This is for a class, to get opinions. Here is the senario.
A man is court ordered to pay 300.00 a month in child support. The mother of the child is remarried to a very rich man, however the courts dont calculate the money the new husband makes.
The man who is paying child support is also remarried, and they have 1 child of their own, who is a 'special needs child.' This child needs medicines that are very expensive. The man works very hard and always pays his child support. But sometimes, he goes without food or paying other bills like electric, rent, etc because he cant afford it. However, the courts wont lower his payment. They just tell him to get a second job.
What do you think?
2006-09-23 07:24:46 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The man just found out a few months ago about this child, because the mother of the child never told him about it until now. The child is already 7 years old! She waited until after the man was married and him and his wife had a kid to tell him about this.
2006-09-23 07:34:42 · update #1
The mother of the child owns a 5 bedroom house, 2 brand new cars, etc. She is only getting child support to 'piss-off' the father, knowing it puts him in finicial problems.
2006-09-23 07:36:43 · update #2
He made the kid so now he has to pay. He should have been taking care of his kid from the start then he won't be in this position. As for the wife , it doesn't matter if she remarried and have a rich husband . Her new husband is not that child's father so he doesn't have to care of it if he doesn't want too but I hope he does being that is his step-kid. In reality , you make a baby you take care of it.
2006-09-23 07:29:19 · answer #1 · answered by ♥ Army Wife ♥ 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
From your additional details, it doesn't sound to me like this is "for a class".
Any way, like some have said, he made the child, he has to pay. This new husband legally has little responsibility to pay for anything for this child (Not much of a man though is he???) Now, there has been a lot of reform in this area in most States. Every time he can (every 2 years or a 50% change in income in most states), he should go in and petition the court for a review. Sure the Ex may not work and she'll come into court with statements of 0 income. He needs to counter that with pictures of the house she lives in, the car(s) she drives, the clothes and belongings the child has when he see the child. All this demonstrates the "need" or lack thereof and can strengthen an argument that the amount of support is punitive and should be reduced to State minimums.
2006-09-23 09:32:09 · answer #2 · answered by APRock 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
courts do not look at the income of the second husband b/c the child is not his however the paternal father does have to pay any way nomatter theincome he now has the only thing he can do is get a 2nd job or file for a motion to lower the current order w/ proof that he cannot afford the current due to circumstances that have altered his lifestyle since then. all of this will have to be taken into consideration through the family courts and with a very good lawyer he has a decent chance of doing so.
2006-09-24 00:59:28 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is not about fair. The court is a machine that follows the law.
I don't think there is a remedy for this. If it is any consolation
this obligation eventually will end and this person will have done the right thing. The only consolation may be that since his ex wife is married to a wealthy, when this obligation ends, let the rich spouse of the ex wife pay for that child's continuing education.
He will be done.
2006-09-23 07:30:30 · answer #4 · answered by planksheer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you do not want to take care of your child then don't make babies. Even if it has been 7 years the fact that you laid with this woman and had a child, in the eyes of the law means that you are liable to the support of the child. He should want to take care of his child with or without the law. The man that the mother married is not responsible unless he adopts the child, yes he is takign care of the child but he does not have to because he is not the father.
2006-09-23 07:40:31 · answer #5 · answered by mshoward1204 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is not fair but the courts are about the law not fairness. In divorces in the US, fathers are generally treated as second class citizens. If the father is unable to provide some of the basics for his 'special needs child', he should be looking for assistance from the state.
2006-09-23 07:37:15 · answer #6 · answered by williegod 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I don't think very much of the child support system--I've heard more unjust stories than just ones. I think it really depends on the state. In some states it may indeed be the law that he owes child support, no questions asked. If that's the case, he's pretty well screwed. If he thinks the law is on his side, he can appeal it, I think, though I'm no lawyer.
2006-09-23 16:02:49 · answer #7 · answered by rabid_scientist 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He can go back to court and have the child support agreement re evaluated. They include all bills when coming to a determination on child support payments.
2006-09-23 09:40:03 · answer #8 · answered by Lori H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's completely unfair because the ***** is stealing money she doesn't need from a special needs child. Also don't you think that it's a bit funny that she isn't court ordered to pay for her kid but her ex is? It's completely unethical.
2006-09-23 07:37:31 · answer #9 · answered by Victoria W 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if he just found out a few months ago how is it that he as been always making his court ordered payments how did it get to court so quickly. what are his visitation; why doesn't he have custody? sounds very suspicious!!!!!
2006-09-23 08:00:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