Arrears Payments

[Roscleo]

How can the courts order anyone to get a job with a higher wage and more hours. Are they going to supply this job to them. How can they expect that you know higher paying jobs are not as accesiable as they were a year or two years ago. I think it is wrong if a person loses their jobs then they should base child support on what they can get not what the CP or Judge think they can get. That is ridculous.
Now how can they put someone in jail for not supporting their children. I mean if they which they are they need to start at the welfare line b.c they are not supporting their children we are the tax payors. So how can they say a man is not paying his support is in violation so throw him in jail but yet some women ( not all) keep on having babies and keep getting benefits so why is she not thrown in jail??????????? I am confused you know the bottom line is the man is only looked at as money the Gov't got tired of forking the bill out so they passed it on rather it is fair or not and boy do we all know it is not fair.
Bottom line is we cannot raise or see or pay for our children unless we go through a lawyer a judge and boo coodles of money. You know satistics say that majority of men who do not pay their support is b.c they do hav eit or it is to high. See child support is like any other bill you pay it if you have it. There is not relief for anything job loss , injury, illness......Oh sure you say oh you can take it back to court which again takes $$$$$$$$ Its funny if you get a divorce when the child is five the courts expect you to pay w/o fail for the next fiftenn years......like you never going to fall on hard times............tell me the fairness........

You have hit the nail on the head I do believe! Women are on welfare and don't support thier children I don't see them throwing them in jail cause they dont' pay so much a month toward supporting their own children.
I also agree that the majority of men who don't pay are the men who can't afford it. But because there are a few men who really do run from thier responsibility all men regardless of how hard they try are considered deadbeats. Which is wrong. You also have men paying cs for children they are not even allowed to see and they are calling someone else daddy.
I would like to see one person on here say "Sure I will make all of the payments on this nice new car for you for the next five or six years and I will never get to drive it or touch it or see it."
I don't think that would go over to well.

 

[Roscleo]

Posted by ryrysmom:
"I really don't see how it is unconstitutional to require someone to provide for children as agreed to in a court order so if that persons punishment for failure to comply is either jail or a job I would hope the NCP would choose the job!!"

I am not arguing that it is unconstitutional for someone to provide for thier children, only that it is unconstitutional for the courts to require "involuntary servitude" ie..working a set number of hours, must have job that pays so much an hour. must get a second job.

Also when NCP's go to court for CS we don't get to agree to anything the court just says you will pay this much a month and if you don't you will loose you license and go to jail. Which brings me back to my previous post:

Here is the courts view of the 13th amendment

The Court looked to the meaning of the Thirteenth Amendment in
interpreting two enforcement statutes, one prohibiting conspiracy to
interfere with exercise or enjoyment of constitutional rights,\33\ the
other prohibiting the holding of a person in a condition of involuntary
servitude.\34\ For purposes of prosecution under these authorities, the
Court held, ``the term `involuntary servitude' necessarily means a
condition of servitude in which the victim is forced to work for the
defendant by the use or threat of physical restraint or physical injury,
or by the use or threat of coercion through law or the legal
process.''\35\

\33\18 U.S.C. Sec. 241.
\34\18 U.S.C. Sec. 1584.

"Involuntary servitude necessarily means a condition of servitude in which the victim is forced to work for the defendant by the use or threat of physical resraint or physical injury, or by the use or threat of coercion through law or the legal process. ((jail time))

 

[Grace_Adler]

I'm not getting into the constitutional thing but I did want to say a couple of things since it was brought up.

One, I don't understand how not paying child support is a crime when it is a civil case and often heard in Administrative court. Wouldn't it have to be held in criminal court to be a crime? Maybe I am misunderstanding what is being said here. Not arguing with the point of whether it should be paid or not because we all know it should.

Second, about the CP. Now I agree alot of people use their children as pawns to manipulate the other parent and that is wrong!

About the CP getting a job and going on welfare. Well let's take me for instance. Let's say my husband left me. I'm not experienced or eductated enough or know how to do any jobs making more than 6 or 7 $ an hour. 40 hour week is gross $280. I have a 1 year old and 4 year old. Daycare here is about $200 a week..cheapest so after taxes I'll bring home about $210 maybe..so I have enough to pay daycare and that's it! Can't get daycare from social services because I've been on the waiting list for 1 year. Can't go to school in person to get educated to get a good job to support myself. Besides I think most of you know how hard it is to take care of a house and 2 small children. It is a FULL TIME JOB!!! And exhuasting!!
So then let's say house payments or rent is $500 a month
food around $400, lights around $200, gas $200, car insur. $45, doctor's appts..?? and diapers, wipes, formula if necessary, baby food, toilet paper, shampoo, soap..other misc stuff..property tax every year, maintenance on the cars. As you can see that's alot of freakin money! And these things are necessary. Not saying the NCP should have to pay for all of it but these bills were there before they leave and don't disappear and are needed for the children. Even bringing home around $200 a week ain't going to get it. And I'd probably only get $140 in child support and that ain't gettin it either. I know it's not leaving much for the NCP to live off either. So what's the answer? I don't know!
So what the hell would I do? I'd be up s**** creek huh? And kids stay sick while in daycare. Last year I put my kids in because at the time I had the money and they got sick and stayed sick for 6 weeks and I had to drop out of school. So basically both parties should think about all this before they go ahead and have babies right? Tell everyone to stop having children? Well we (people) don't do this and in my case I wasn't sure I could have children. Things never go the way you plan and you never know what's going to happen cuz I sure didn't plan on all this. No one knows what the future holds. Stupid me I guess..live and learn. Besides it's a little too late now..the point is not how the problem came about but that it exists and how to fix it. If anyone has any answers I'd sure like to hear them.

However, for the CPs that do have people to watch their children and are capable of going to work AND then they want to ask for more money or quit their jobs to live off someone else just because they want to with no good reason..then by all means they should go get a job or should be doing something to improve their situation.

And yes, welfare was created to help people who fall on hard times..not to be taken advantadge of. RFD said that if the govt didn't do things how he said that this would happen and guess what..? The people who shouldn't get it do and the ones who need it don't.

Yes I do think the courts are presumptious, biased and feminist..at times. I do agree that some women are very underhanded and when they do something wrong they get rewarded or no action is taken as far as family court goes.

Anyway this is just an opinion and my thoughts. Sorry so long.

 

[fried eggs]

One, I don't understand how not paying child support is a crime when it is a civil case and often heard in Administrative court. Wouldn't it have to be held in criminal court to be a crime?

I think the point is, once court ordered to do something, it is no longer JUST what it was originally but becomes a criminal offense not to follow through with whatever you were court ordered to do.

 

[Grace_Adler]

Ok I get what you're saying but wouldn't you have to be held in criminal contempt instead of civil?