Lowering amount of CS agreed to in a MSA in Florida

[Deblynrob]

This is not the forum for legal advice. For those of you who are not educated, legal advice can only be given by an attorney. In twenty-five years in the legal field, I have not once heard of or had a client come to me and say..."I am a noncustodial parent, I have had a huge raise..I want to pay more child support because my kids need it and deserve it." Wonder why that is? hummmmm Well at least I managed to get some of you thinking and some of you..well... Statistics prove there are more deadbeat noncustodial parents out there than deadbeat custodial parents. Now if you know the law, that comment will make sense to you and if you dont..then keep your ignorance to yourself. And by the way..I am not a newbie, I have been on this board for a very, very long time.

**I had every intention of staying out of this, but you have rubbed me the wrong way. I am a non-custodial mother and a custodial step mother.
Being that I am a non-custodial parent, I pay child support. I ALWAYS let Friend of the Court when I get a raise. I have never been one day late on my child support payments. I pay all health care premiums including 50% of non covered medical expenses.
The judge just "slaps them on the wrist" whenever they deny visitation. (which is frequently) This has led me to beg, plead and bribe my ex and his wife to see our daughter.
They call CPS on me on a fairly regular basis and it has gotten to the point that the caseworker will call me and say "guess what you did this time" All allegations have been investigated and found to be without merit. This situation has taken an emotional toll on our daughter. It scares me to think of the psychological damage being done.
What you are doing, Elease, is generalizing. I know non custodial parents who are deadbeats and many, like me, who pay their child support faithfully and willingly and are visitors in their child's life. I know custodial parents who are vindictive and money hungry. I know many who would be happy just to get a child support check even if was only $25 a week and would never think of keeping their children away from the non-custodial parent. The point is not all custodial and non custodial parents are the same.
So, why not stop stereotyping?

 

[Whyte Noise]

You may have been "reading" on this board for a long time, but unless you've decided to become "incognito" to voice your opinions, then your total of 10 posts makes you a "newbie".

As for your other statement about being educated... believe it or not, I got's me one of them thar things. Maybe I don't have my Juris Doctorate or anything, but I DO know how to read the fine print on things. Isn't that part of the curriculum for Contracts 101? Look at the bottom of your page on your monitor, and you will see these words... "The FreeAdvice Forums are intended to enable consumers to benefit from the experience of other consumers who have faced similar legal issues." And also, these words, "All postings reflect the views of the author but become the property of FreeAdvice. Information on FreeAdvice or a Forum should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for advice from an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction who you have retained to represent you."

So, if you think legal advice can only be given by an attorney, then perhaps you need to contact the administrator of this website, and complain to them that there are people on here "practicing law without a license." Of course, that would get you nowhere because of the disclaimer I just pointed out. As a paralegal (if you truly are one) you should know what that encompasses. Normal folks giving out advice based on their own experiences and reasearch does not constitute practicing law without a license. However, your choice of words that went something like this, "I have not once heard of or had a client come to me and say..." COULD be construed as practicing law without a license because as you should know, a paralegal works under the guidance of an attorney and at no time represents themselves as anything other than a paralegal to a client. If you have clients coming to YOU, and telling you things and you're giving them legal advice under the guise of being a paralegal... well, draw your own conclusions.

As for your statistics comment, I can show you statistics that prove that the so called "deadbeat parent" in most cases is someone that had their child support set too high to begin with, lost their job and have been unable to find other employment, etc. Not a matter of not wanting to pay, but a matter of simply not being ABLE to pay. We can banter that around all day long. here's you some statistics:

66 percent of fathers lack the financial resources to pay the allotted payment of child support

40 percent of mothers reported that they had interfered with the fathers' visitation to punish the ex-spouse.

Custodial fathers are less likely to receive child-support payments than mothers.

Custodial mothers represent 85.1 percent of all custodial parents.

Only 14.9 percent of fathers have custody of their children.

Custodial fathers are less likely to receive child-support payments than mothers.

56.3 percent of custodial parents had some sort of agreement or award for their children.

32.4 percent of custodial parents didn't feel they needed a legal agreement.

*Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Government Accounting Office, American Sociological Review, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Washington D.C.: Child Trends*

Oonly 10% of all noncustodial father fit the "deadbeat dad" category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of those with NO visitation rights still financially support their children. (Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173). Additionally, of those NOT paying support, 66% are not doing so because they LACK THE FINANCILA RESOURCES to pay (Source: GAO report: GAO/HRD-92-39 FS).

66% of single mothers work less than full time while only 10% of fathers fall into this category. (Source: Garansky and Meyer, DHHS Technical Analysis Paper No. 42)

66% of all support not paid by non-custodial fathers is due to inability to pay. (Source: U.S. General Accounting Office Report, GAO/HRD-92-39FS January 1992).

