Does my income define me as a father?
Father Figure
while her mother took classes. One day, when I came home from work,
she had moved out. I didn't know where she was. I didn't know where
my baby was. Turned out, she had run away with one of my close
friends.
I freaked out and in my despair, said and did things that I now
regret. No crimes were committed, nothing like that, but suffice it
to say that I freaked out. The pain of betrayal threw me into a deep
depression and for years, I could not function. I was suddenly
reduced to "less than" a father and made a mere visitor in my child's
life as my former close friend slipped right into place as her
"father".
I managed to get a very high paying job for about a month. I have
ADHD and couldn't concentrate on the stressful work that this job
entailed, but because I had that high paying job for one month, I was
deemed by the courts as being able to make that amount of money on a
regular basis so my child support payments are huge and I have not
been able to keep up with them. A lot of it has to do with the
depression that comes with thinking that life is beautiful one minute
and being knocked off my feet the next. People just don't understand
the depression that goes along with being made a second class citizen
in one's child's life. I am way behind on support. I want to pay it,
but I can't. If I work maybe 60 hours a week, I can, but ALL of my
salary would go toward supporting a woman who has, in the last month,
purchased a half milllion dollar home and has now had another child
with my former friend.
How is it that because of this inability to pay the amount she is
asking gets twisted into my not being a good father or my not caring
or my not loving my daughter or my being undeserving of having her in
my life the way I used to have her? How is it that this one thing has
now knocked me down into second class citizen status and makes the
step father a "better" father than I am. I still love my child as
much as I ever did. How is it that because my ex decided to marry
someone from a wealthy family that this means she loves my daughter
"more" than I do and that her current family is somehow "better" than
I am.
The facts are plain and simple. I have ADHD. I am on medication for
it. My brain is wired differently from people who don't have this
disorder. I work hard when I can find a job that I can perform and I
make my child support payments when I can, but the money does not go
to my child. It goes to the mother and the half million dollar home.
I didn't abandon my family. SHE chose to leave my family. I loved my
family and provided as best I could. I still love my daughter with
everything I have but she is being brain washed into believing that
the value of a father lies solely in his ability to pay or not pay
child support. I didn't ask her mother to leave me. I didn't ask for
any of this. I do the best I can.
Viking
yours to soc.men.
If you're not a troll, get a lawyer and be prepared to spend $10,000+
to get your cs payments adjusted.
Of course, I might ask where you were when we were fighting for
fathers' rights all these years. As usual, dads in trouble never think
of fighting for fathers' rights until it hits them. And not even
then--they just want a quick solution. If your problem gets fixed,
you'll just go back to ignoring fathers' rights efforts, I'm certain.
I've seen that so many times--and fathers wonder why the system is so
set against them.
DB
"Viking" <no...@goodgoodbye.com> wrote in
> If you're not a troll, get a lawyer and be prepared to spend $10,000+
> to get your cs payments adjusted.
Fake or not, the system keeps you so broke that you can't afford to defend
yourself!
Think about this, why should anyone have to fight for what should be a
natural born right in terms of access to your own children? A father
should never be a defendant to his children!
Viking
Well, duh. Fathers' rights activists, including myself, have always
thought fathers shouldn't have to fight for their natural rights. But
males in general absolutely clam up when it comes to gender and family
court issues, and we have gotten no support. It's like fighting for
the rights of sheep. Eventually, you get tired of doing it. If they're
not going to stand up for themselves, and resist you when you try to
stand up for them, it becomes a losing proposition. All you ever hear
from are fathers in trouble, and if you solve their problem for them,
you never hear from them again. Spent fifteen years fighting for their
rights, but when you talk to fathers and men about their rights, they
just look at the ground and say, "Well, most men are beasts...." (I
have heard just those words dozens of times.) Hell with it, I am sick
to death of hearing from fathers in trouble who've never lifted a
finger to change the situation and want pity and help immediately.
