No Child support !! If You Have a Penis

Off Topic
61

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

No, that is not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is she might as well have been single. He didn’t participate in ANYTHING. They could have been roommates, for all the participating he did. He can’t, all of a sudden, decide he wants to be a dad, just because she left and took the kids. He had his chance to be a dad and he fucked it up.[/quote]

That’s fucking bullshit. “He had his chance”. Spoken like a true vindictive woman. Apparently, the female species need not even be directly involved in the situation to have strong feelings of vindictiveness. I’m sure the children want him to have his chance as many times as it takes.

Bet that never occurred to you now did it?

62

[quote]Grneyes wrote:
…He can’t, all of a sudden, decide he wants to be a dad…[/quote]

Why not? Why should a man who’s missing out on his kids for the sake of his role in his marriage as the provider be expected to continue to make that sacrifice after the marriage ends? Hell, even if he’s only there to hide from a wife he can’t stand, there’s no reason why he shouldn’t be able to make changes. Even if he was intentionally avoiding it all and being a douche why should he be denied the chance to make it right?

And let’s not forget the REAL reason it matters at all: How is his new participation bad for his kids?

“He never used to do that so why should he get to now” isn’t about their kids. It’s about her anger, and her will to deprive him of what he wants now in order to punish him. It’s a common attitude presented by selfish women who can’t put their own personal fealings aside and do what’s right for their kids, because their too busy running a power trip against their former mate.

63

[quote]Broncoandy wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:
…He can’t, all of a sudden, decide he wants to be a dad…[/quote]

Why not? Why should a man who’s missing out on his kids for the sake of his role in his marriage as the provider be expected to continue to make that sacrifice after the marriage ends? Hell, even if he’s only there to hide from a wife he can’t stand, there’s no reason why he shouldn’t be able to make changes. Even if he was intentionally avoiding it all and being a douche why should he be denied the chance to make it right?

And let’s not forget the REAL reason it matters at all: How is his new participation bad for his kids?

“He never used to do that so why should he get to now” isn’t about their kids. It’s about her anger, and her will to deprive him of what he wants now in order to punish him. It’s a common attitude presented by selfish women who can’t put their own personal fealings aside and do what’s right for their kids, because their too busy running a power trip against their former mate.[/quote]

EXACTLY.

Vindictiveness, a decidedly female trait. And it is in full bloom right before your eyes.

64

[quote]Broncoandy wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:
…He can’t, all of a sudden, decide he wants to be a dad…[/quote]

Why not? Why should a man who’s missing out on his kids for the sake of his role in his marriage as the provider be expected to continue to make that sacrifice after the marriage ends? Hell, even if he’s only there to hide from a wife he can’t stand, there’s no reason why he shouldn’t be able to make changes. Even if he was intentionally avoiding it all and being a douche why should he be denied the chance to make it right?

And let’s not forget the REAL reason it matters at all: How is his new participation bad for his kids?

“He never used to do that so why should he get to now” isn’t about their kids. It’s about her anger, and her will to deprive him of what he wants now in order to punish him. It’s a common attitude presented by selfish women who can’t put their own personal fealings aside and do what’s right for their kids, because their too busy running a power trip against their former mate.[/quote]

…but we have nothing to worry about…because two people on the forum had good divorces where everything went GRRRRRRRRREEEAT!!

A man can work his ass off providing for the family only to have his wife hate him for it, file for divorce, and then spend the rest of his life trying to stop him from being a father.

That sounds fantastic.

I am wondering how “neglected” this wife felt when she was spending the money he earned.

My guess is, she isn’t running from his money even after the divorce…because she earned it, huh? While he was working long hours, she earned that money by telling all of her friends all of her personal business and badmouthing the husband.

I am still waiting to find out if he was working like that from the start of the relationship and if the wife even asked him to quit his job or offer to work more hours herself to compensate.

I am betting NOT.

65

[quote]Professor X wrote:

“He never used to do that so why should he get to now” isn’t about their kids. It’s about her anger,
I am still waiting to find out if he was working like that from the start of the relationship and if the wife even asked him to quit his job or offer to work more hours herself to compensate.