All the following are for custodial parents-
Single mothers who work less than full time: 66.2%
Single fathers who work less than full time: 10.2%
Single mothers who work more than 44 hours per week: 7.0%
Single fathers who work more than 44 hours per week: 24.5%


So, see... I can pull statistical data out of my ass all day to back what I say, as I'm sure you can too if you head on over to NOW or one of their little affiliates.

Now, show me YOURS since I showed you mine. I want to see your statistics that prove non-custodial parents are more "deadbeat" than custodial parents. I'm in the "Show-Me State" after all.

 

[CMSC]

LOL Lets have a show of hands..how many of you custodidal parents out there can support a small child on $75 a week! Preschool or no preschool? Every state now has what is called a "Child Support Guidelines and Worksheet".

I raised my two off of $34.62/week...however I worked my butt off and made more to contribute to my income, not just relying on the child support!

Yep, every state has a guideline's worksheet and do you know that most states have a minimum support amount? That would be between $25 and $50 per month if the NCP is at poverty level or a higher support amount would not be fair.

 

[Lil Miss Smarty Panties]

Great post, BLCM. Not that it's going to penetrate.

uh heh heh heh uh heh you said penetrate.


The Elease person is probably from singlemomz. They started oozing over here after that unfortunate incident about a month ago. They all hate NCP's and think all NCP men are deadbeats. They lovingly refer to all their ex's as sperm donors. They are a close second in the bitterness department to the bunch of self absorbed hags on MAFIA. One of my good friends once referred to them as female n@zi man haters. A very good description.

 

[CMSC]

They are a close second in the bitterness department to the bunch of self absorbed hags on MAFIA.

Hey now! I am on MAFIA!LMAO I am not THAT self absorbed!!!

 

[Lil Miss Smarty Panties]

Tell WV hi from oh really?

 

[CMSC]

Tell WV hi from oh really?

WV? Great now I am racking my brain trying to figure out who WV is.

 

[Lil Miss Smarty Panties]

Come on now ry, you can do it. Think of John Denver.

 

[CMSC]

Come on now ry, you can do it. Think of John Denver.

Yea, that helped. I am too tired, I am going to bed.

 

[mrseld]

My husband has sole custody of his two children and received $66.25 a week for two children. Of course, I say that as if his ex-wife has paid faithfully. She hasn't. Her CS obligation began in 1996. She is currently over $20,000.00 behind in child support. My husband had to work two jobs to to keep his children fed and didn't even go after her for the arrearage until 1999. A full 3 years after their divorce. She paid consistantly for one year after that and we haven't seen any money since 2000. Thankfully, we don't "need" the money, but that's not really the point. We could've used it to put in their savings accounts for them to have when they turned 18.

I don't know how in the world the other poster (ryry I think) did it on a little over $35 a week! But, you'd be amazed what you can do when you have to.

And all NCP's aren't losers. Some of them got a raw deal just like some of the CP's did. It's just the luck of the draw. Sometimes you get a responsible NCP who pays and sometimes you don't. Sometimes you get a CP who is dedicated to giving the NCP their visitation no matter what and sometimes you don't. You can't put all the NCP's or all of the CP's under one "label".

 

[Elease]

I will try to explain a fact. Child support is based on the incomes of BOTH parents. If one parent is on unemployment, or receiving disability, or any other form of assistance, child support guidelines calculate that as income. If a NCP is jobless then the court determines cs based on what that person could be making from previous incomes. My experience in the courts is that they are not as sympathetic as all of you, to NCP who come in arguing...my wifes new hubby and family are rich ...so they dont need cs. None of you addressed that comment from the poster I noticed. Also none of you addressed the comments from another poster that she/he has spent over 500.00 per month on the care of a child. Also in reading over the terms of usage on this board I failed to find the part that stipulates you must have been on this board for X amount of time, and won friends and made buddies to offer an opinion. This is an Internet message board. Open to the public, upon registering. Get a life!

 

[stealth2]

I will try to explain a fact. Child support is based on the incomes of BOTH parents.

As a paralegal, I would think that you know CS calculations are state specific. Some use a shared income model, while some base the calculation only on the income of the NCP. If you're going to try and "educate" people, you might like to make sure you get your facts straight.

The amount actually needed to raise a child varies by locale as well - CA or NYC would be significantly more expensive than, say, Idaho. So that's really a rather moot discussion.

 

[CMSC]

I will try to explain a fact. Child support is based on the incomes of BOTH parents.

*boy you aren't too bright are you?

If one parent is on unemployment, or receiving disability, or any other form of assistance, child support guidelines calculate that as income.

*REally? Is that in EVERY state?

If a NCP is jobless then the court determines cs based on what that person could be making from previous incomes.

*WRONG AGAIN!


