5 children

[majomom1]

I think that you misunderstood her a little...she was being very blunt to get a point across to the OP....and its a very valid one.

If he is the father of these children, and DCFS doesn't give them back to mom, he could very well end up with custody. Its darned difficult to suddenly become a caretaker of 5 children, particularly children born to an apparently drug addicted mother....add a new baby on top of that, and the relationship is headed for serious trouble.

She needs to be very certain that she can handle things for the long haul, before she ties herself to him for the rest of her life.

Sorry. I don't consider ANY child a rugrat -- under any circumstance. This was beyond blunt. JMO.

You are free to see it as you choose Ldi... I still love ya.

 

[CourtClerk]

Sorry. I don't consider ANY child a rugrat -- under any circumstance. This was beyond blunt. JMO.

You are free to see it as you choose Ldi... I still love ya.

Not to mention ALL kids are selfish, unappreciate beasts at one time or another. Most snap back into reality rather quickly, but if that's the attitude you're going in with, then guess what happens when their hormones rear their ugly head? You get out what you give.

 

[mmmagique]

I have three children I love dearly. They are not ungrateful or brats. (well....not USUALLY)
(and sm to 6 furbabies *lol*)

And yes, I felt that if I didn't say this in as blunt a way as possible, I might not get her to take a step back and listen. If someone would have actually pointed out reality to me when I was seeing a 'gentleman' who was of ill-repute, I might have avoided a lifetime of heartache. I love our children desperately, but it's hard to explain to my children that they can't see daddy because he's in prison for manufacturing meth with intent to distribute, and child neglect because they were with him at the time. Not to mention one of them had to get de-contaminated...

I was blunt and to the point because I think it's better to hear it now then to live it later. Also because it is difficult for us, in our income bracket to sometimes pay for all of our necessities (and yes, we are frivolous at times), so, I can't even imagine what it would be like it my fiance had to pay cs on 5 children. I just can't.

So, I apologize if I was over the top, but, anyone who knows me or my children knows I love them to pieces.

~Christina

 

[majomom1]

I have three children I love dearly. They are not ungrateful or brats. (well....not USUALLY)
(and sm to 6 furbabies *lol*)

And yes, I felt that if I didn't say this in as blunt a way as possible, I might not get her to take a step back and listen. If someone would have actually pointed out reality to me when I was seeing a 'gentleman' who was of ill-repute, I might have avoided a lifetime of heartache. I love our children desperately, but it's hard to explain to my children that they can't see daddy because he's in prison for manufacturing meth with intent to distribute, and child neglect because they were with him at the time. Not to mention one of them had to get de-contaminated...

I was blunt and to the point because I think it's better to hear it now then to live it later. Also because it is difficult for us, in our income bracket to sometimes pay for all of our necessities (and yes, we are frivolous at times), so, I can't even imagine what it would be like it my fiance had to pay cs on 5 children. I just can't.

So, I apologize if I was over the top, but, anyone who knows me or my children knows I love them to pieces.

~Christina

I forgive you. I completely understand wanting to get the point across. That can be done without calling the kids rugrats. (And yes, mine can be ornery too...)

In this case, I think the "blunt" should all be directed at her fiance. If she doesn't get it on that alone, then she is already lost.

 

[Farfalla]

He only openly admits to being the father of the first two. The other three he says he's not sure about, she was exactly around much, but he admits they could be. And like I said in my previous post, he did try to establish paternity.
And as far as I know, she is still married to her husband. I have a case number with ****** County that shows DNA was performed on the husband. So I imagine, yes he's been eliminated in court. Trying to read the court notes is like reading another language for me. I just don't understand how she's trying to get child support when DCF has them. Will he have to pay her child support when DCF has them?

Does Mike have an attorney? If not he needs one yesterday. This attorney can find out if the husband is still legally considered the father.... DNA that does not match his does not automatically make him not their father legally.

If they no longer have a legal father... Mike needs to get DNA tests done on all 5 children to establish his paternity.

She has filed for child support.

He can file for custody and visitation of ones who are his children. Most likely he will get joint legal custody with the mother, some visitation and have to pay about half his income in child support, transportation costs for the kids to visit him, etc.

He can start out trying for full custody since she no longer has the children.. it might work. But I think his chances are slim. He can expect to pay a lot in legal fees for all this.

Keep in mind that you are a legal stranger in this case... you have NOTHING to do with it.

So most people here will not give you legal advice. If Mike would come here for advice he might get some help (but you might want to suggest to him that bad mouthing the mother of his children will not fly here. He is the one who choose her for the mother of his children. He’s stuck with her for the rest of his life.) You can give him moral support, but you cannot do this for him. He needs to be the one doing everything for the case and for his children. If he wants to now start being a parent he really needs to structure his life around his 5 children. And 5 children are a lot of children for anyone today.

If he gets visitation you will be the step mom of what are probably very disturbed children. This is really going to be hard on you on many levels... You already have a very nasty attitude about their mother, you have already decided that the child with a disability does not have a disability even though you have no clue and have never seen this child. All of this will make it very hard to be a step-parent to these children. They will resent you to no end just because you are the step parent. Kids just do that with step parents.

You really do need to think about this long and hard... do you really want to be married to a man who is paying half his income to 5 children and have your future child's life disturbed by 5 high need children? In marrying you he will be getting a free baby sitter and house keeper. Your future children will be losing their mother even before they are born.