DB
"Viking" <no...@goodgoodbye.com> wrote in
> Well, duh. Fathers' rights activists, including myself, have always
> thought fathers shouldn't have to fight for their natural rights. But
> males in general absolutely clam up when it comes to gender and family
> court issues, and we have gotten no support. It's like fighting for
> the rights of sheep. Eventually, you get tired of doing it. If they're
> not going to stand up for themselves, and resist you when you try to
> stand up for them, it becomes a losing proposition. All you ever hear
> from are fathers in trouble, and if you solve their problem for them,
> you never hear from them again.
It's much like the Cancer causes or even worse is drunking driver crusaders.
It's only when people are directly effected will they take any action.
Most people are too busy trying to earn a living, it's a shame they have to
deal with any of this shit!
Isn't it curious how the woman's rights moment is so active to the point
where they can have any legislation passed without any real opposition. Look
at the source of their organizations!
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be
the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under
omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep,
his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our
own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of
their consciences." -- C. S. Lewis
Viking
>
>"Viking" <no...@goodgoodbye.com> wrote in
>
>> Well, duh. Fathers' rights activists, including myself, have always
>> thought fathers shouldn't have to fight for their natural rights. But
>> males in general absolutely clam up when it comes to gender and family
>> court issues, and we have gotten no support. It's like fighting for
>> the rights of sheep. Eventually, you get tired of doing it. If they're
>> not going to stand up for themselves, and resist you when you try to
>> stand up for them, it becomes a losing proposition. All you ever hear
>> from are fathers in trouble, and if you solve their problem for them,
>> you never hear from them again.
>
>It's much like the Cancer causes or even worse is drunking driver crusaders.
Listen you moron, I ain't no "drunking" driver crusader. I ain't no
one who "torment[s] us for our own good." Point out exactly how I'm
"torturing" people, you idiot. I'm just an activist who got fed up
working for sheep. Sheep like you that complain and do nothing to help
themselves.
>It's only when people are directly effected will they take any action.
Then they, like you, deserve all the shit you get. If you can't
protect your freedoms, don't expect them to be around when you start
crying about them.
You want quotes? I'll give you quotes: "The price of liberty is
eternal vigilance."--Thomas Jefferson
teachrmama
is talking about the fact that most people do not know their liberties have
been taken away until the loss of those liberties affects them personally.
And he is right! Society, in general, really does believe the "deadbeat
dad" mantra, and thinks that these things only happen to those who deserve
them. I did not get the impression that he was calling *you* a drunken
driver crusader, or anything else derogatory.
"Viking" <no...@goodgoodbye.com> wrote in message
news:54up74tujj232s9pp...@4ax.com...
teachrmama
on one month's salary? Where we are, it is set by your tax returns from the
previous several years, or by 6 months of pay stubs.
"Father Figure" <fatherf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0ca7939c-413e-4bdf...@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Avenger
"Father Figure" <fatherf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0ca7939c-413e-4bdf...@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> while her mother took classes. One day, when I came home from work,
> she had moved out. I didn't know where she was. I didn't know where
> my baby was. Turned out, she had run away with one of my close
> friends.
Ok doesn't matter if he's a troll I'll give some advice. Your first mistake
was getting married. You don't understand females or life. Men and women
have nothing in common and females are programmed to live off men. The only
reason men even bother with females is their blind urge to reproduce (sex)
and I can easily prove this by giving you a drug that will reduce your sex
drive to 0.
>
> I freaked out and in my despair, said and did things that I now
> regret. No crimes were committed, nothing like that, but suffice it
> to say that I freaked out. The pain of betrayal threw me into a deep
> depression and for years, I could not function. I was suddenly
> reduced to "less than" a father and made a mere visitor in my child's
> life as my former close friend slipped right into place as her
> "father".
>
> I managed to get a very high paying job for about a month. I have
> ADHD and couldn't concentrate on the stressful work that this job
> entailed, but because I had that high paying job for one month, I was
> deemed by the courts as being able to make that amount of money
The first thing you should have done is not work at all. Based on your
condition you should have applied for disability then other benefits that
can't be touched. You're too incompetent to even appear in court and a
lawyer (free) has to represent you. Once the bitch and the judge sees
there's no money to be had from you they will give up.
Stop making any payments. They get 0 from now on. Females and their
offspring should be punished for their misconduct. Let her new rich husband
foot the bill.
Dusty
news:g5is5...@news5.newsguy.com...
> Just out of curiosity, where do you live that they set the CS amount based
> on one month's salary? Where we are, it is set by your tax returns from
> the previous several years, or by 6 months of pay stubs.
Massachusetts, a wonderful place if your a divorce attorney, will often set
one's monthly C$ payments based on weekly pay stubs. That weekly amount is
then multiplied by 4.3 to create one's monthly support amount.
And of course, all this is based on pre-tax income.
Then CSE adds in fines, fees, penalties and interest into the amount owed.
This new amount is often far beyond what was originally owed in the first
place. And if that trick doesn't work, then the judge will add in non-C$
monies, such as your X's attorneys fees, marital debt, credit card bills,
insurance payments, car payments and anything else old thing they can come
up with. Yes, I said "they can come up with", by that I mean your X's
attorney and the judge. There is no difference between the two, save for
the robes and the amount they concoct that you owe.
So, yeah, it's possible he's from a place where they'd do that (use your
weekly pay, that is).
teachrmama
"Dusty" <no....@home.org> wrote in message
news:g5j053$vkp$00$1...@news.t-online.com...
That is so outrageous!!
Bob W
> news:g5is5...@news5.newsguy.com...
>> Just out of curiosity, where do you live that they set the CS amount
>> based on one month's salary? Where we are, it is set by your tax returns
>> from the previous several years, or by 6 months of pay stubs.
>
> Massachusetts, a wonderful place if your a divorce attorney, will often
> set one's monthly C$ payments based on weekly pay stubs. That weekly
> amount is then multiplied by 4.3 to create one's monthly support amount.
This brings back old memories for me. My paydays were bi-weekly so they
multiplied my income by 26 and divided by 12 to come up with the monthly
amount.
My ex's paydays were weekly so they multiplied her income by 4 (not 4.3) to
come up with her monthly amount. They must have figured I wouldn't notice.
When I sent a written objection to the court prior to the signing of the
modification order, the court denied my objection. It was just little
chicken s*** moves like that that motivated me to become an activists.
Dusty
Tell me about it. I've been going round and round with them about it for
years.
Oh, and get this.. they've decided to give the CP a $20K break on expenses
(up $5K from the $15,000 is used to be).
This is taken from the CP's available cash used to calculate the amount of
C$ owed by the NCP. The commonwealth claims this is so the CP can keep a
roof over her head and food on the table. Yet, the NCP isn't given the same
break.
Here's the link..
http://www.mass.gov/courts/formsandguidelines/csg2006.html
Look for II. FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED IN SETTING THE CHILD SUPPORT ORDER;
(C). It's in the first paragraph. It's also found on the paper form used
to figure C$ amounts. But it's not on the electronic one
(http://www.dor.state.ma.us/apps/worksheets/cse/guidelines-short.asp).
DB
>I can't imagine why you ae angry at DB. He is on the same side you are.
>He is talking about the fact that most people do not know their liberties
>have been taken away until the loss of those liberties affects them
>personally.
Seems the man lacks some reading comprehension skills! LOL
People who are not directly effected by the CS system just don't have a clue
what is really going on.
People still get married, have children and unfortunately divorce years
later with the mistaken impression or naive notion that they have rights
that protect them and look after their best interests.
Little did they know that the people who they trusted and put in charge to
look after their rights and well being were the same assholes that sold them
out and are now fucking them over for the sake of advancing their own
political careers.
