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:

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.

What idiot pays CS in cash? He should be able to produce canceled checks or money order stubs. A money order is $0.35 cents from places like 7-11, Walmart, etc.

A fictional idiot. One invented by a poster who wanted to claim a mother was committing benefits fraud with the full knowledge of their ex-spouse and that the benefits offices cannot track the existence of an order.

[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:

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.

What idiot pays CS in cash? He should be able to produce canceled checks or money order stubs. A money order is $0.35 cents from places like 7-11, Walmart, etc.

A fictional idiot. One invented by a poster who wanted to claim a mother was committing benefits fraud with the full knowledge of their ex-spouse and that the benefits offices cannot track the existence of an order.

No, they don’t see, the order or try to get the payments.

[Anonymous]

I have to agree with OP. It’s a mess. DSS has been bouncing back-and-forth since he was 5yo. He is a junior now, and I feel like things are better, but it was sooooo disruptive for him during the earlier years. Different rules/expectation across two households, having to haul a lot of things back-and-forth, not having school friends at his other house. But most importantly, I felt like he had no grounding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have to agree with OP. It’s a mess. DSS has been bouncing back-and-forth since he was 5yo. He is a junior now, and I feel like things are better, but it was sooooo disruptive for him during the earlier years. Different rules/expectation across two households, having to haul a lot of things back-and-forth, not having school friends at his other house. But most importantly, I felt like he had no grounding.

If it was so bad for him, why didn’t you and your spouse let him stay with his other parent??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have to agree with OP. It’s a mess. DSS has been bouncing back-and-forth since he was 5yo. He is a junior now, and I feel like things are better, but it was sooooo disruptive for him during the earlier years. Different rules/expectation across two households, having to haul a lot of things back-and-forth, not having school friends at his other house. But most importantly, I felt like he had no grounding.

Why was he hauling a lot of things back and forth? My dc only bring their school backpack, which they would have anyways.

Where ex and I live, there is the zoned school, a STEM school, a charter, a large and some small private schools. So their school friends may not live nearby and their neighborhood friends may not go to their school. That's not a divorce thing.

If it was 'soooo disruptive' for him, it sounds like their was some parental issues involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have to agree with OP. It’s a mess. DSS has been bouncing back-and-forth since he was 5yo. He is a junior now, and I feel like things are better, but it was sooooo disruptive for him during the earlier years. Different rules/expectation across two households, having to haul a lot of things back-and-forth, not having school friends at his other house. But most importantly, I felt like he had no grounding.

NP here. What would be your suggested solution then? Your stepson staying with his mom most of the time and your DH only has visitations (hence less bonding between father and son)? Or your stepson staying with you and your DH most of the time so the two of you barely have any couple's time together?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The pendulum has swung way too far. 50/50 makes kids into chattel who have to shuffle their lives between multiple homes.

Why do judges do this to kids? Does ANY kid like this arrangement?

You're right! Most of them should be with their fathers full time!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not ideal. We make it work by spending a lot of money ensuring the child has two homes, not no home. If she gets something, she gets two of them. She never has to bring anything back and forth except her schoolwork.

Great idea but expensive. Many parents would not be able to afford this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

Not a good alternative. Why should one person do all the work of parenting during the school year and the other one has all the fun of time off with the kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

Not a good alternative. Why should one person do all the work of parenting during the school year and the other one has all the fun of time off with the kids?

Why should a kid suffer because their parents are jerks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

Not a good alternative. Why should one person do all the work of parenting during the school year and the other one has all the fun of time off with the kids?

So you think my ex was actively parenting the kids when we were married? I love that for you. No, he didn't even want full weekends and CERTAINLY didn't want Friday after school to Sunday mornings ('because then i lose friday night and saturday night!!') and finally agreed on Saturday at 5pm to Sunday to 5pm. After five or six Saturday nights of pizza for dinner they asked him to cook dinner. No. Then they'd read or play with whatever toy they brought before bed. Awake Sunday by 7am, and I finally told them they couldn't call me unless it was an emergency until 9am because it was my only morning to sleep late. So they'd call me at 9:02. Their father would sleep until noon or 1pm. Then he'd return them at 3pm. And get annoyed with me for not being home to receive them. "Where are you? I'll bring them to you." They didn't shower there, they didn't get their hair brushed, got crap food, and their father didn't want them there. Zero interest. Happy to pay child support and have me do all the work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

Not a good alternative. Why should one person do all the work of parenting during the school year and the other one has all the fun of time off with the kids?