My experience in the courts is that they are not as sympathetic as all of you, to NCP who come in arguing...my wifes new hubby and family are rich ...so they dont need cs. None of you addressed that comment from the poster I noticed. Also none of you addressed the comments from another poster that she/he has spent over 500.00 per month on the care of a child. Also in reading over the terms of usage on this board I failed to find the part that stipulates you must have been on this board for X amount of time, and won friends and made buddies to offer an opinion.

*You don't have to be on here for X amount of time, HOWEVER, if you don't know what the F*uck you are talking about, you will get straightened out.

This is an Internet message board. Open to the public, upon registering. Get a life!

 

[CMSC]

I don't know how in the world the other poster (ryry I think) did it on a little over $35 a week! But, you'd be amazed what you can do when you have to.

I think this is where people are getting confused. I didn't make in on $34.62/child. I made in on MY income, if I got child support that week (which didn't start out as $34.62, it was $12.50/wik.) then the kids got something they needed that I couldn't buy just yet. It is still that way, thanks to my wonderful husband, who makes enough to let me stay home and enjoy my children! If I get the child support for the week, the kids get new shoe's or socks or we take them out to eat etc. It is now our "fun money". We don't plan our finances around it, I consider it money I can't always get so it is like winning money on a lottery ticket. If we don't use the money that week, it gets put into the bank to draw a little interest. We have also bought savings bonds with some of it.

 

[Whyte Noise]

I will try to explain a fact. Child support is based on the incomes of BOTH parents.

****I know it's been said to you before, but I can't help but rub salt in an already gaping wound.

BUWAHAHAHAHAHA

Not in Georgia, it's not. Not in Illinois, it's not. Of course, these are just 2 of the states that use only the non-custodial parents income and never even calculate in the custodial parents income at all. We've called you on this statement already, lets move on to another one.

If one parent is on unemployment, or receiving disability, or any other form of assistance, child support guidelines calculate that as income.

****Any type of Title IV agency "assistance" is not considered "income". TANF (welfare check), food stamps, medical assistance... every state's guidelines specifically states that those items are NOT counted as income. Also, SSDI is considered as income, but SSI is not. SSDI can be garnished, as can UI benefits, but SSI can not.

If a NCP is jobless then the court determines cs based on what that person could be making from previous incomes.

****Not necessarily Elease. Depending on each individuals circumstance, they may impute an income to an NCP, which could be nothing more than minimum wage @ 40 hours per week. However, if a CP is jobless.... why don't the courts impute THEM an income too? Only fair, right?

My experience in the courts is that they are not as sympathetic as all of you, to NCP who come in arguing...my wifes new hubby and family are rich ...so they dont need cs.

****It's not the fact that his ex is married to some rich man, and he doesn't need to pay child support that we're defending, it's the fact that his ex is claiming an extra $100 a month for pre-school expenses, and the child isn't even in pre-school any longer. Based on that, and that alone, is why I told the poster to go back for a modification. My ex makes over $50,000 a year with his yearly bonus included, but you don't hear me saying I shouldn't pay child support, do you? And now, since I'll have the kids for the next year, I'm not even asking him to pay ME child support.

None of you addressed that comment from the poster I noticed.

****Why should I? It wasn't relevent to the question he was asking about, which was the pre-school monies.

Also none of you addressed the comments from another poster that she/he has spent over 500.00 per month on the care of a child.

****If you were referring to the comment I made about my children's medicine costing that much every month, then I see no reason for anyone else to comment on it. It was directed at you. You seem to be sitting in the drivers seat of the NCP bashing wagon. I'm the NCP, and I'M the one that takes care of that. My ex never had that bill as the CP because he convieniently chose to just not take them to the doctors. Therefore... no doctors, no medicines, no medicine bills. I have 3 kids with allergies, one of those has asthma, and another of them is ADHD. So, that's about $500 every single month in just medication costs alone for my kids. And we haven't even added in the costs of the cavities that are going to have to be filled, the broken teeth that will have to be capped or pulled, and the cost of braces which will run between $3,000 and $5,000. And, guess who's taking care of all this? Yup, that's right. Me. The sh*tty NCP that could care less about the kids, and just wants to get out of paying child support. My ex, the actual court ordered CP, hasn't done it in 3 years and could care less about it apparently. So, who is the deadbeat in this case?

Also in reading over the terms of usage on this board I failed to find the part that stipulates you must have been on this board for X amount of time, and won friends and made buddies to offer an opinion. This is an Internet message board. Open to the public, upon registering. Get a life!

****Offering an opinion is one thing. Bashing a poster based on nothing more than your tunnel vision view of NCP's is another. Stating untruths as fact is also not a good thing, and we've pointed out where your flaws are in that department. If you want to help people, and offer sound advice, then by all means go ahead. No one is stopping you. But when you tell blatent lies and try to pass them off as truth, as ryry's said, you will be called on it. If not by one of us non-educated doofuses, then by one of our law-talking professionals on this board. It's just that this time, we got to you before they did.