Getting full custody for mother committing welfare fruad

[Zigner]

Women have always been the victors in custody proceedings against the father's since CS began ...

Cut the melodramatics. This is so not-true as to be laughable.

-signed-
A guy who gained full custody (legal and physical, as well as CS) over the mom for his 3 kids over 2 decades ago.

 

[not2cleverRed]

I believe being that she abandoned her position as a parent, then she should not be allowed to be in an equal parental position. I am not seeking joint custody or considering her financial status because she has not been concerned with ours for three years. Women have always been the victors in custody proceedings against the father's since CS began, it is time for dad's to start playing their positions.

I thought you were an okay guy until you made that statement.

Historically, in colonial America fathers got custody in divorces, in accordance with English Common Law.

Blame the Industrial Revolution, and the subsequent social upheaval it caused. (But thanks to that, you have your modern mass produced amenities... including the gadget you used to post such drivel.)

I'm sorry that it bothers you so that, as a woman, my citizenship status is no longer determined by my husband's citizenship status - yes, not only did women not have the right to vote 100 years ago, they could lose their American citizenship just by marrying a noncitizen.

You've had de facto custody for years. If you moved your derriere you'd have had physical custody, legally, for years. So just do it already.

And yes, of course your son's mother should be supporting him. But absent a court order that reflects the status quo, you are legally owed nothing, and in fact, you may owe the state if she has been collecting benefits on his behalf.

But hey, blame the nasty feminists.

 

[HRZ]

Your beliefs don't cut it .and it may hurt your position to be critical of Mom ...but status quo helps and a court order counts if you get same .

Mom will have some rights to visitation , get over it .

 

[Bigles]

Cut the melodramatics. This is so not-true as to be laughable.

-signed-
A guy who gained full custody (legal and physical, as well as CS) over the mom for his 3 kids over 2 decades ago.

Well guy that gained full custody over the mom 4 his 3 kids over 2 decades ago, where I grew up and when I grew up those men were never awarded custody unless it was to the grandparents, and I wouldn't even entertain the thought that one of them would want to. Anyhow, back to reality sir, I have 8 children and 16 grandchildren by two wives and 1 fling and have never had to pay child support to anyone. I am merely asking questions to form a strategy towards getting custody of my youngest son. I would like to thank you all for your input and output.

 

[stealth2]

I have 8 children and 16 grandchildren by two wives and 1 fling and have never had to pay child support to anyone.

Certainly, much to be proud of.

 

[LdiJ]

I believe being that she abandoned her position as a parent, then she should not be allowed to be in an equal parental position. I am not seeking joint custody or considering her financial status because she has not been concerned with ours for three years. Women have always been the victors in custody proceedings against the father's since CS began, it is time for dad's to start playing their positions.

Dad, that is your bitterness showing rather than the best interest of your child.

 

[commentator]

If she is the one who has legal custody of the child, how much he stays with her isn't really an issue that the people who certify for food stamps are going to come after, unless it is questioned, he's considered a member of her household, and she probably has the papers to prove it. By the way, how do you know she's been claiming him and receiving assistance for him for the last 3 years? As someone has said, usually when a mother applies for assistance listing children, great interest is paid in who is the child's father and is there any way some support could be obtained from him.
And if it is investigated, and she maintains the child was with her, was a member of her household for SNAP purposes at least most of the time during the last three years, with her having custody, it's like your word against hers that he's lived with you the whole time and there's probably not going to be any fraud determined. If there is a fraud determination, it might get her sanctioned, barred from getting SNAP for a while, but as I continuously belabor the point, if they criminally prosecuted every public assistance case they run up on, they'd have no jail space for any other kind of criminal behavior and or time to try the cases. It will not be something that you'd need to bring up while seeking custody. If you are awarded custody, you can make sure she doesn't do it anymore.

 

[TheGeekess]

Well guy that gained full custody over the mom 4 his 3 kids over 2 decades ago, where I grew up and when I grew up those men were never awarded custody unless it was to the grandparents, and I wouldn't even entertain the thought that one of them would want to. Anyhow, back to reality sir, I have 8 children and 16 grandchildren by two wives and 1 fling and have never had to pay child support to anyone. I am merely asking questions to form a strategy towards getting custody of my youngest son. I would like to thank you all for your input and output.

I could explain the sociology/culture behind that, but I'm not wasting my time.

 

[Bigles]

If she is the one who has legal custody of the child, how much he stays with her isn't really an issue that the people who certify for food stamps are going to come after, unless it is questioned, he's considered a member of her household, and she probably has the papers to prove it. By the way, how do you know she's been claiming him and receiving assistance for him for the last 3 years? As someone has said, usually when a mother applies for assistance listing children, great interest is paid in who is the child's father and is there any way some support could be obtained from him.
And if it is investigated, and she maintains the child was with her, was a member of her household for SNAP purposes at least most of the time during the last three years, with her having custody, it's like your word against hers that he's lived with you the whole time and there's probably not going to be any fraud determined. If there is a fraud determination, it might get her sanctioned, barred from getting SNAP for a while, but as I continuously belabor the point, if they criminally prosecuted every public assistance case they run up on, they'd have no jail space for any other kind of criminal behavior and or time to try the cases. It will not be something that you'd need to bring up while seeking custody. If you are awarded custody, you can make sure she doesn't do it anymore.

Thank you for the feedback

I could explain the sociology/culture behind that, but I'm not wasting my time.

No, she left out home three years ago because I had to ask my grown unemployed son and daughter in law to leave, she then began receiving food stamps for our adolescent son. I found out when her uncle whom she was selling the stamps to showed me the card with her name on it at the commissary while he and I shopped together. My son has been with me ever since she left.

My dude, the summary to your second statement would be that society was not set up for a brotha to win back during the tensions of the civil rights era and beyond. I made it out of the ghetto because I chose a different path. I chose to be responsible.

 

[stealth2]

My dude, the summary to your second statement would be that society was not set up for a brotha to win back during the tensions of the civil rights era and beyond. I made it out of the ghetto because I chose a different path. I chose to be responsible.

I wouldn't play that card in court. You'll look a fool.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Dealing with you child's custody in court isn't the place to make a stand for men's rights. It won't go over well. You have a good case on the facts and using a men's rights argument can only hurt your case.

 

[Bigles]

Dealing with you child's custody in court isn't the place to make a stand for men's rights. It won't go over well. You have a good case on the facts and using a men's rights argument can only hurt your case.

I never mentioned a mens rights defense, you must be a bot.

 

[stealth2]

I never mentioned a mens rights defense, you must be a bot.

Yeah, you pretty well did with all your "poor, poor daddies" talk.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I never mentioned a mens rights defense, you must be a bot.

You didn't use the words you used the rhetoric.