-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
my ex wife is on permanent ssi and...
- Thread starter round 1
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
TheGeekess
Keeper of the Kraken
Is Mom on SSDI or SSI? If she's on SSI, then there's not enough to live on, much less support children. SSI is needs based.
Silverplum
Senior Member
Your daughter should be receiving money from Mom's SSDI -- or is she on SSI?
This is from another state, but it gives a good explanation of the difference between SSI and SSDI and how child support is affected.
http://cssd.dc.gov/page/impact-ssi-and-ssdi-child-support
Info from CA: http://www.childsup.ca.gov/portals/0/resources/docs/pub160_english.pdf
and
http://www.disabilityrightsca.org/pubs/501701.pdf
justalayman
Senior Member
there is no such thing as permanent SSI., SSI is income and continued proof of the disability dependent. As such, if the recipient becomes able to work again (and given the current issues, I suspect a lot of people will be highly scrutinized in the near future) or developes a means to produce an income from something other than their disability allows, their situation would be reviewed and a re-determination made.
single317dad
Senior Member
I believe the confusion stems from the requirement that the disability is expected to be permanent in order to qualify (e.g., a broken foot that is expected to heal is not considered a disability, where it might be under private insurance).
LdiJ
Senior Member
I think its something else....at least in this thread.
SSI cannot be garnished for child support, therefore there is no way to enforce a CS order if someone's only income is SSI. That is why many CSEAs say that child support cannot be collected if someone is on SSI.
SSDI, produces a children's benefit as well, which normally replaces child support.
justalayman
Senior Member
Yes, I know. I was only being critically specific of the statement of it being permanent.
OHRoadwarrior
Senior Member
She can appeal to the judge, based on her SSI. Though the judge cannot specifically garnish her SSI, they can issue a minimal support order and find her in contempt for failing to pay it. The court might expect her to work 10 hours a week to come up with this money.
Proserpina
Senior Member
Proserpina
Senior Member
SSDI also requires continued proof of disability (though the review time-lines will differ greatly from case to case).
The ONLY difference, really, is that SSDI requires a certain number of qualifying SS "quarters" to be earned; SSI generally kicks in only when the disabled person either doesn't have enough qualifying quarters and/or the SSDI award doesn't meet certain levels.
OHRoadwarrior
Senior Member
Judicial discretion. As you are aware, the court takes SSI or SSDI into account. It is not required to find a particular individual unable to pay as little as 20 a month. When it does so, it chooses to acknowledge their disability status.
ROSE v. ROSE ET AL.
Last edited:
LdiJ
Senior Member
I think that you are going to want to quote a bit from your cite. The only Rose v Rose et al that I could find is the following...which obviously doesn't apply:
ROSE v. ROSE ET AL.
88 Pa. D. & C. 59 (1953)
Common Pleas Court of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.
December 3, 1953.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 10th day of July 1951.
"BENJAMIN ROSE
"Witness Lillian Rose
"Nathan Rosenberg"
[ 88 D. & C. 61 ]
The above agreement was executed without any consideration other than the hope that it would restore harmony in the family, all of whom had strongly objected to plaintiff's remarriage.
In paragraph 10 of the petition it is alleged as follows:
"After the signing of the said agreement of 1951, the defendant, Bernard Z. Rose, who is now the Treasurer and General Manager of Best Markets, has assumed that he is in complete control of the business and refuses to recognize either the authority of the plaintiff, who is President of the Corporation, or of the Board of Directors, with the result that the success of the Corporation is seriously jeopardized by lack of harmony in the management. The plaintiff, Benjamin Rose, in view of the circumstances desires to sell his stock in the Best Markets, but is unable to do so because the defendant, Bernard Z. Rose, has asserted and publicly stated that his father has no right to sell the stock and that in accordance with the agreement above referred to, the stock must be held for him, the said Bernard Z. Rose, and the children of the said Bernard Z. Rose."
Proserpina
Senior Member
I was actually asking you to provide proof of your assertion that the court may EXPECT a disabled person to work 10 hours per week.
Go ahead.
Ditto LdiJ.
I'mTheFather
Senior Member
You might want to try a different search engine. It seems that yours doesn't do a very good job.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=481&invol=619
You're comparing apples to oranges.
LdiJ
Senior Member
Ok...you found another case with the same name. Good. However I agree that he is comparing apples to oranges. There is a huge difference between veteran's benefits and SSI. No judge in that case ordered him to work 10 hours a week either to pay for child support.