50/50 is terrible for kids! Why does this nonsense persist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

They can check, but they don't check for private custody cases, just the ones that go through the Office of Child Support. There are two different systems. No, you don't report someone for food stamp fraud as that impacts the child. The systems for the private child support cases are not linked as the garnishment gets sent from the employer or the NCP sends a check directly.

This...is word salad.

As I said before-someone is posting from decades past.

Yo clearly don’t get the system. There are two ways through the court to get child support. It’s only tracked if you go through the office of child support, which is always a good idea and far better for ncps as then they don’t have to deal with the drama.

Luckily for you, it seems that you’re the one who doesn’t get the system for applying for food stamps/Medicaid. You have to disclose income from child support. If you are not receiving child support you have to list the father and the state will come after him for child support before they will give the mother food stamps. So no, some poor suffering non-custodial dad isn’t just nobly not reporting his children’s to the state for fraud, they would be coming after him for the money.

Not if the mother lies. No decent father would report it. No, they rarely come after the Dad. They don't have enough staff for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kids should get to stay in the primary home, the home they grew up in. I agree with OP that 50/50 sucks for kids. All of you that do it can convince yourself your kids are fine with it, but they’re not. They don’t have options though so they have to go along with it.

This should be mandatory.

Are you a 5 year old?

Nope, just someone who had to deal with a selfish farther who seemed to enjoy forcing me to travel all the time.

Or, maybe you were a selfish kid who didn't realize your Dad was just trying to be your father and spend time with you. If he refused to see you, you'd be complaining more. You had a loving father who was interested in a relationship with you and you refused it. Your friends who you probably have seen in many years were not more important than your Dad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

Court records are not accessible to anyone and public benefits workers only have access to some data bases so they'd pull from the office of child support but not from those that are court orders via a court hearing. You clearly don't have any clue. And, most of those data bases are 20-30 years old.

Oh it's word salad PP again. Unfortunately, you are still completely incorrect!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

They can check, but they don't check for private custody cases, just the ones that go through the Office of Child Support. There are two different systems. No, you don't report someone for food stamp fraud as that impacts the child. The systems for the private child support cases are not linked as the garnishment gets sent from the employer or the NCP sends a check directly.

This...is word salad.

As I said before-someone is posting from decades past.

Yo clearly don’t get the system. There are two ways through the court to get child support. It’s only tracked if you go through the office of child support, which is always a good idea and far better for ncps as then they don’t have to deal with the drama.

Luckily for you, it seems that you’re the one who doesn’t get the system for applying for food stamps/Medicaid. You have to disclose income from child support. If you are not receiving child support you have to list the father and the state will come after him for child support before they will give the mother food stamps. So no, some poor suffering non-custodial dad isn’t just nobly not reporting his children’s to the state for fraud, they would be coming after him for the money.

Not if the mother lies. No decent father would report it. No, they rarely come after the Dad. They don't have enough staff for that.

If the mother lies and says dad is not providing child support, they 100% come after dad. The state has no interest in funding children of deadbeat fathers. It takes no staff time at all to garnish wages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

They can check, but they don't check for private custody cases, just the ones that go through the Office of Child Support. There are two different systems. No, you don't report someone for food stamp fraud as that impacts the child. The systems for the private child support cases are not linked as the garnishment gets sent from the employer or the NCP sends a check directly.

This...is word salad.

As I said before-someone is posting from decades past.

Yo clearly don’t get the system. There are two ways through the court to get child support. It’s only tracked if you go through the office of child support, which is always a good idea and far better for ncps as then they don’t have to deal with the drama.

Luckily for you, it seems that you’re the one who doesn’t get the system for applying for food stamps/Medicaid. You have to disclose income from child support. If you are not receiving child support you have to list the father and the state will come after him for child support before they will give the mother food stamps. So no, some poor suffering non-custodial dad isn’t just nobly not reporting his children’s to the state for fraud, they would be coming after him for the money.

Not if the mother lies. No decent father would report it. No, they rarely come after the Dad. They don't have enough staff for that.

False false false. They ABOSLUTELY go after the other parent (not always Dad) if one parent is getting food stamps/aid. This must be the poster who is posting from the distant past.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

They can check, but they don't check for private custody cases, just the ones that go through the Office of Child Support. There are two different systems. No, you don't report someone for food stamp fraud as that impacts the child. The systems for the private child support cases are not linked as the garnishment gets sent from the employer or the NCP sends a check directly.

This...is word salad.

As I said before-someone is posting from decades past.

Yo clearly don’t get the system. There are two ways through the court to get child support. It’s only tracked if you go through the office of child support, which is always a good idea and far better for ncps as then they don’t have to deal with the drama.