So you think my ex was actively parenting the kids when we were married? I love that for you. No, he didn't even want full weekends and CERTAINLY didn't want Friday after school to Sunday mornings ('because then i lose friday night and saturday night!!') and finally agreed on Saturday at 5pm to Sunday to 5pm. After five or six Saturday nights of pizza for dinner they asked him to cook dinner. No. Then they'd read or play with whatever toy they brought before bed. Awake Sunday by 7am, and I finally told them they couldn't call me unless it was an emergency until 9am because it was my only morning to sleep late. So they'd call me at 9:02. Their father would sleep until noon or 1pm. Then he'd return them at 3pm. And get annoyed with me for not being home to receive them. "Where are you? I'll bring them to you." They didn't shower there, they didn't get their hair brushed, got crap food, and their father didn't want them there. Zero interest. Happy to pay child support and have me do all the work.

So, because you married a crappy disengaged husband and father to your kids, you assume all men are that way. Sorry, not true at all. Why did you have kids with a man like that?

50-50 should be standard for most situations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

Not a good alternative. Why should one person do all the work of parenting during the school year and the other one has all the fun of time off with the kids?

Why should a kid suffer because their parents are jerks?

Exactly so if a parent doesn't want 50-50 the child should go with the other parent since that parent thinks it's better to have one home. They can make the sacrifice. Just having summers isn't great as you have to pay for camps/child care which is a bigger cost especially when you are also paying child support and you are still working so its not like you get any great time with them especially when its only 4-6 weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

Not a good alternative. Why should one person do all the work of parenting during the school year and the other one has all the fun of time off with the kids?

So you think my ex was actively parenting the kids when we were married? I love that for you. No, he didn't even want full weekends and CERTAINLY didn't want Friday after school to Sunday mornings ('because then i lose friday night and saturday night!!') and finally agreed on Saturday at 5pm to Sunday to 5pm. After five or six Saturday nights of pizza for dinner they asked him to cook dinner. No. Then they'd read or play with whatever toy they brought before bed. Awake Sunday by 7am, and I finally told them they couldn't call me unless it was an emergency until 9am because it was my only morning to sleep late. So they'd call me at 9:02. Their father would sleep until noon or 1pm. Then he'd return them at 3pm. And get annoyed with me for not being home to receive them. "Where are you? I'll bring them to you." They didn't shower there, they didn't get their hair brushed, got crap food, and their father didn't want them there. Zero interest. Happy to pay child support and have me do all the work.

So, because you married a crappy disengaged husband and father to your kids, you assume all men are that way. Sorry, not true at all. Why did you have kids with a man like that? 50-50 should be standard for most situations.

I don't assume all men are that way, but I think each family should be considered one by one. Not 50/50 for everyone unless it's a problem. And he was a great husband before we had kids! I wanted 3, he wanted 4, and after 2 I was like "I can't handle any more without help" and he'd swear he'd change and help and be different and just go off birth control and let's get rolling on that third.... meanwhile he would never change a diaper and announced he'd had a realization he doesn't have patience for kids after all. But pre-kids he was an excellent husband. Even while I was pregnant and giving birth. But the second we got home he was exhausted, then "I don't know how; I don't want to hurt her" and when I tried the "just leave him for a few hours and let him figure it out" I came home to a baby screaming with hunger who wound up with a diaper rash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

Not a good alternative. Why should one person do all the work of parenting during the school year and the other one has all the fun of time off with the kids?

So you think my ex was actively parenting the kids when we were married? I love that for you. No, he didn't even want full weekends and CERTAINLY didn't want Friday after school to Sunday mornings ('because then i lose friday night and saturday night!!') and finally agreed on Saturday at 5pm to Sunday to 5pm. After five or six Saturday nights of pizza for dinner they asked him to cook dinner. No. Then they'd read or play with whatever toy they brought before bed. Awake Sunday by 7am, and I finally told them they couldn't call me unless it was an emergency until 9am because it was my only morning to sleep late. So they'd call me at 9:02. Their father would sleep until noon or 1pm. Then he'd return them at 3pm. And get annoyed with me for not being home to receive them. "Where are you? I'll bring them to you." They didn't shower there, they didn't get their hair brushed, got crap food, and their father didn't want them there. Zero interest. Happy to pay child support and have me do all the work.

So, because you married a crappy disengaged husband and father to your kids, you assume all men are that way. Sorry, not true at all. Why did you have kids with a man like that? 50-50 should be standard for most situations.

I don't assume all men are that way, but I think each family should be considered one by one. Not 50/50 for everyone unless it's a problem. And he was a great husband before we had kids! I wanted 3, he wanted 4, and after 2 I was like "I can't handle any more without help" and he'd swear he'd change and help and be different and just go off birth control and let's get rolling on that third.... meanwhile he would never change a diaper and announced he'd had a realization he doesn't have patience for kids after all. But pre-kids he was an excellent husband. Even while I was pregnant and giving birth. But the second we got home he was exhausted, then "I don't know how; I don't want to hurt her" and when I tried the "just leave him for a few hours and let him figure it out" I came home to a baby screaming with hunger who wound up with a diaper rash.

Yes, you do assume it.