whelming idea that a man’s ‘place’ is away at work, while a woman’s ‘place’ is home with children.
Prior to 1930, my relatives were living agrarian lifestyles, store-bought items were a rarity. They grew, raised, or whittled most everything they needed [cotton, wool, milk, cheese, meat]. From talking to my grandparents money certainly existed but it just was not a big concern. They fished, wove clothe, boiled down lard and lye for soap. Two of them were even grammar school teachers, they did it in exchange for eggs and coal.
Now that kind of an agrarian culture would view this entirely differently then we do today.
:-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
In the marriage, it depends on the what the couple decides. But in divorce, I see that changing a lot. I've known many people who divorce and share custody 50/50. The kids stay one week with mom and one week with dad. No money is exchanged for support. It does, however, limit either one from moving. If they live in a metropolitan area, it requires them either to live in the same school district, or one drives the kids to school on their week. I've seen this work out quite well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LDO USN
CoolChef:
Be careful...There are those that lurk here that can smell a lie like a fart in an elevator. Please stop your half truths.
Warm Regards,
LDO
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
ldo i don't know what you mean by "half truths" i told it straight i have over paid by at least 20 grand to date and i do not appriciate you suggesting i speak with a forked tongue!!!!!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
To the top for a friend.
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.