Luckily for you, it seems that you’re the one who doesn’t get the system for applying for food stamps/Medicaid. You have to disclose income from child support. If you are not receiving child support you have to list the father and the state will come after him for child support before they will give the mother food stamps. So no, some poor suffering non-custodial dad isn’t just nobly not reporting his children’s to the state for fraud, they would be coming after him for the money.

Not if the mother lies. No decent father would report it. No, they rarely come after the Dad. They don't have enough staff for that.

False false false. They ABOSLUTELY go after the other parent (not always Dad) if one parent is getting food stamps/aid. This must be the poster who is posting from the distant past.

No they don't. Most social service offices have a few fraud investigators for the entire state at best. They aren't going to go after a mom except if it's extreme. It's very very rare. You really don't think a mom would lie about getting child support. They can only track what goes through the office of child support, not what is paid directly or through garnishment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

+1

If the dad had the information that she lied to receive benefits, he would have reported it.

And to be clear, a mother of two in Maryland only qualifies for food stamps if her total income is less than $30,000 annually. So if some dad is paying so little in child support that her income is under $30,000 it’s entirely possible she would struggle to get shoes for her kids.

If Dad is paying $1K-1500K, which is pretty common, she'd not have to earn very much to get $30K. In this situation, Mom wasn't paying the rent, her boyfriend/AP was. And, that money should have been spent on the kids.

Apparently she wasn’t earning that much or she wouldn’t have qualified for public assistance, so dad was likely not contributing anything like $1000-$1500/ month or she wouldn’t have qualified.

Who pays the rent is irrelevant, and, you have know way to know what the cohabitating couple did about joint finances. A car payment, a kid who needs therapy, one or two extra curricular activities, food…less than $30,000 gets you very little in this area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

+1

If the dad had the information that she lied to receive benefits, he would have reported it.

And to be clear, a mother of two in Maryland only qualifies for food stamps if her total income is less than $30,000 annually. So if some dad is paying so little in child support that her income is under $30,000 it’s entirely possible she would struggle to get shoes for her kids.

If Dad is paying $1K-1500K, which is pretty common, she'd not have to earn very much to get $30K. In this situation, Mom wasn't paying the rent, her boyfriend/AP was. And, that money should have been spent on the kids.

LOL I almost pulled a muscle laughing at that!

Unless there is a HUGE income disparity, and a huge parenting time disparity, rarely is one paying 1.5k a month. With 50/50 so common now, many parents have small cs amounts or even none, if their incomes are similar.

Gotta up your game trollio.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do 50-50 and we as parents shuffle Around

This is the only way to do it. The parents who make the decision to break up the family should be the ones doing the shuffling around.

I think only married people advocate for this. I am married, but if I ever got divorced, no way would I agree to this. The best part of being divorced would be not having to deal with your ex’s stuff and their mess - taking turns in the same house means that there’s still a million reasons to fight, with no clean break. It’s the worst of both worlds; all the hassles of living together with none of the benefits. If you can make this work; you should just stay married.

It's called family nesting and I know a family who have been doing this for 10 years. Kids stay in the family home and the parents go back and forth between an apartment. I get why it wouldn't work for everyone, but it was important to them both, that the divorce caused as little distraction for the kids as possible.

Cost and often the parents don't cooperate. So, what happens when Mom has an affair and moves in with the AP? Dad should have to share a home with the AP? What if that AP has kids? Do they go to the house for visits or to live on Mom's time? Or, the reverse with Dad?

Why are you asking me all these questions? I would have zero desire to do this in a divorce situation. I'm just sharing an alternative option that has worked out well for someone I know about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kids should get to stay in the primary home, the home they grew up in. I agree with OP that 50/50 sucks for kids. All of you that do it can convince yourself your kids are fine with it, but they’re not. They don’t have options though so they have to go along with it.

This should be mandatory.

Are you a 5 year old?

Nope, just someone who had to deal with a selfish farther who seemed to enjoy forcing me to travel all the time.

Or, maybe you were a selfish kid who didn't realize your Dad was just trying to be your father and spend time with you. If he refused to see you, you'd be complaining more. You had a loving father who was interested in a relationship with you and you refused it. Your friends who you probably have seen in many years were not more important than your Dad.

If he were interested in a relationship with me he wouldn't have caused a divorce by cheating and he wouldn't have move so far away, I do still see those friends frequently and they a far more important to me than he will ever be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

+1

If the dad had the information that she lied to receive benefits, he would have reported it.

And to be clear, a mother of two in Maryland only qualifies for food stamps if her total income is less than $30,000 annually. So if some dad is paying so little in child support that her income is under $30,000 it’s entirely possible she would struggle to get shoes for her kids.

If Dad is paying $1K-1500K, which is pretty common, she'd not have to earn very much to get $30K. In this situation, Mom wasn't paying the rent, her boyfriend/AP was. And, that money should have been spent on the kids.

Apparently she wasn’t earning that much or she wouldn’t have qualified for public assistance, so dad was likely not contributing anything like $1000-$1500/ month or she wouldn’t have qualified.

Who pays the rent is irrelevant, and, you have know way to know what the cohabitating couple did about joint finances. A car payment, a kid who needs therapy, one or two extra curricular activities, food…less than $30,000 gets you very little in this area.

It's not always in this area and if you aren't paying rent, on food stamps, free medical care, then your only expenses are your and the kids needs. When you get food stamps, you get Medicaid as well so the mom was double dipping with Medicaid and Dad's private insurance for the kids and these kids were not in any activities or therapies. Both would have been nice. And, yes, you do have a way of knowing if that's the excuse they are using not to pay the other ex-wife child support for his kids. But, obviously, that is ok with you that his kids suffer because of her and she's getting AP income, her income and Dad's income plus public benefits. But, right, Mom can never do wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kids should get to stay in the primary home, the home they grew up in. I agree with OP that 50/50 sucks for kids. All of you that do it can convince yourself your kids are fine with it, but they’re not. They don’t have options though so they have to go along with it.

This should be mandatory.

Are you a 5 year old?

Nope, just someone who had to deal with a selfish farther who seemed to enjoy forcing me to travel all the time.

Or, maybe you were a selfish kid who didn't realize your Dad was just trying to be your father and spend time with you. If he refused to see you, you'd be complaining more. You had a loving father who was interested in a relationship with you and you refused it. Your friends who you probably have seen in many years were not more important than your Dad.

If he were interested in a relationship with me he wouldn't have caused a divorce by cheating and he wouldn't have move so far away, I do still see those friends frequently and they a far more important to me than he will ever be.

You don't sound like a very nice person. He was trying. His cheating had nothing to do with his parenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

They can check, but they don't check for private custody cases, just the ones that go through the Office of Child Support. There are two different systems. No, you don't report someone for food stamp fraud as that impacts the child. The systems for the private child support cases are not linked as the garnishment gets sent from the employer or the NCP sends a check directly.

This...is word salad.

As I said before-someone is posting from decades past.

Yo clearly don’t get the system. There are two ways through the court to get child support. It’s only tracked if you go through the office of child support, which is always a good idea and far better for ncps as then they don’t have to deal with the drama.

Luckily for you, it seems that you’re the one who doesn’t get the system for applying for food stamps/Medicaid. You have to disclose income from child support. If you are not receiving child support you have to list the father and the state will come after him for child support before they will give the mother food stamps. So no, some poor suffering non-custodial dad isn’t just nobly not reporting his children’s to the state for fraud, they would be coming after him for the money.

Not if the mother lies. No decent father would report it. No, they rarely come after the Dad. They don't have enough staff for that.

False false false. They ABOSLUTELY go after the other parent (not always Dad) if one parent is getting food stamps/aid. This must be the poster who is posting from the distant past.

No they don't. Most social service offices have a few fraud investigators for the entire state at best. They aren't going to go after a mom except if it's extreme. It's very very rare. You really don't think a mom would lie about getting child support. They can only track what goes through the office of child support, not what is paid directly or through garnishment.

You are seriously misinformed. When you apply for services you have to prove your income, with things like pay stubs and bank statements. A payment from garnished wages is visible to the benefits office. If you claim $0 child support you have to name the co-parent and they will go after them unless you can prove something like their current incarceration.

Incidentally it’s why so many abused women/children wind up without benefits, because they don’t want to risk the father being notified of their whereabouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

+1

If the dad had the information that she lied to receive benefits, he would have reported it.

And to be clear, a mother of two in Maryland only qualifies for food stamps if her total income is less than $30,000 annually. So if some dad is paying so little in child support that her income is under $30,000 it’s entirely possible she would struggle to get shoes for her kids.

If Dad is paying $1K-1500K, which is pretty common, she'd not have to earn very much to get $30K. In this situation, Mom wasn't paying the rent, her boyfriend/AP was. And, that money should have been spent on the kids.

Apparently she wasn’t earning that much or she wouldn’t have qualified for public assistance, so dad was likely not contributing anything like $1000-$1500/ month or she wouldn’t have qualified.

Who pays the rent is irrelevant, and, you have know way to know what the cohabitating couple did about joint finances. A car payment, a kid who needs therapy, one or two extra curricular activities, food…less than $30,000 gets you very little in this area.

It's not always in this area and if you aren't paying rent, on food stamps, free medical care, then your only expenses are your and the kids needs. When you get food stamps, you get Medicaid as well so the mom was double dipping with Medicaid and Dad's private insurance for the kids and these kids were not in any activities or therapies. Both would have been nice. And, yes, you do have a way of knowing if that's the excuse they are using not to pay the other ex-wife child support for his kids. But, obviously, that is ok with you that his kids suffer because of her and she's getting AP income, her income and Dad's income plus public benefits. But, right, Mom can never do wrong.

