If a parent does not want to be finacially responsible for the
child(ren) should they should they still be aloud time with the
child(ren)?
2006-10-19 18:05:01 · 23 answers · asked by J 2 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Parenting
Ok to clarify if they say I am not going to help you finacially because you can do it by yourself but I still want to come over and visit and be aloud parental rights
2006-10-19 18:10:27 · update #1
If you feel that it would be in your child's best interest to keep the other parent away because they're abusive or on drugs or something, then by all means, protect them! But if the money is the only reason, then that will come back an bite you in the end.
The custodial parent is entitled to financial support and you should go to court to get it. My kids' father owes me over $30k in back support and, although he's only asked to see the kids like 3 times in the last 10 1/2 years, I have never said no. He had to be sober and could not take them out of my sight, but I let him see them. The children will only resent you for preventing the relationship later. Bite the bullet. I often say that doing what's best for the kids rarely means doing what's easiest.
My older kids are now almost 12 & 13 and they know that their father hasn't seen them over the years by his own choice. They're also old enough to see what a jerk he is for choosing drugs and alcohol over his own flesh and blood. They know that mom is always there for them and does what she feels is best for them. I think they appreciate me more for that because they know how hard it is for me to hold my tongue, but I've done it for them because they wanted to see him. I hope you get this all straightened out soon. Good luck!
2006-10-19 18:43:27 · answer #1 · answered by Chocoholic 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If this is ur situation then u need to consider one major thing:
What is more important? U getting money (yes that is meant to be paid for a damn good reason but unfortunately the heel ur dealing with doesn't believe so)
OR
The child/ren having contact and a relationship (which they can evaluate for themselves later they r at a stage of life when it is appropriate) with BOTH parents?
Unfortunately some people get lost in "I'm right, I'm doing the right thing" but that doesn't give that partner the right to deny access to the kids as a form of punishment, only because ur punishing the kids too. Unless there is a threat of physical or emotional abuse, children need both of their parents!
2006-10-20 01:24:10 · answer #2 · answered by Belle 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What should be focused on is the best interest of the child(ren). What is immaterial is who deserves what and when. It is usually in children's best interest to have a relationship with both parents (barring extenuating circumstances such as abuse). But then again, it is also in children's best interest to have a financially stable parent(s). And if that takes involving the courts, then so be it. One doesn't have a choice to be financially responsible for their children-- they made that choice when they chose to be sexually active.
2006-10-20 02:58:43 · answer #3 · answered by aas_627 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
seems like a cop out to me. being a parent encompasses many things, some difficult and some not, some fun and some not. it is really important that kids don't feel abandoned by a parent, and for this reason it's important to have both parents in their kids lives IF POSSIBLE. that being said, financial support for a kid is part of the reality of having children. not fair to be there for the fun parts but not the painful ones. it teaches the wrong message, and puts each parent in a different light with the kids. financial should be shared as much as possible, just like parental responsibility for upbringing.
2006-10-20 01:15:24 · answer #4 · answered by The Beast 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Whether a child should be allowed to spend time with a parent is an issue of what is best for the child, not how or whether the parent provides financial support.
2006-10-20 01:08:35 · answer #5 · answered by Calina 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No parent would like not to be financially responsible for (his or her) children. The point is that there are situations we can not help. sometimes your plans fail you and as human beings, when ends no longer meet, things begin to go wrong and you begin to behave wared even if you dont want to. I think a parent shouldn't be deprived the chance of seeing his/her children simply because he is not financially capable as things might later change for good in future. As long as the children are willing and they love him, he has the right to see his own children.
2006-10-20 03:30:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they are not permitted time... who loses the most? The child(ren) right? Yes, kids need money to meet their daily needs... but what they need most is love and attention.
It's got to be hard to allow someone that doesn't pay child support (I'm assuming that's what you mean) to see his/her children... but if they are good influence, love the kids... keep the kids in mind too.
2006-10-20 01:09:16 · answer #7 · answered by B L 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
OK reverse it and then rethink your question if a parent pays support and is denied access's for no legal or moral reason is that right?money has nothing to do with parenting the government tells me pay and good frigging luck even knowing where your child lives let alone seeing them and don't say take her to court you must know where she lives to serve her as the support comes off my cheque it goes Through the courts and they use the privacy act to hide her location i do not know if she is still in the country or which province she lives in
2006-10-20 01:15:19 · answer #8 · answered by alledgedflatlander 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
it depends on what they wont pay for finacially,if its things that you dont need(lipstick,new shoes"every week" or something that the child wants because its the new thing) then sure they can have involement in the child life,because they are still getting things that the child NEEDS but if thier not buying the must haves,like food,lady products,clothing that fit stuff like that its called neglect and the child can report it to the school administative and from thier they will call child services in the case will be properly handel
2006-10-20 01:12:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Allow him to see the children, and have the state set up child support
2006-10-20 01:30:49 · answer #10 · answered by Ash 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