Both parents against the attorney general

[Dhart1977]

You owe the State for the time that your daughter was on Medicaid. How long was that?

They didn't state I owed for that time, they just wanted me to start paying in March from what we were told.

 

[TheGeekess]

They didn't state I owed for that time, they just wanted me to start paying in March from what we were told.

You owe for that time.

 

[Eekamouse]

Why? Plenty of non-Jews were victims of the Holocaust. Or maybe I'm missing your point.

I know that. I guess I was confused because OG said no one gassed his wife, his kid or himself or took his belongings and that generally didn't happen to Nazi war criminals and their families. Oh never mind. I can't untangle this knot coherently so I guess the only point is on the top of my head. LOL

 

[justalayman]

They didn't state I owed for that time, they just wanted me to start paying in March from what we were told.

Well, you can’t start paying before the time they order you to pay, now can you?

Did they tell the mother she would be receiving these payment?

If they are being paid to her, until this gets straightened out she can simoly return the money to you. I don’t think that is what is happening though.

 

[stealth2]

I wasn't able to get her on mine until I changed jobs, which happened before the case went to court. The reason for the case was handled before any judge heard it. We don't agree with any of it and want to know how to close it.

Yet the state was still helping support your child.

p.s. as you see, your Nazi reference was poorly taken, and rightly so. You may want to consider how offensive your characterization is to all those victimized by that regime.

 

[Dhart1977]

Well, you can’t start paying before the time they order you to pay, now can you?

Did they tell the mother she would be receiving these payment?

If they are being paid to her, until this gets straightened out she can simoly return the money to you. I don’t think that is what is happening though.

Yes she would be and she said she'd just give it back but my point was we did everything they asked for it to be closed yet they continued to throw obstacles in the way to where it wouldn't be closed before the court date. To us this seemed like their plan the whole time, to just keep pushing it and feeding us lies about closing it before any judge was involved.

 

[cbg]

Did you really think that all you had to do would say, Close it, and it would be closed the next day? Have you never dealt with a bureaucracy before?

 

[Dhart1977]

Did you really think that all you had to do would say, Close it, and it would be closed the next day? Have you never dealt with a bureaucracy before?

When we tell them she's not on Medicaid and have proof she isn't then yes that's exactly what should have been done. It seemed to us they just wanted to get another person paying child support just to get a judgement.

 

[Ohiogal]

I know that. I guess I was confused because OG said no one gassed his wife, his kid or himself or took his belongings and that generally didn't happen to Nazi war criminals and their families. Oh never mind. I can't untangle this knot coherently so I guess the only point is on the top of my head. LOL

I mistyped... Because it infuriated me that he was thinking he was treated like a Nazi War Criminal... yet he wasn't because he was not accused of gassing men, women and children... Nor placed on trial for his life even 80 years after the fact.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

When we tell them she's not on Medicaid and have proof she isn't then yes that's exactly what should have been done. It seemed to us they just wanted to get another person paying child support just to get a judgement.

They want you on child support to recoup the money the state spent on Medicaid. Period.

 

[commentator]

I am automatically suspicious and it sounds hinkey, and I am sure that anyone who is in social services feels this way in general, of when ex husband and ex wife ( or father and mother of child) both adamantly want NO CHILD SUPPORT and no court involvement. Because sometimes, if she is allowed a choice in the matter, the wife will say she doesn't want child support, not because of her high minded principles about not wanting the government involved, or because she still wildly agrees with and has faith in the baby's other parent, but because the baby's other parent is a lunatic and she's afraid of him and he has bullied and threatened her into the idea that she just wants to get away and she's not going to dare to ask him for anything. There used to be a form in my state that the mother could sign saying that asking for child support from the father would be dangerous for her safety when applying for aid. Later, they fixed that nationwide. The state has the responsibility to collect from the other parent, not the person applying for the aid.

It's kind of like the old pressing charges in domestic violence cases, where it was taken out of the abused person's hands because you literally had the abuser standing there in cuffs screaming, "If you press charges against me, I swear I'll come back and make you sorry!" as they were taking them away. It doesn't sound like you were supporting your child, at least to the extent of providing insurance, or that you were about to do so until caught up in the Medicaid situation and are being collected upon.

I scoff at the idea that you had to wait to put the child on your insurance when she lost her job where she was obviously carrying the child on her insurance before this. Most insurances allow changes due to family emergencies. And it was to the point that the child ended up signed up on Medicaid. That means that you had an uninsured child floating around out there for a few days. That's how the program got involved. If I were the state, I'd be leery of letting you go your merry way saying WE want this whole case dropped, WE don't believe in child support, etc. when it very clearly sounds like WE is you. And you are a blusterer and a bully and an argu-er. If you go in blowing like this to DHS to try to get this dealt with your way, you may find yourself removed from the office by the police. You will have to pay for the coverage provided during the time your child was on Medicaid. Period.

 

[cbg]

And even if we completely accept every word of the OP's story, it's just not as easy as punching a button and presto! The Medicaid is turned off. They need to investigate whether there are any outstanding claims. They need to confirm dates. They need to finalize paperwork. Information needs to be entered into computers and transmitted. If the OP really, truly believes that this can happen instantaneously (even completely apart from whether he can make an immediate demand to begin with) with no logistics that have to be followed or that it won't take any time, he's going to have a very hard time maneuvering in today's world.

 

[stealth2]

We don't need the state involved in the raising of our daughter

But it's okay for the state to insure your child. Got it.

 

[justalayman]

When we tell them she's not on Medicaid and have proof she isn't then yes that's exactly what should have been done. It seemed to us they just wanted to get another person paying child support just to get a judgement.

She WAS on Medicaid. Why do you keep ignoring that fact?

If they are requiring the payments for repayment if Medicaid your wife won’t be receiving the child support.