If you’re not in this area, the threshold for food stamps drops to even less money, and having a car is even more critical.

If a man is saying he can’t pay child support because he’s paying rent on an apartment, the custodial parent should go after him (and if she doesn’t the courts will). If this story you are telling is accurate, two non-custodial parents are choosing not to report benefits fraud and that does not add up, nor does your idea that benefits fraud isn’t tightly investigated by the state.

I am glad you never had to apply for benefits. Part of my volunteer work is to help people apply for food stamps and WIC. I promise you they ask all about child support in the forms and in the interviews.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50/50 has been an absolute godsend for a couple of women of my acquaintance who finally have the time to pursue career, meaningful and healthy relationships, and their own health and well being.

Unfortunately the instances where a father fights for 50/50 to lower child support and then constantly flakes should be dealt with more harshly by the courts and penalized per diem in child support payments.

Your constant Dad bashing is pathetic. Many moms fight for full custody to get maximum child support and then don't spend it on the kids. It goes both ways. Its pathetic that the courts have zero accountability for child support and keep Dad's out of kids' lives as the other parent often manipulates the kids and situation for their best interests.

It’s not Dad bashing. I have nothing but respect for the men who seek 50/50 and actually take 50% without excuses or constant flakiness.

The ones that realize their weekend includes Super Bowl Sunday and expect to be able to either switch or drop the kids back with mom by 2pm tomorrow? Nothing but contempt.

Yes you are. Same post every time.

Do you think there should be consequences for men who don’t take their 50% if that’s what they sought in court?

Yes, there are consequences, they lose custody. However, there are no consequences if the Mom's don't spend the child support on the kids.

If she’s buying food and clothes and providing a place to sleep, she’s spending child support on the kids. Or are you claiming it’s common for people to starve their kids, not give the clothes, and make them sleep outside?

Or, what if her boyfriend pays the rent and the kids are going without clothes and they are on food stamps....

Going without clothes meaning the kids are barefoot and naked or meaning in your omniscience you don’t think their clothes justify the child support? Even if someone else pays rent, internet, heat and electricity aren’t free. Food stamp and other benefit adjudications take child support into account so obviously she’s not getting very much if she still qualifies.

Again, if they aren't paying the rent and utilities that should not be taken into child support calculations as you are saying that is what child support is for. The kids often went without proper clothing and shoes too small. And, no, food stamps and other benefits did not take into consideration the child support as if they did she wouldn't have qualified. More than likely she lied about the child support as no way she'd get food stamps and medical otherwise, especially dad had the kids on full medical coverage.

Surprise, some Mom's lie and don't use the money appropriately.

So, I call troll here-they absolutely check this when a parent applies for aid. Child support orders are court records. If this Mom 'lied' it must have been decades ago before computers were in wide use. Also, one can easily report suspected food stamp fraud. In fact, it's as easy as posting on DCUM

I really think there is one, or a few, posters in this thread whose last interactions with the family court system was in 1985 or so.

+1

If the dad had the information that she lied to receive benefits, he would have reported it.

And to be clear, a mother of two in Maryland only qualifies for food stamps if her total income is less than $30,000 annually. So if some dad is paying so little in child support that her income is under $30,000 it’s entirely possible she would struggle to get shoes for her kids.

If Dad is paying $1K-1500K, which is pretty common, she'd not have to earn very much to get $30K. In this situation, Mom wasn't paying the rent, her boyfriend/AP was. And, that money should have been spent on the kids.

Apparently she wasn’t earning that much or she wouldn’t have qualified for public assistance, so dad was likely not contributing anything like $1000-$1500/ month or she wouldn’t have qualified.

Who pays the rent is irrelevant, and, you have know way to know what the cohabitating couple did about joint finances. A car payment, a kid who needs therapy, one or two extra curricular activities, food…less than $30,000 gets you very little in this area.

It's not always in this area and if you aren't paying rent, on food stamps, free medical care, then your only expenses are your and the kids needs. When you get food stamps, you get Medicaid as well so the mom was double dipping with Medicaid and Dad's private insurance for the kids and these kids were not in any activities or therapies. Both would have been nice. And, yes, you do have a way of knowing if that's the excuse they are using not to pay the other ex-wife child support for his kids. But, obviously, that is ok with you that his kids suffer because of her and she's getting AP income, her income and Dad's income plus public benefits. But, right, Mom can never do wrong.

That's not double dipping...it's legal to cover a child both with a private plan and Medicaid, if they qualify.

Why doesn't Dad have 50/50? Why doesn't he alleviate his kids 'suffering'? Why doesn't he put them in activities or therapies if needed? If he had the kids 50/50, and paid for their insurance-he would not be paying any 1.5k cs! Unless he is an incredibly high earner.