Given the number of deadbeat dads, why don't you get wages garnished from the beginning?

[Anonymous]

My friend is going through the preliminary stages of divorce right now- 3 kids, will likely have majority custody and will get child support.

I'm urging her to demand wage garnishment (can you do that?) I've known and heard of way to many women not getting the child support they're entitled to, just because dad decides not to pay. WTF. That's insane.

Why wage garnishment mandatory for child support?
Can she simply request it when she gets her child support decree?

[Anonymous]

typo-
Why ISN'T wage garnishment mandatory for child support?

[Anonymous]

In Maryland wages are automatically garnished.

[Anonymous]

This is easier for him.

[Anonymous]

Obviously this varies by state but in VA wage garnishment is the default unless the parties agree otherwise. Also, FYI, the deadbeat dad situation that you speak of doesn't represent the statistical majority of divorce cases or even a statistically significant minority. That situation presents itself most commonly in the cases of the perpetually unemployed and incarcerated.

[Anonymous]

Just because his wages are garnished does not mean the custodial parent will get the total amount the non-custodial parent owes each month. My ex took a part-time job so I only got about half of what the court ordered each month. I know he was working full time but he must have gotten his employer to pay him partly under the table. He has owed a good thousand dollars for a year and a half. He makes sure to fly under the amount where his driver's license or passport won't be renewed though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just because his wages are garnished does not mean the custodial parent will get the total amount the non-custodial parent owes each month. My ex took a part-time job so I only got about half of what the court ordered each month. I know he was working full time but he must have gotten his employer to pay him partly under the table. He has owed a good thousand dollars for a year and a half. He makes sure to fly under the amount where his driver's license or passport won't be renewed though.

+1

It's amazing how ex-h can magically become unemployed and therefore have no wages to garnish. So, Op, it's easier said than done.

Op - don't you think (most) states already garnish wages automatically. It's not news breaking. MYOB in terms of giving your friend legal advice. She's already paying big bucks to her lawyer to take care of things like garnished wages.

[Anonymous]

I think that wages should only be garnished if the parent required to pay child support has shown an inability/unwillingness to pay on time/at all.

Not all dads are deadbeats...whether they are with their child(ren)'s mother or not. If mothers are going to be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to caring for the kids (until they prove otherwise) why does this not extend to dads?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that wages should only be garnished if the parent required to pay child support has shown an inability/unwillingness to pay on time/at all.

Not all dads are deadbeats...whether they are with their child(ren)'s mother or not. If mothers are going to be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to caring for the kids (until they prove otherwise) why does this not extend to dads?

My husband has paid both ways - mailing a check monthly and garnishment. We preferred garnishment so she couldn't demand we send the money early or give us a hard time about it. As long as it was taken out of my husband's paycheck, it wasn't our problem. The big issue for her was the garnishment way was always a week or two late and there were all kinds of other issues. She would call us to take care of it and we'd refer her back to the child support office as she set up the garnishment without us knowing (and took a double payment one month because she didn't tell us nor did they). It can be done as long as there is a court order. She was much better off with direct pay due to it coming late but we loved the garnishment as it took away one thing she could harass us about.

I think they should have accountability of how the child support is used for months over $800 per child.

[Anonymous]

Has he proven himself to somehow be unworthy of 50/50 custody or and/or trust that he’d pay support on time? I’m not sure why you’re looking at this so aggressively from the get go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that wages should only be garnished if the parent required to pay child support has shown an inability/unwillingness to pay on time/at all.

Not all dads are deadbeats...whether they are with their child(ren)'s mother or not. If mothers are going to be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to caring for the kids (until they prove otherwise) why does this not extend to dads?

My husband has paid both ways - mailing a check monthly and garnishment. We preferred garnishment so she couldn't demand we send the money early or give us a hard time about it. As long as it was taken out of my husband's paycheck, it wasn't our problem. The big issue for her was the garnishment way was always a week or two late and there were all kinds of other issues. She would call us to take care of it and we'd refer her back to the child support office as she set up the garnishment without us knowing (and took a double payment one month because she didn't tell us nor did they). It can be done as long as there is a court order. She was much better off with direct pay due to it coming late but we loved the garnishment as it took away one thing she could harass us about.

I think they should have accountability of how the child support is used for months over $800 per child.

Seriously? $800 doesn't even pay for 1/2 my child's share of a roof over her head. You are lame if you think a custodial parent is somehow chiseling you because you have to pay over $800 a month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that wages should only be garnished if the parent required to pay child support has shown an inability/unwillingness to pay on time/at all.

