English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If it has been proven in court that the parent with care has deliberately distroyed the relationship between child(ren) and absent parent and that to enforce contact would be too traumatic for the child(ren), then the absent parent should be excused of their financial resposibility until the parent with care has started to repair the damage.

2006-10-13 14:47:10 · 32 answers · asked by Fran T 2 in Family & Relationships Marriage & Divorce

32 answers

Actually, I totally agree with you. If say the mother has turned her children against their father then she should have to bear the consequences of it. It is unfair on the father that he should have to give her money when she is making life very difficult for him (and miserbale too)

2006-10-17 02:42:26 · answer #1 · answered by Kari 3 · 1 0

This is a very difficult situation and no doubt will be debated for many years.

Talking of my experiences, as an absent mother, my ex-husband would not allow me to see my children for 4 years because I was not a born again christian. he was of the opinion that my life style was welcoming the devil, when really I am just an average person I am not a criminal I own my own home and I have a good job. So he stopped contact for 4 years. So why should I give him money. He has obviously chosen that he doesn't want me to be apart of there lives. Yes they are my responsibility but unfortunately my ex husband did not want me to have a share in that responsibility by preventing me from seeing my kids and court orders are a waste time.

Thankfully 4 years later and my children are now 15 and 17 and have minds of there owns and I see both my children frequently. I still wont pay my ex money but there again he wont ask me for any as he hasn't spoke to me for 4 years and he only lives 1/2 mile away. I do give the kids £10 and week and frequently buy them clothes

2006-10-14 16:00:11 · answer #2 · answered by me_lisa 1 · 1 0

I'm sorry but you made the baby you need to support it. I'm sorry if the other parent damaged the childs feelings for you but if you would support the child and make an effort maybe she wouldn't be able to damage your relationship with them. I raise my 3 year old with no help. I work 30 hours a week at min wage. I do not tell my daughter negative things about her father even though he has not paid me a penny in a year and a half. He does not send presents or cards for christmas or b-days and he calls me names in front of her whenever he gets the chance. Too many men out here think they can just make children and abandon them and that is why their kids end up hating them. Start supporting your child and maybe one day he/she will realize you care and want a relationship with you otherwise you run the risk of your kid hating you because of something you did.
If you try to give up your parental rights to get out of support both parents have to sighn the papers and agree to it. My ex wanted to do that until he found out I wouldn't allow it and the judge was not willing to sighn the papers and got angry that he wanted to do that just to get out of support issues. Now if the mother agrees and the courts thinks it is in the childs best interest you are giving up all rights and can only see your kids after they turn 18 if they come looking for you.

2006-10-13 15:01:28 · answer #3 · answered by lil sis 3 · 2 0

Initally, it rather is frequently set to be paid from one determine to a diverse, frequently by way of mailed examine. If a concern arises, then the government enterprise in fee of the case (In Canada, that's the family contributors Responsiblity place of work), taken particular measures. After quite a few warning letters, they're going to initiate garnishing wages (if the payee has a criminal pastime, this might't be carried out for those that're paid funds below the table). in the event that they have not got a ordinary pastime, then they government make revoke their license and/or passport. Payee's can get around paying by ability of many strategies, even with the incontrovertible fact that at last the government catches as much as them and that they are forced to pay decrease back pay. some flee the rustic, others have no longer something of their call so their is not any thank you to song them, many artwork below the table and might desire to careless approximately dropping their DL/passport. additionally, there are various circumstances, the place the guy won't be able to pay for valid motives and then the help is redefined or suspended by ability of the courts.

2016-10-02 06:56:04 · answer #4 · answered by vishvanath 4 · 0 0

listen that not true the only person who can distroy a relationship between the child(ren) and absent parent is that parent if you have bond with that child no one can mess that up even if your on child support spend time with your and if the parent in care try to stop you take them to family court for split custody

2006-10-13 15:01:10 · answer #5 · answered by sexy black 1 · 1 0

You are still thinking of the parents as having rights here - and that is not
the over-riding issue. The over-riding issue is the wellbeing of the child.