Father's rights is a joke, sad but people think the AIDS cause in Africa is
far more important!
The Government seems to think so too, they're sending $30 Billion of your
tax dollars to help support that cause.
Politicians are very generous with other people's money!
Phil
> Are you a troll? We get lots of trolls that post fake stories like
> yours to soc.men.
>
> If you're not a troll, get a lawyer and be prepared to spend $10,000+
> to get your cs payments adjusted.
>
> Of course, I might ask where you were when we were fighting for
> fathers' rights all these years. As usual, dads in trouble never think
> of fighting for fathers' rights until it hits them.
Possibly because, like me, they never thought the government would or
could remove the right to be a parent from so many millions and for no
other reason than being a divorced dad. Had I been told about this, I
wouldn't have believed it either until after I had been through it all.
>And not even
> then--they just want a quick solution. If your problem gets fixed,
> you'll just go back to ignoring fathers' rights efforts, I'm certain.
Perhaps but then again, is it possible that they don't get their
situation fixed (I don't know of any, personally) but just give up?
> I've seen that so many times--and fathers wonder why the system is so
> set against them.
Well, for one thing, we just can't believe it and go along, hoping it
will all work out somehow. By the time we figure it isn't getting any
better, we've adjusted to our surroundings. I am still involved even
though I no longer have to pay the extortion called "child support". I
hope to get even more involved in the coming months, after I fully
retire.
Phil #3
Phil
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:05:49 -0700, "DB" <Dee...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Viking" <no...@goodgoodbye.com> wrote in
>>
>>> Well, duh. Fathers' rights activists, including myself, have always
>>> thought fathers shouldn't have to fight for their natural rights.
>>> But
>>> males in general absolutely clam up when it comes to gender and
>>> family
>>> court issues, and we have gotten no support. It's like fighting for
>>> the rights of sheep. Eventually, you get tired of doing it. If
>>> they're
>>> not going to stand up for themselves, and resist you when you try to
>>> stand up for them, it becomes a losing proposition. All you ever
>>> hear
>>> from are fathers in trouble, and if you solve their problem for
>>> them,
>>> you never hear from them again.
>>
>>It's much like the Cancer causes or even worse is drunking driver
>>crusaders.
>
> Listen you moron, I ain't no "drunking" driver crusader. I ain't no
> one who "torment[s] us for our own good." Point out exactly how I'm
> "torturing" people, you idiot. I'm just an activist who got fed up
> working for sheep. Sheep like you that complain and do nothing to help
> themselves.
Attacking people whow share the same aim is not a way to win friends and
influence anyone.
>
>>It's only when people are directly effected will they take any action.
>
> Then they, like you, deserve all the shit you get. If you can't
> protect your freedoms, don't expect them to be around when you start
> crying about them.
True to a point but when you are facing an enemy of immense proportions
(the government), you must pick and choose your battles or else wind up
in jail or dead. Either way, you won't be much help to anyone. There are
only two ways to defeat an enemy: 1) Destroy him or; 2) change him. I
opt for the second. (Oh, by the way, as I said in another post, I no
longer have to pay child support so I'm one that stuck around although I
haven't been as active as I wish, I plan to change that before the year
is out).
>
> You want quotes? I'll give you quotes: "The price of liberty is
> eternal vigilance."--Thomas Jefferson
The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in
human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. ~Jas. Madison
Phil #3
DB
"Viking" <no...@goodgoodbye.com> wrote in
>>It's only when people are directly effected will they take any action.
>
> Then they, like you, deserve all the shit you get. If you can't
> protect your freedoms, don't expect them to be around when you start
> crying about them.
Why shouldn't people expect their freedoms to be around when they need them,
isn't that the reason a bill of rights is written out and defined in a
constitution that everyone is supposed to abide by?
No generation has the right to give away the rights of future generations!
Viking
Can you REALLY be such a totally naive babe i the woods??
If you can't answer your own question, you have been living with your
eyes closed, assuming you're over the age of ten, which is doubtful.
Ask an adult to help you.
teachrmama
Actually, DB is right. No generation has the *right* to give away the
rights of future generations. But it is happening because not enough people
are fighting to keep it from happening. The vast majority of people in this
country seem to look at our freedoms as **entitlements** that will never go
away. They don't seem to understand that, unless we are willing to fight
for them, every freedom we have *will* be taken away. I imagine our
founding fathers would be horrified to see that people go about their
business assuming that a piece of paper (the Constitution) will protect
them, rather than understanding that that piece of paper outlines the rights
and freedoms that we are willing to *fight to keep.*
When the government talks about cutting social programs and benefits, people
come out in droves to fight to keep the program going. When the government
takes away a freedom, people yawn and shrug, unless it affects them
personally.
DB
"Viking" <no...@goodgoodbye.com> wrote in
>>
>>Why shouldn't people expect their freedoms to be around when they need
>>them,
>>isn't that the reason a bill of rights is written out and defined in a
>>constitution that everyone is supposed to abide by?
>>
>>No generation has the right to give away the rights of future generations!
>
> Can you REALLY be such a totally naive babe i the woods??
I sure was a Naive babe in the woods, along with Millions of others who were
taught that they were guaranteed freedoms and rights by the constitution.
Isn't this what America brags to the rest of the World about, but we all
know now that this is a lie and America is a Fraud and a bunch of hypocrites
too!
I don't see CS as a Father's rights issues, more of an attack on our
freedoms from the country's very own government!
The real threat is from terrorists now sitting in office who are only
interested in looking after their own club and they now have a license to do
what ever they want with you when you are labeled an NCP. You are now a
second class citizen with very few rights and freedoms and they will dictate
how much you will earn and how much you will pay to raise your own children.
So is this the same freedom that America is fighting so hard to give to the
Iraqi people? LOL
DB
"Dusty" <no....@home.org> wrote in
> Oh, and get this.. they've decided to give the CP a $20K break on expenses
> (up $5K from the $15,000 is used to be).
>
> This is taken from the CP's available cash used to calculate the amount of
> C$ owed by the NCP. The commonwealth claims this is so the CP can keep a
> roof over her head and food on the table.
Everyone pays for housing regardless if they have children or not!
Most 1 bedroom apartments cost $800 to $1000 with an additional $100 for a
second bedroom.
It's only the additional expenses that should be split for food and housing.
Government thinking is total crap, $10 Trillion in debt proves that!!!!
Avenger
"DB" <Dee...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:mfhfk.13291$cW3....@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com...
That $30 billion (actually it's a lot more) will go to drug companies for
useless drugs and corrupt African leaders. It's a round about way for
businessmen in the US and Europe to use tax money to pay bribes so that they
can drain some resources out of Africa.
At this point all of the weak and most susceptible have died from AIDS so
the numbers will decrease anyway. I'm sure they'll claim it was from all the
help and "miracle drugs" from the West
And the poor sucker prole taxpayers will believe it lol
I'm amazed that the average moron never catches on to these scams but
perhaps it's because they are average, unsophisticated and with no
historical knowledge of human nature. Both political parties in the US work
together like Mafia families to maintain certain rackets for the benefit of
their patrons who employ them. Any fighting they do is between themselves
for dominance not for the benefit of the proles. Sure, they throw you a few
crumbs (from your own taxes) and like fools you think you're getting
something lol
>
>
>
>
Dusty
True enough DB. Though the point I was making was the only line you
omitted.. "..the NCP isn't given the same
break."
Andrew Usher
What an idiot. He made a good point, one that obviously
applies to you!
Andrew Usher
Phil
"Avenger" <ave...@avengers.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Qbvfk.27$0p1.20@trndny08...
I could not agree with this more. I thought for a long time (starting in
the 60's) that I was the only person in the US who felt fear of my own
government. In the 1990's I predicted that civil war would break out in
the US, although not for a while. It seems that ordinary citizens are
becoming fed up with the direction the US has undertaken so my guess may
just become reality. I would hate to see it but as Kennedy said, "Those
who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution
inevitable."
Phil #3
deannie
> "Father Figure" <fatherfigur...@gmail.com> wrote in message
As an outsider, No children, husband etc. I think child support
payments are valid if the woman is on her own, the ex husband an
abuser etc and a divorce had to occur to benefit both parties, then
fair enough, pay up. I think you have a valid point when the woman
then hitches up with another man who has the wealth to support your ex-
wife and dependants. It does sound like you have the raw end of the
bargain. No children, no partner, just a financial hose going
towards your ex-wife. It doesn't sound fair at all. If she has
formed a new relationship, the new male partner understood she had
children (a part of her), accepted her for that, then let him pay!!
Any payments you make towards your daughter should be out of love for
your offspring and made voluntary.
Dr. Lippschitz
>
> As an outsider, No children, husband etc. I think child support
> payments are valid if the woman is on her own, the ex husband an
> abuser
It's almost always the female who is the abuser both mental and physical.
etc and a divorce had to occur to benefit both parties, then
> fair enough, pay up. I think you have a valid point when the woman
> then hitches up with another man who has the wealth to support your ex-
> wife and dependants. It does sound like you have the raw end of the
> bargain. No children, no partner, just a financial hose going
> towards your ex-wife.
Females initiate most divorces mostly because they're bored.
It doesn't sound fair at all. If she has
> formed a new relationship, the new male partner understood she had
> children (a part of her), accepted her for that, then let him pay!!
Any man who marries is a fool. A female with kids? The guy is insane lol
> Any payments you make towards your daughter should be out of love for
> your offspring and made voluntary.
I would disown my children if they were living with a stepfather and their
whore mother.
DB
"deannie" <nadi...@gmail.com> wrote in
> As an outsider, No children, husband etc. I think child support
> payments are valid if the woman is on her own, the ex husband an
> abuser etc and a divorce had to occur to benefit both parties, then
> fair enough, pay up.
That's the same mentality of how this whole mess was sold to the masses.
So how do you feel about woman that go around having unprotected sex and
producing children they know they cannot afford on their own. This is a
reckless behavior that seems to conveniently get ignored.
Many politicians built their empty careers on the Best Interest of the
Children mantra.
This was a cheap shot at men as politicians claimed men are bad and
politicians would save the good women from a life of poverty by forcing men
to pay for all their expenses. Politicians are always so generous with
other people's money, they had no right to trample on anyone's freedoms and
failed to protect freedoms that are guaranteed in constitution . What is sad
is this generation is so quick to give away what was so hard fought for by
former generations.
John Doe
> "deannie" <nadi...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
>> As an outsider, No children, husband etc. I think child support
>> payments are valid if the woman is on her own, the ex husband an
>> abuser etc and a divorce had to occur to benefit both parties,
>> then fair enough, pay up.
>
> That's the same mentality of how this whole mess was sold to the
> masses.
That's the mentality of a true zealot.
But seriously. Read the rest of the post you replied to.
--
The first big front wheel rollerblades.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27532210@N04/2565924423/
Google Groups is destroying the USENET archive,
to hell with Google.
DB
"John Doe" <jd...@usenetlove.invalid> wrote in message
news:JTGnk.15183$LG4....@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
> "DB" <Dee...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>> "deannie" <nadi...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>
>>> As an outsider, No children, husband etc. I think child support
>>> payments are valid if the woman is on her own, the ex husband an
>>> abuser etc and a divorce had to occur to benefit both parties,
>>> then fair enough, pay up.
>>
>> That's the same mentality of how this whole mess was sold to the
>> masses.
>
> That's the mentality of a true zealot.
Yes the C$ idiots scream, all men bad and we need a system to make them pay!
Grow up mate, when did we teach our kids that the government can solve all
their personal problems?