I am betting NOT.[/quote]

Don’t hold your breath. Bitches truly be crazy.

66

[quote]Broncoandy wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:
…He can’t, all of a sudden, decide he wants to be a dad…[/quote]

Why not? Why should a man who’s missing out on his kids for the sake of his role in his marriage as the provider be expected to continue to make that sacrifice after the marriage ends? Hell, even if he’s only there to hide from a wife he can’t stand, there’s no reason why he shouldn’t be able to make changes. Even if he was intentionally avoiding it all and being a douche why should he be denied the chance to make it right?

And let’s not forget the REAL reason it matters at all: How is his new participation bad for his kids?

“He never used to do that so why should he get to now” isn’t about their kids. It’s about her anger, and her will to deprive him of what he wants now in order to punish him. It’s a common attitude presented by selfish women who can’t put their own personal fealings aside and do what’s right for their kids, because their too busy running a power trip against their former mate.[/quote]

Well Fucking said. I can’t stand that vindictive crap. He should have every oppourtunity to be present in his kids lives for the better.

67

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
That sucks OP. The system is definitely stacked against men. A family member of mine used to work in child placement and foster care (after a stint as a child abuse investigator). One time she told me a story that blew my mind away. (It’s been awhile, so I might confuse a little of the story).

A father and mother had “issues” at the time of birth. So the mom never put the dad’s name on the birth certificate. Well over the years they made it work and lived together for 7 years but were never married. The mother got sick and died. Well it turns out the man couldn’t take custody of the children until it was “proven” he was the father. He had raised the kids for their whole lives but they had to go into the foster system until a paternity test could be done, which was, apparently, a lengthy process…or at least it seemed that way when your kids are in a foster-care system instead of under your roof. My family member told me she almost paid for the guy’s test herself b/c she thought it was such bullshit but, apparently, that too was illegal or against some regulations or something as she was the person who placed the children.

The system needs to change. [/quote]

I’m betting there was more to the story than that. They don’t take kids away for no reason and without cause, especially if there is other family around to take them in. [/quote]

I am sure that there is more to the story. However, my understanding is that, in the eyes of the law, they were NOT “taking the kids away” as he was “not the dad.” He was just a man living in the house of the mother. Despite being the biological father AND having lived with them for years, b/c he was not on the birth certificate, he was not the “father” in the eyes of the law. He was not family. So, for the law, b/c there was no family, the kids were placed in foster care until he could “prove” he was the biological father.

As I understood it at that time, if it turned out he wasn’t the biological dad, he had very little recourse. …come to think on it, I should call her up and find out what happened with that story…

68

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

No, that is not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is she might as well have been single. He didn’t participate in ANYTHING. They could have been roommates, for all the participating he did. He can’t, all of a sudden, decide he wants to be a dad, just because she left and took the kids. He had his chance to be a dad and he fucked it up.[/quote]

WTF?!? I must agree with what the others have been saying, this sounds like vindictive bullshit to me. He “had his chance,” huh? Who is she to say how many “chances” he has? Maybe they had a bad marriage, but even if everything you are saying is true, is is STILL THE DAD AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH. Are you actually hating him because he is now active in the lives of his children? That’s beyond fucked up.

I think I must be missing something…

69

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
That sucks OP. The system is definitely stacked against men. A family member of mine used to work in child placement and foster care (after a stint as a child abuse investigator). One time she told me a story that blew my mind away. (It’s been awhile, so I might confuse a little of the story).

A father and mother had “issues” at the time of birth. So the mom never put the dad’s name on the birth certificate. Well over the years they made it work and lived together for 7 years but were never married. The mother got sick and died. Well it turns out the man couldn’t take custody of the children until it was “proven” he was the father. He had raised the kids for their whole lives but they had to go into the foster system until a paternity test could be done, which was, apparently, a lengthy process…or at least it seemed that way when your kids are in a foster-care system instead of under your roof. My family member told me she almost paid for the guy’s test herself b/c she thought it was such bullshit but, apparently, that too was illegal or against some regulations or something as she was the person who placed the children.

The system needs to change. [/quote]

I’m betting there was more to the story than that. They don’t take kids away for no reason and without cause, especially if there is other family around to take them in. [/quote]

I am sure that there is more to the story. However, my understanding is that, in the eyes of the law, they were NOT “taking the kids away” as he was “not the dad.” He was just a man living in the house of the mother. Despite being the biological father AND having lived with them for years, b/c he was not on the birth certificate, he was not the “father” in the eyes of the law. He was not family. So, for the law, b/c there was no family, the kids were placed in foster care until he could “prove” he was the biological father.

As I understood it at that time, if it turned out he wasn’t the biological dad, he had very little recourse. …come to think on it, I should call her up and find out what happened with that story…
[/quote]

Definitely more to that story bro. Definitely.

70

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

I think I must be missing something… [/quote]

You’re not missing anything. This is the female perspective illustrated for you. He wasn’t a good husband (in her opinion) or a good dad (in her opinion) and therefore, he has forfeited all rights and redemption, even if such redemption is in the best interest of the children because…bitches be fucking crazy.

It’s called wanting your pound of flesh, and fuck the world and everyone else in it (including the kids). “You had your chance”. GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE WITH THAT BULLSHIT.

71

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Broncoandy wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:
…He can’t, all of a sudden, decide he wants to be a dad…[/quote]

Why not? Why should a man who’s missing out on his kids for the sake of his role in his marriage as the provider be expected to continue to make that sacrifice after the marriage ends? Hell, even if he’s only there to hide from a wife he can’t stand, there’s no reason why he shouldn’t be able to make changes. Even if he was intentionally avoiding it all and being a douche why should he be denied the chance to make it right?

And let’s not forget the REAL reason it matters at all: How is his new participation bad for his kids?

“He never used to do that so why should he get to now” isn’t about their kids. It’s about her anger, and her will to deprive him of what he wants now in order to punish him. It’s a common attitude presented by selfish women who can’t put their own personal fealings aside and do what’s right for their kids, because their too busy running a power trip against their former mate.[/quote]

…but we have nothing to worry about…because two people on the forum had good divorces where everything went GRRRRRRRRREEEAT!!

A man can work his ass off providing for the family only to have his wife hate him for it, file for divorce, and then spend the rest of his life trying to stop him from being a father.

That sounds fantastic.

I am wondering how “neglected” this wife felt when she was spending the money he earned.

My guess is, she isn’t running from his money even after the divorce…because she earned it, huh? While he was working long hours, she earned that money by telling all of her friends all of her personal business and badmouthing the husband.

I am still waiting to find out if he was working like that from the start of the relationship and if the wife even asked him to quit his job or offer to work more hours herself to compensate.

I am betting NOT.[/quote]

X, you’ll be waitng a while for whatever answers you’re looking for… Greeny went to bed some time ago.

I’ve heard the story from Greeny’s family about this relationship from day 1 and it was discussed in detail at Thanksgiving.

While I wouldn’t know these people from mud, it seems like she had perfectly valid reasons for doing what she did.

72

[quote]imhungry wrote:

X, you’ll be waitng a while for whatever answers you’re looking for… Greeny went to bed some time ago.

I’ve heard the story from Greeny’s family about this relationship from day 1 and it was discussed in detail at Thanksgiving.

While I wouldn’t know these people from mud, it seems like she had perfectly valid reasons for doing what she did.
[/quote]

I don’t think the discussion is any longer about some case study your wife is familiar with as it is now about the views she expressed, which pretty much sums up the problem. “You had your chance”. Never any mention about the children. Hope you never blow your chance.

73

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]imhungry wrote:

X, you’ll be waitng a while for whatever answers you’re looking for… Greeny went to bed some time ago.

I’ve heard the story from Greeny’s family about this relationship from day 1 and it was discussed in detail at Thanksgiving.

While I wouldn’t know these people from mud, it seems like she had perfectly valid reasons for doing what she did.
[/quote]

I don’t think the discussion is any longer about some case study your wife is familiar with as it is now about the views she expressed, which pretty much sums up the problem. “You had your chance”. Never any mention about the children. Hope you never blow your chance. [/quote]

Well, that was the collective thought of her family, really.

She tried to explain the situation as best she could, BG. I’m sure she wasn’t expecting the reaction she did. I sure as hell didn’t.

I’m 99.9 percent sure I/we will be fine, BG. If there was any real doubt about her character, I sure as hell wouldn’t have married her.

74

[quote]Professor X wrote:

…but we have nothing to worry about…because two people on the forum had good divorces where everything went GRRRRRRRRREEEAT!!

A man can work his ass off providing for the family only to have his wife hate him for it, file for divorce, and then spend the rest of his life trying to stop him from being a father.

That sounds fantastic.

I am wondering how “neglected” this wife felt when she was spending the money he earned.

My guess is, she isn’t running from his money even after the divorce…because she earned it, huh? While he was working long hours, she earned that money by telling all of her friends all of her personal business and badmouthing the husband.

I am still waiting to find out if he was working like that from the start of the relationship and if the wife even asked him to quit his job or offer to work more hours herself to compensate.

I am betting NOT.[/quote]

You know X, I kinda resent that first comment. As one of the 2 people who mentioned they had an easy divorce, I never said no one should worry and everything will be great. That so many guys on this forum have had shitty experiences with the whole lot of marriage really makes me sad. It seems like the whole idea of marriage now is for the money and control, and the situations described make me wonder what kind of people we are becoming as a whole. There seems to be a great lack of compassion, common sense and basic humanity from the 2 people who should be exercising it the most in a marriage: the parents.

Everyone has a story, or knows someone who has a story and I really believe there are more than 2 sides to each one. The truth is that no one knows what goes on in a marriage except the 2 people involved, and divorce and CS can distort those facts beyond reason. His side, her side and then everyone else who gets caught up in the shitstorm have opinions.

I like the idea of a parental pre-nup. I don’t know anything about the law but it would be prudent if guidelines could be established in advance of having kids as to how it will be in the event of divorce. Who knows if it would hold up in court, situations change, but until people can start being more like human beings and less like greedy animals I don’t have any other ideas. Or never get married and have kids if you have no faith in a pre-nup, parental pre-nups or more importantly a potential partner. For some men and women, I wouldn’t blame them.

I don’t think everything is great, I think its fucked over to a point I wonder if it can ever be redeemed.

75

[quote]imhungry wrote:

Well, that was the collective thought of her family, really.

She tried to explain the situation as best she could, BG. I’m sure she wasn’t expecting the reaction she did. I sure as hell didn’t.

I’m 99.9 percent sure I/we will be fine, BG. If there was any real doubt about her character, I sure as hell wouldn’t have married her. [/quote]

I sincerely apologize for being personal but as you can probably guess, I lived with this fucked up system and I’m still living with it. I despise the attitude she expressed, intentionally or not.

76

In San Diego if you are behind in child support the receiving spouse gets funds from the state and then the state goes after the owing spouse. So they are still getting paid something. Is that what happens in other states?

77

Man it fucking sucks what guys have to pay for child support.

Thankfully, I have taken a clear lesson. This is one problem I will NEVER bring on myself.

78

Marriage has always been about resource distribution, i.e. economics. I do not care if you are talking about berries and fish, or car payments and child rearing. This needs to be understood before entering into a marriage as, we can see in the discussion of child support & alimony, these are economic issues.

I had this talk with my wife before we got married.

Key to remember, never marry someone you would not want to divorce. If they strike as sometimes unreasonable and vindictive before you get married…I think these goes to their support network some as well.

79

711×1099 190 KB

Says it all.

80

Wow thanks Bulldog for bringing a topic I argued about in another thread. I have spoke to lawyers and family law is different for every state, so some of these arguments are apples and oranges.

Seems to me males will speak of guys they know who have been fucked over and females will speak of all the females they know who were fucked over. Strange.

You know who gets fucked over is the kids 9 times out of 10, cause no matter who is at fault male or female most of the time its all selfishness from one of the parents. This is why there should always be an attorney ad litem (spl) an attorney for the childrens sake. They have no voice in these matters and there should be an impartial party to speak for them.

In case no body saw the other thread, I have been fucked over and always paid child support. My wifes X owes my wife $99,000 in back child support and my brothers X owes him $15,000. So I have seen both sides and the system is fucked up period.