Not all dads are deadbeats...whether they are with their child(ren)'s mother or not. If mothers are going to be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to caring for the kids (until they prove otherwise) why does this not extend to dads?

My husband has paid both ways - mailing a check monthly and garnishment. We preferred garnishment so she couldn't demand we send the money early or give us a hard time about it. As long as it was taken out of my husband's paycheck, it wasn't our problem. The big issue for her was the garnishment way was always a week or two late and there were all kinds of other issues. She would call us to take care of it and we'd refer her back to the child support office as she set up the garnishment without us knowing (and took a double payment one month because she didn't tell us nor did they). It can be done as long as there is a court order. She was much better off with direct pay due to it coming late but we loved the garnishment as it took away one thing she could harass us about.

I think they should have accountability of how the child support is used for months over $800 per child.

Seriously? $800 doesn't even pay for 1/2 my child's share of a roof over her head. You are lame if you think a custodial parent is somehow chiseling you because you have to pay over $800 a month.

Your child portion should not be 1/2. They are not roommates. They are your child. The difference should be how much between a 1-2/3 bedroom, not 1/2 the cost of the apartment or house as you'd need somewhere to live. In my husband's situation, his ex's boyfriend paid the rent and major expenses. Kids often went without so one has to wonder where the money went? No activities, minimal clothing and when the kids were teens they got jobs to pay for their own needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that wages should only be garnished if the parent required to pay child support has shown an inability/unwillingness to pay on time/at all.

Not all dads are deadbeats...whether they are with their child(ren)'s mother or not. If mothers are going to be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to caring for the kids (until they prove otherwise) why does this not extend to dads?

My husband has paid both ways - mailing a check monthly and garnishment. We preferred garnishment so she couldn't demand we send the money early or give us a hard time about it. As long as it was taken out of my husband's paycheck, it wasn't our problem. The big issue for her was the garnishment way was always a week or two late and there were all kinds of other issues. She would call us to take care of it and we'd refer her back to the child support office as she set up the garnishment without us knowing (and took a double payment one month because she didn't tell us nor did they). It can be done as long as there is a court order. She was much better off with direct pay due to it coming late but we loved the garnishment as it took away one thing she could harass us about.

I think they should have accountability of how the child support is used for months over $800 per child.

Seriously? $800 doesn't even pay for 1/2 my child's share of a roof over her head. You are lame if you think a custodial parent is somehow chiseling you because you have to pay over $800 a month.

Your child portion should not be 1/2. They are not roommates. They are your child. The difference should be how much between a 1-2/3 bedroom, not 1/2 the cost of the apartment or house as you'd need somewhere to live. In my husband's situation, his ex's boyfriend paid the rent and major expenses. Kids often went without so one has to wonder where the money went? No activities, minimal clothing and when the kids were teens they got jobs to pay for their own needs.

Then I guess he should not have had a kid with the woman if she is the type of person that would steal from her own children. The number of parents paying child support to someone that they were not VOLUNTARILY SEXUALLY involved with is very, very low. SO-- maybe the real lesson is, "don't have sex with someone you don't want to parent with for the rest of the child's childhood and beyond."

Don't want to sound totally cold but I am a divorced mom and I do everything possible to get along with my kid's dad because that is an obligation I took on when I had a child with him. I get $600/month and I have her 100% of the time. Before age 12ish, that covered childcare and no health care, no clothes, no food, no extra-curricular stuff, no college savings. Since childcare ceased, there have been braces and some medical stuff-- so the payment covers, say-- her medical/dental needs and still-- none of the other items.

I am actually not really complaining. It's his loss that he chose not to step up and do the right thing and I could even say "my fault" for having a child with someone who is not a great father-- but my kid is awesome and I get the privilege of being the mom-- full-time.

[Anonymous]

To the step mom complaining about what child support was used for - its not for activities. It's for all child related expenses. My current child support order requires an amount based on his income as the base support, then 50% of childcare AND 50% of the cost of extra curricular activities.

The base support is used for things like gas for my car (kid goes to school 25minutes from my house and I have to drive him - ex doesn't do any school related driving), groceries (kiddo needs to eat), a small portion goes to college savings (ex is very unlikely to contribute), and paying utilities and the mortgage.

There is plenty of caselaw where dad's have asked courts for an accounting of what support is used for, and the courts have all refused - no its not discrimination against men - because the costs of raising a child can be very intangible and requiring an accounting of the money would be a waste of resources (both by the custodial parent AND the courts).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In Maryland wages are automatically garnished.

Not true.