Your responsibility is to your children, not to his and the other woman’s children. All of the problems that those children bring into your home will become your children's problems.. the drug use, the abuse, the neglect, the rough life... all of it. You will be short changing your children in so many ways it’s hard to even start to list them.

 

[Farfalla]

Sorry. I don't consider ANY child a rugrat -- under any circumstance. This was beyond blunt. JMO.

You are free to see it as you choose Ldi... I still love ya.

The term 'rugrats' is used sort of as an endearment for 'children'. There is a very cute children's cartoon called 'RugRats' that my children watched growing up.

 

[majomom1]

The term 'rugrats' is used sort of as an endearment for 'children'. There is a very cute children's cartoon called 'RugRats' that my children watched growing up.

Yes. I am well aware of that. That is not how it was used here.

Do you actually read any of the other posts? Based on some of your posts, I would say no.

 

[Farfalla]

I have three children I love dearly. They are not ungrateful or brats. (well....not USUALLY)
(and sm to 6 furbabies *lol*)
And yes, I felt that if I didn't say this in as blunt a way as possible, I might not get her to take a step back and listen. If someone would have actually pointed out reality to me when I was seeing a 'gentleman' who was of ill-repute, I might have avoided a lifetime of heartache. I love our children desperately, but it's hard to explain to my children that they can't see daddy because he's in prison for manufacturing meth with intent to distribute, and child neglect because they were with him at the time. Not to mention one of them had to get de-contaminated...
I was blunt and to the point because I think it's better to hear it now then to live it later. Also because it is difficult for us, in our income bracket to sometimes pay for all of our necessities (and yes, we are frivolous at times), so, I can't even imagine what it would be like it my fiance had to pay cs on 5 children. I just can't.
So, I apologize if I was over the top, but, anyone who knows me or my children knows I love them to pieces.
~Christina

Well if you got chewed on for your post I’m about to get it for some similar things I just posted. I agree with what you said. I think that until a person has lived with certain types of difficulties they have no idea what such a situation can do to them and to their children.

I have been the step mom to two children for over 10 years now. They came from a situation in which their mother abused them, was an alcoholic, used drugs, etc. Going into it I thought that love and understanding would conqueror all. I thought that the siblings would be good for my son. I had no clue. I love my step children, but if I had it to do over I'm not sure I'd do it again.

 

[Farfalla]

Yes. I am well aware of that. That is not how it was used here.

Do you actually read any of the other posts? Based on some of your posts, I would say no.

Did I read all of which posts? I've read every post on this thread. What do you think I missed?

 

[>Charlotte<]

Instead of veering off into a squabble about who called who what, why don't we stick to what's really important here?

I just looked at Black's Law Dictionary, and "wazoo" isn't listed at all.

 

[majomom1]

Did I read all of which posts? I've read every post on this thread. What do you think I missed?

I was just curious. You asked a number of questions that had already been answered.

 

[Farfalla]

I was just curious. You asked a number of questions that had already been answered.

Nope, did not. In reading OP&#8217;s posts very carefully, the story keeps changing. She&#8217;s contradicting herself all over the place. Just one small example is that first she said that he had little to do with the children and has never even seen the youngest one. Than in a later post says the he has visitation and paid child support of his on will until mom refused further visitation. It cannot be both of those.

So I asked questions to see what sort of answers I&#8217;d get in further responses &#8230;

Now keep in mind that OP states in her first post that mom is living with her husband and charging roommates. She is presumably stating something she knows as fact.


So I asked. &#8220;How long ago (what year) did she divorce her husband?&#8221; Her answer was

And as far as I know, she is still married to her husband.

I also asked &#8220;Has the husband been legally, in court, eliminated as the father of these children?&#8221;

and to my knowledge has had DNA testing proving he's not the father.

and

I have a case number with ****** County that shows DNA was performed on the husband. So I imagine, yes he's been eliminated in court.

OP is stating things here as facts that she has no clue about&#8230; she does not know if the mother is still married. She also does not know if the husband has been eliminated as the father. As I recall, getting a non-match in the DNA does not automatically take away the husband&#8217;s rights as a father. So no&#8230; these things were not answered earlier&#8230; they are still not answered.

What we have here is the typical third party thing going on. She is not a party to this case but is trying to find what her boyfriend has to do. She is relaying the story third hand&#8230; thus does not get it all straight.

 

[Humusluvr]

She also does not know if the husband has been eliminated as the father.

Please stop saying "eliminated." Reminds me of The Terminator.

How about we say "disestablished paternity?"

They haven't put wazoo in the Law Dictionary yet? Dang, I have a call to make...

 

[Farfalla]

Please stop saying "eliminated." Reminds me of The Terminator.

How about we say "disestablished paternity?"

They haven't put wazoo in the Law Dictionary yet? Dang, I have a call to make...

ok ....

 

[nextwife]

What amazes me is that this guy kept playing around with this woman and never seemed to be bothered by the idea that her husband might be raising children HE kept producing. That it was ok to keep hoodwinking this husband into supporting children that may not have biologically been his. That's as low as it goes, IMHO.

How dare either of them conspire to allow this husband be be defrauded about such an critically important life issue. A man has a right to know if he is raising another man's child!!