Am I Wrong?

[ecastanedo]

California

Before I was married to my wife, she was married to another individual. They divorced and the split everything, including all the legalities regarding the children 50/50.

So both children live with us. They see their father every OTHER weekend (starting after school Friday and ending Monday morning when they get dropped off at school).

I am fine with that arrangement, but I am having trouble understanding something else regarding the judgment... and is there anything we can do about it if we feel we have a good case.

Basically, the judge awarded him credit from 6am to 2pm. Which I think is crazy, because they are in school. My wife does not work, so she is just as capable as him to have them during this time. As a matter of fact, we do have them with us from 6am until he comes by and insists on picking them up to drop them off at school, half a block away.

They never spend any weekdays or weeknights with him. They are with us always, unless it is his weekend, which again is every OTHER weekend.

So...

1) Why would he get credit for the time that they are in school? He works nights so can have them during the day, but so can my wife, because she does not work.

2) Is it me or does $160 a month seem like nothing in terms of child support?

It isn't really an issue of us paying for everything if we got credit for everything, but it seems kind of unfair that he gets the benefit of claiming that he has them during a time in which he does not and my wife is just as capable of having them. This minor difference, is making a huge difference in our wallets.

Basically, we feel like he is getting a free ride, because when it comes to his children, we are paying for EVERYTHING. I don't understand how someone who hardly sees his children should not be held to a higher responsibility for providing financially for them.

The argument that the judge made was that he pays for what he needs to when they are with him. If this is the case, then am I just naive in thinking that there is something wrong with not holding fathers (or mothers for that matter) accountable for having children and not providing for them?

 

[BL]

Get over it would ya , the FATHER has every OTHER weekend .

What the hell ya mean " credit " . $160.00 might seem cheap to you , but it might be within the Guidelines and Judges discretion.

Look buddy , you knew what you were marrying into , chip in .

By the way , there is NO WE , this is between the parents . If you'd like to donate to the case feel free , but don't meddle .

 

[ecastanedo]

I didn't mean to offend you, whoever you are. I thought I had a valid question. Can I assume you have never dealt with a dead beat dad? I love my step children and have a child of my own. The last time I checked though, they were his daughters also. So that is where my concerns are.

It never ceases to amaze me how the so called experts in a forum will jump on you every chance they get, because lingering in a forum so long has given you this unfounded feeling of knowing everything about everything.

You do not know my situation and I didn't come here to play high school. I came here for some honest advice. Not for someone to go crazy, because they didn't like the question.

My advice to you, whether you want it or not, is to lay off, and please, have some tact. You come off as a sorry and angry know-it-all who is not contributing anything productive to this forum.

 

[BL]

Think of me what you like , but I do recall the Father DOES pat $160.00 .

I'm truly sorry if reality has hit you in the Face , but YOU have NO say so legally in the matter .

There are many many step Parents that look down on the Bio Parents weather they are man or women . They have many versions of the term dead beat .

What counts is the States LAWS , not your interpretations .

sorry you don't get it . Bye ..

 

[ecastanedo]

Again, I apologize for not being a know-it-all. And Again, the last time I checked you did not know the specifics of the situation.

Also, it seems like you tend to think that a step-parent is somehow a second rate citizen. That may come from your legal "expertise".

The funny thing is, I came here for legal advice, yet you pretend to know me and our case as if you know some things about me. I asked for my honest opinion and you spun out of control. I think I am more amused than anything else. Can you do it again?

Look, I am emotionaly invested in this. I am not a robot like you seem to be. I came here, because I had questions. You seem to have answered them I think. So for what it's worth, I think that I thank you.

I didn't mean for your to get your underwear in a bunch.

Tact. Tact. Tact.

Try it, you might like it.

P.S. I thought this was a discussion forum? Not a let me ask you something so you can get pissed and bitch about how stupid people are forum. Remind me to watch out for you in the future....

 

[Phnx02]

California

Before I was married to my wife, she was married to another individual. They divorced and the split everything, including all the legalities regarding the children 50/50.

So both children live with us. They see their father every OTHER weekend (starting after school Friday and ending Monday morning when they get dropped off at school).

I am fine with that arrangement, but I am having trouble understanding something else regarding the judgment... and is there anything we can do about it if we feel we have a good case.

Basically, the judge awarded him credit from 6am to 2pm. Which I think is crazy, because they are in school. My wife does not work, so she is just as capable as him to have them during this time. As a matter of fact, we do have them with us from 6am until he comes by and insists on picking them up to drop them off at school, half a block away.

They never spend any weekdays or weeknights with him. They are with us always, unless it is his weekend, which again is every OTHER weekend.

So...

1) Why would he get credit for the time that they are in school? He works nights so can have them during the day, but so can my wife, because she does not work.

2) Is it me or does $160 a month seem like nothing in terms of child support?

It isn't really an issue of us paying for everything if we got credit for everything, but it seems kind of unfair that he gets the benefit of claiming that he has them during a time in which he does not and my wife is just as capable of having them. This minor difference, is making a huge difference in our wallets.

Basically, we feel like he is getting a free ride, because when it comes to his children, we are paying for EVERYTHING. I don't understand how someone who hardly sees his children should not be held to a higher responsibility for providing financially for them.

The argument that the judge made was that he pays for what he needs to when they are with him. If this is the case, then am I just naive in thinking that there is something wrong with not holding fathers (or mothers for that matter) accountable for having children and not providing for them?

What exactly do you mean when you say the ex gets credit from 6am-2pm?

 

[BL]

Again, I apologize for not being a know-it-all. And Again, the last time I checked you did not know the specifics of the situation.

Also, it seems like you tend to think that a step-parent is somehow a second rate citizen. That may come from your legal "expertise".

The funny thing is, I came here for legal advice, yet you pretend to know me and our case as if you know some things about me. I asked for my honest opinion and you spun out of control. I think I am more amused than anything else. Can you do it again?

Look, I am emotionaly invested in this. I am not a robot like you seem to be. I came here, because I had questions. You seem to have answered them I think. So for what it's worth, I think that I thank you.

I didn't mean for your to get your underwear in a bunch.

Tact. Tact. Tact.

Try it, you might like it.

P.S. I thought this was a discussion forum? Not a let me ask you something so you can get pissed and bitch about how stupid people are forum. Remind me to watch out for you in the future....

Again YOU ( referring to OUR case ) have NO case .

If that's all you can do is insult the Legal responses , then this forum is not for you . This IS an advice forum , not a discussion forum .

Read up before you post . Again and finally good day .

 

[ecastanedo]

Okay, in the future I promise to be more anal in my legalise. Take Care...

Phnx02: I meant to say that in terms of the way time spent with each parent is calculated, we have them from 2pm to 6am and he "has" them from 6am to 2pm.

Blonde Lebinese: Did you find anything wrong with that statement to Phnx02? I'm sure you did somehow...

 

[BL]

Okay, in the future I promise to be more anal in my legalise. Take Care...

Phnx02: I meant to say that in terms of the way time spent with each parent is calculated, we have them from 2pm to 6am and he "has" them from 6am to 2pm.

Blonde Lebinese: Did you find anything wrong with that statement to Phnx02? I'm sure you did somehow...

Yeh 8 lousey hrs . Thank you .. Oh don't forget EOW and $160.00 in support . Too bad YOU don't approve .

 

[Silverplum]

Here's your problem: you keep referring to "OUR" and "WE" and all those nice married words. Except that, in legalese, there IS no "our" or "we" in child custody and support. The "we" was your wife and her X. The "our" should refer to the kid/s from the relationship between your wife and her X.

You can't stand up for her in court or mediation. You can't file any papers. You can't interfere. Legally. (This IS a legal info site, you know. Not much else matters.)

The amount of support paid? Not your business.
The amount of time spent at mom's vs. the amount at dad's? Not your business.
The relationship, legal or otherwise, between your wife and her X and their children? Not your business.

Do you see the problem now? IF there's a problem, it's your wife or her X that needs to take care of it. Not you.

Edited: I forgot to add that your snotty little 'tude ain't helping either, dude.

 

[TNBSMommy]

I'm with Phnx02,I don't understand the "credit" thing either, do you mean he simply GETS them from 6 to 2? Or he has a credit for his CS from 6 to 2? If so, how much do you honestly think your wife is losing for 8hours every other week. What is the big deal if he gets them from 6 to 2? So what if your wife is "capable" of having them during the same time, if that is his time, that is his time...She has them the rest of the week...

For your second question, the 160 a month has alot to do, if not everything, with his income at the time CS was set up...

 

[ecastanedo]

I've never had so much fun talking to a robot. My computer is a lot nicer.

I never said I didn't like the answers. If asking questions is wrong, then what is this advice forum about? Reading your insulting responses to people? I guess robots don't see anything wrong with insulting other people's intelligence that they don't even know. And I quote:

"Get over it would ya"
"What the hell ya mean"
"Look buddy"
"reality has hit you in the Face"
"sorry you don't get it"

Who the hell are you to talk to me that way? I'll pass on your advice, even if you are correct....

I think I'm finally done with you. I just thought of a million different things to do that is better than dealing with you....

 

[BL]

Here's your problem: you keep referring to "OUR" and "WE" and all those nice married words. Except that, in legalese, there IS no "our" or "we" in child custody and support. The "we" was your wife and her X. The "our" should refer to the kid/s from the relationship between your wife and her X.

You can't stand up for her in court or mediation. You can't file any papers. You can't interfere. Legally. (This IS a legal info site, you know. Not much else matters.)

The amount of support paid? Not your business.
The amount of time spent at mom's vs. the amount at dad's? Not your business.
The relationship, legal or otherwise, between your wife and her X and their children? Not your business.

Do you see the problem now? IF there's a problem, it's your wife or her X that needs to take care of it. Not you.

Edited: I forgot to add that your snotty little 'tude ain't helping either, dude.

I like that reply , it fits so well . Nonayour business .

 

[ecastanedo]

Here's your problem: you keep referring to "OUR" and "WE" and all those nice married words. Except that, in legalese, there IS no "our" or "we" in child custody and support. The "we" was your wife and her X. The "our" should refer to the kid/s from the relationship between your wife and her X.

You can't stand up for her in court or mediation. You can't file any papers. You can't interfere. Legally. (This IS a legal info site, you know. Not much else matters.)

The amount of support paid? Not your business.
The amount of time spent at mom's vs. the amount at dad's? Not your business.
The relationship, legal or otherwise, between your wife and her X and their children? Not your business.

Do you see the problem now? IF there's a problem, it's your wife or her X that needs to take care of it. Not you.

Edited: I forgot to add that your snotty little 'tude ain't helping either, dude.

It is my business when my wife comes to me with all of this. I never said I could interfere or that I would want to. You people make too many assumptions.

I understand that there are legal terms. Great! Please... inform me. That is what I am here for. I don't understand the attitude some of you take of getting pissed off at the people who don't fully understand the legal system. Who is this forum for anywat then? For people like you to fluff up each other's feathers? Please... You act like children.

Give me some sound advice and I will take it, but when you act like a bunch of primitives, you make this whole web site look bad. I hope you are a small minority. I'm sure the experts would agree.

Having the knowledge does not make you an expert!

And you make mention of my attitude? How about your friend, Miss Charming?

 

[Silverplum]

(snip)
Having the knowledge does not make you an expert!
(snip)

What does it make one?