CS System abuse makes it to Montel

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Don - 29 Jun 2004 19:57 GMT

A women was on today who did not have custody of her children and was paying
child support. Although she paid on time her ex decided to sue her for back
child support for the years they did not have an agreement for CS. The
total for those 4 years was $20,000.

With only $1200 a month to live on the woman basically said she had no other
choice but to steal $20,000 from her employer to avoid jail time for failure
to pay the CS arrears.

Of course the victim was a women, God forbid if the media reports something
like this happening to a man, but at least it is a start. The audience and
Montel were sympathetic to her story as they should be but I can only
imagine how they would have reacted if a man was in the same position.

Reply to this Message

barry@psyber.com - 29 Jun 2004 21:24 GMT

: A women was on today who did not have custody of her children and was paying
: child support. Although she paid on time her ex decided to sue her for back
: child support for the years they did not have an agreement for CS. The
: total for those 4 years was $20,000.

Sounds like bullshit to me. Typically, a CS obligation starts at the time
one files for the support. The time prior to that is not subject to a CS
obligation.

b.

Reply to this Message

Don - 30 Jun 2004 00:14 GMT

> : A women was on today who did not have custody of her children and was paying
> : child support. Although she paid on time her ex decided to sue her for back
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> one files for the support. The time prior to that is not subject to a CS
> obligation.

Perhaps that is the case in the UK or where you are from but it is pretty
common here in US. The CS obligation does start at the time one files for
support however you can go up in front of a family court Judge and seek back
child support up until the time the child was born.

It is not uncommon for a guy to find out he is a Daddy years after the fact
and end up having to pay years worth of back child support. My neighbor for
one had to get a DNA test for a kid that was 18. He turned out to be the
father and got hit with 18 years of CS. He lost the family home for his 3
small children and it was very hard on them and his wife losing everything
they had. It is about the kids right, now that is what I call bullshit.

I have seen similar occurrences from other friends, family members and right
here in this forum if you stick around for awhile and educate yourself.

Reply to this Message

Gini - 30 Jun 2004 01:01 GMT

>: A women was on today who did not have custody of her children and was paying
>: child support. Although she paid on time her ex decided to sue her for back
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>one files for the support. The time prior to that is not subject to a CS
>obligation.

====
It is in some states. Some go back to the point of separation/divorce, if
applicable. Some states give judges the option of going back to the birth of the
child. Some have a specified number of years that can be tapped such as two,
three. In some states, child support can be retroactively ordered after the
child reaches the age of majority.
====
====

>b.

Reply to this Message

Chris - 02 Jul 2004 08:38 GMT

> >: A women was on today who did not have custody of her children and was paying
> >: child support. Although she paid on time her ex decided to sue her for back
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> three. In some states, child support can be retroactively ordered after the
> child reaches the age of majority.

The true colors of so-called "child support" rears it's ugly head. Anyone
who promotes "child support" carries the burden of shame upon their
shoulders!

> ====
> ====
> >
> >b.

Reply to this Message

Bob - 30 Jun 2004 00:44 GMT

> A women was on today who did not have custody of her children and was paying
> child support. Although she paid on time her ex decided to sue her for back
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Montel were sympathetic to her story as they should be but I can only
> imagine how they would have reacted if a man was in the same position.

Yep, the whole "child support" system is completely abusive.

Bob

Signature

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/

[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

Reply to this Message

Gypsy0005 - 01 Jul 2004 04:02 GMT

>Of course the victim was a women, God forbid if the media reports something
>like this happening to a man, but at least it is a start. The audience and
>Montel were sympathetic to her story as they should be but I can only
>imagine how they would have reacted if a man was in the same position.

Montel is pretty sympathetic to fathers rights. He did a show on parental
alienation about 5 yrs back. I was on that show with my family as the example
of a good divorce and how adults don't have to act like idiots when they are
divorcing.

He had several women that did things from extorting outrageous support and not
allowing visitation to a couple that actually got into a fist fight at a school
function. Dianna Thompson was also on this show. The women came off looking
like the dirt bags that they are.
Might be time to bombard Montel with your stories. He is a legitimate media
outlet that has a history of being fair.

Reply to this Message

Family Forum / Parenting / Parenting / July 2004

CS System abuse makes it to Montel