And the child needs money, regardless of whether or not he or she can
stand to be in the same room with you.

If you have a beef with your ex-spouse, then you can take legal action
against HER - but you cannot use your alimony which is (at least theoretically)
for the upbringing of the child as leverage to change her behavior.

You can, however, call the department of social services and confront
her that she is damaging her own children by depriving them of your
self.

The only exception here is if you have reason to believe that the alimony
is not being spent towards the wellbeing of the child. This is usually pretty
difficult because parents are not required to keep their accounts and
their children's accounts separate.

Even if your child absolutely hates you, you are still financially responsible
for him or her.

2006-10-13 14:54:04 · answer #6 · answered by Elana 7 · 1 0

That's not a bad theory. I mean, I believe that both adults are responsible and if I were in the situation I'd want to support my children. However, it seems unfair that I'm forking out who knows how much for a child I don't see or know.
Might I assume that u are in this situation? If u seriously don't see ur children then speak to a solicitor and seek custody. That allows u to see ur kids and it's an ultimate f*** u to the ex-wife. If however, u just care about the money, like my father, go f*** urself and stop wasting mine and everyone else's time (I don't like selfish fathers).
Hope that helps.

2006-10-13 19:39:06 · answer #7 · answered by Knight-wing 3 · 0 0

There would be to many legal loop holes left in a law like that, think of how many guys out there that are dead beat dads that would use that as a excuse to get out of paying thousands of dollars... i mean yeah i can understand where you are coming from but regardless of what the situation is between the parents and the kids that child still needs alot of things... and they just need that money,,, regardless the child needs the money,,, no matter whos right or wrong in the situation :)

2006-10-13 14:51:16 · answer #8 · answered by chrystal_lynn2002 5 · 2 0

First of all, everyone who has answered your question.. has answered it truthfully and has given you the answer that you probably werent looking for.
Child Support is a FEDERAL LAW, however each state places its own by laws, if you will, under the FEDERAL LAW.

Do you have Court Documented proof from a court appointed Shrink who will tesify both under oath and by affidavit that your ex has turned the children against you?

Even if you do have that, the courts will neither reduce your child support nor terminate the Child Support order.

Children learn at an early age that actions speak louder than words. No matter how much your ex tells them that you dont love them, or that you dont want them; If you have visitation with them, and I dont mean quantity, but QUALITY visitation, they will know that no matter what comes out of their mothers mouth in reference to you is nothing but lies.
However there is a flip side to this as well. You bear the responsibility of how your kids see you as well. And you play a part in turning them against you by not only what you say, but as well by what you do.
No one can turn anyone else against another person unless one of two things happen. The person wants to be turned, or the person someone is trying to turn them against has hurt them so much, that they see no other recourse than to have no contact with said person.
You, play a big role in your childrens lives. If you dont want your ex to turn them against you, then what you SAY AND WHAT YOU DO, matters as much as what you dont say and what you dont do.

PS. If you dont want to pay Child Support, then Voluntarily TERMINATE YOUR PARENTAL RIGHTS. Once you are no longer a parent in the eyes of the law, then you no longer have to pay child support for Children that you arent a parent to.

2006-10-13 16:01:30 · answer #9 · answered by Shalamar Rue 4 · 0 0

In my state, visitation and child support are two separate issues totally. You don't pay child support in exchange for visitation. The child still has to eat and be clothed whether he/she visits the absent parent or not. It would be more productive to try and repair the relationship with the child than to get out of paying child support.

2006-10-13 15:06:40 · answer #10 · answered by Georgia Girl 3 · 1 0

So sorry. You are wrong, little grasshopper. Whether the custodial parent is right or wrong in what she says about the noncustodial parent, the children still need to be supported. I understand your reasoning, in its one sided skewed sort of way.
The children are not objects with terms of use. They are little people you helped bring into the world. They had no say in the matter. Now, be a man and pay the damn support, no matter how good or bad you and the ex get along.

2006-10-13 15:21:49 · answer #11 · answered by Slimsmom 6 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers