Forgot your password?
Type your email address below and click the sign up button to create an account.
Victoria is my home town though I have not lived there in years. Parents should dfinitely pay to support their children but, in many places, the system needs a fix above and beyond support collection. Step one-quit taking children away from involved and perfectly fit fathers (not saying that is the case with others who have posted). In Alabama, a father must prove the mother unfit to gain custody of his children...absent that, the mother need only prove the father is not the mother. Hardly a fair standard. Further, support should be based on necessary expenses of the children. In my case, my ex was able to maintain support for one child at the same level as it had been for 3, by claiming house payment on her half million dollar house and other things including her lawn service. That is when child support becomes something entirely different. So let's fix the whole system...stop custodial parents from hiding the kids...stop custodial parents from interfering with visitation and, yes, make sure parents are supporting their children (interestingly, joint physical and legal custody would accomplish this and should be implemented except where one parent is truly unfit). Just my two cents.
This is heartbreaking. It is about the children and what is best for them. If you are the one paying child support can you still pay at the courthouse and they send to the parent with the children. Divorce is many times a ugly thing and using a child as a pawn is the same as child abuse. If you have children raise them to be adults that you can be proud of and remember, they learn form your actions, good or bad.
Problem isn't just the AG office it is the entire system.
I have seen favortism exhibited by a local judge towards another in the legal profession.
He was ordered to pay no child support and there was absolutely no resolution via the court on him having to inform the court of a change in employment status or changing his address.
Deadbeat is an attorney making well over $100,000 a year (for at least a decade) with a house worth $300,000 and two late model vehicles. Hasn't paid a dime and never will since child is now an adult.
If you think i am complaining about being finacially responsible for my children you need to work on your comprehension skills. I have no problem with caring for my kids financially or otherwise. I do however have a problem with a system that would throw me in jail and remove my children if they dont think I am caring for them properly(has not happened just an example) but will allow him to abuse his children on a daily basis. It is a criminal act to abandon your children. And it matters not how you feel about your ex either because the money is not for her. Daycare for our 3 boys runs anywhere from 295-380 a week. That is 50% of my income and when you figure cost of living runs on average 60% of your income well you see what I am left with. Quit crying about your responsibilities and be a man. Pathetic.
Hick- I was only replying to your implication of why some are deadbeats--"I can see why there might be "deadbeat" dads. They just do not want to deal with an ex that is still has not let the fact go that they were rejected."I agree with all of you who state the system is broke--but it is broke both ways. And the AG office is a big JOKE. Many of the staff who work mediation don't know the laws and don't look at each case individually. They just want to process you thru. Those of you who do the right thing are punished because of these deadbeats by being treated poorly. And the ones who are hurt by these deadbeats never get any help because the system continues to allow them to be deadbeats.
I've been away...so I just got back to reading the rest of these posts...rachelj...umm you said "I cannot believe anyone can complain about having to be financially responsible for their children." But isn't that what BOTH sides are doing? The fact of the matter is...the system is broken...the American family is hurting because of it...and the best interest of the child has been replaced by: The best interest of .
I don't know if this still applies or not, the AG child support division s budget is determined by the amount they collected the previous year. The more they collect the more they get to spend the next year.
On a personal note, I was paying child support to the first ex. She lived out of state. She moved to another state and did not notify anyone but her mom and sis.
All of my calls to her moms house where she was living ended with her mom telling me, "She's at work, and ( my son) is outside playing, let me see if I can find him." A few minute pause and then "No I can't find him." That went on for a three months, so I quite paying support.
Lo and behold I get a letter from the N. Carolina office of the AFDC informing me that due to the ex collecting benefits and no checks from Texas, her case was referred to the Texas AG.
The ex claimed that I was $6800 in arrears. Thank God I saved all my receipts, after a meeting at Laurent Tower, I was more than happy to write a $1248 check, finally know where my son was at and resume visitation courtesy of US Air, one of the few airlines that flew unescorted minors from that neck of the woods. More cost but it was worth every cent.
I cannot believe anyone can complain about having to be financially responsible for their children. I dont know about you but I go above and beyond even without his help. Yes I am angry he does not help for many many reasons but so I can sit on my ass is not one of them. I worked before him and I work after him and that will not change because I for one WANT to give my kids a good life no matter the cost. I do agree with the AGs focus being on the ones they can collect from. But it is not those parents who are destroying families is it? I know we cant police morals but maybe labor camps and such is not such a bad idea for dads/moms who dont take care of their responsiblilities. Because what they are doing now is not working and our kids are paying the price for it.
kash - I did not say you have to see your ex to pay child support. However, you do have to keep lines of communication open with your ex if you want to know anything that is going on while they are in her possession. If you need me to give you examples I will, but I was hoping you would be smarter than that...
You don't have to see your ex to pay child support.
Really Hicktoria....so you are stating that these dead beats dont want to pay the child support because they dont want to deal with the ex! They should be more worried about the childs well being. I have total respect for the ones that take care of their responsibilty and I have no remorse for the ones that dont give a darn and run and hide.
Well said Kash!
I pay child support, have my kids covered on insurance and pay extra to help out. However, some things will never change when you get divorced. My ex thinks she is GOD and can determine on her own when I get to see my kids. I could go to the AG and raise all kinds of cain, but what matters most here is the kids. I would rather put up with her insane morals than have my kids wonder what happened now.... Anyway, just my thoughts on the matter. Just remember a woman scorned ... well you get the point. I can see why there might be "deadbeat" dads. They just do not want to deal with an ex that is still has not let the fact go that they were rejected. Seen it too many times...
Its 20% of the non-custodial parents income, do you really think the custodial only spends 20% of their income? In a typical divorce degree the non-custodial parent has the child 6 nights a month while the custodial parent has them the other 22. The custodial is usually responsible for getting the child back and forth the school, getting necessary items for the child (clothes, school supplies), homework, medical care, and other child-rearing jobs. The non-custodial has only the weekend to plan for. The AG office is a joke because they let way to many deadbeats get away with being deadbeats. If they aren't gonna pay anyway, why not have their butts sit in jail? Put them on chain gangs!
@digitaldper - how many moms supporting kids on their own do you think can afford to only work a part time job? My child is in school from 7:30 to 3....I work from 8-5....I pay half as much in day care costs now as I did when she wasn't in school. Please do the math and tell me which parent gets screwed in this case. She is watched for 2 hours for 1/2 as much as when she is watched for 9....make since? @rachelj - in my opinion, the AG is way to lenient. Like you said, as long as they make an attempt to pay, the non custodial parent is left alone. However, the bills at my house and the need for new clothes and food just keep coming. I don't have the luxury of not paying this month...must be nice for them to have that choice. @notasheep - completely agree! surprised? THE SYSTEM IS A JOKE.
I provide Everything and have since the divorce. He makes more than enough to pay his support which is nowhere near half of what it takes to provide for them but he chooses not to and frankly I feel like the system allows him to make that choice. I have had to hunt him down and provide address license plate numbers places of employment because I m told they dont have the man power. And even when I tell them where he is they do nothing. See as long as he pays something every three months hes good.the only payment I have gotten this year is 20 dollars. Last year it was 50 dollars total. Anyway I by no means think a good coparent should be punished for a deadbeats crimes I do however think thete are many more cases of parents that walk away and truly destroy lives all while under court order and the watchful eye of the AG.
my husband has always paid child support and AG was saying he is in arrears, we provided court papers and finally got it corrected and received an apology from the AG citing they had made a mistake. I am not standing up for dead beat dads but just because a mother as the children doesnt mean they are with the right parent and that the father is a dead beat. did we get all that money back that we paid HECK NO and never will, but AG does make mistakes.
Again...each case is different. There are always 3 sides to the story, yours, mine, and the truth. And the truth is...it's a BROKEN system. There are as many stories of noncustodial parents being wronged as there is the custodial parents being wronged. So what is the common denominator?? The policy itself.
well let me share my story of the victoria attorney general B.S. my 8 yr. old sons father has 4 kids. one with me and "3" with another. he is only ordered to pay child support for ours and he couldnt even do that with out throwing a fit. so, i found myself back in court because he wanted support to be lowered. he is a two income family buying is home owns three cars and is financing two other vehicles and provides NO medical support what so ever. and do you know what the GREAT rep. told me and him? "well Mr. Cry Baby, sounds like you need a break". a break? a break! are you kidding me? so, i asked him. well Mr. AG Rep. since your in the buisness of handing out breaks. where is mine? can i please get a break too? well i sure did get a break. they cut the amount of support by more than half. in another case for my 3 yr. old son. whos father still lives at home with his parents and only monthly bill is his child support. when he took me back to court to lower his support, guess what the Rep. told me? "well Ms. Better Luck Next Time, we are going to lower your sons support by 120.00 because it causes Mr. Man Child to much hardship to pay this amount even with him not providing medical support. so, lets make it easier for Mr. Cry Baby and Mr. Man Child and make it so hard for you to continue caring for their sons oh and just for Sh**s and Giggles lets go ahead and order you to provide all medical support for your sons. so, i would like to see the book of guidelines they follow cause that is sum bull.
rachelj - I'm sorry you are having such a tough time. I know that raising kids on ANY budget can be tough and stressful. But here is kind of what I was trying to explain: Should the AG's Office be tough on everyone just because your ex doesn't pay like he should? Should every non custodial parent be treated like a "selfish" ex when they can't pay?
There are individual circumstances to each and every case. One person should not have to carry the burden of another person's mistakes and abuses.
Seriously those of you who believe the system is not fair to non custodial parents have obviously never had to raise children on your own. My ex spouse is 31,000 in arrears in Victoria County none the less and he has only been incarcerated for non payment once and you bet your butt he came up with 7,000 just like that to get out of jail. He is ordered to pay 800 a month for 3 children and I am sure most of you think wow thats a lot. HA!! Daycare costs more than that every month. So I agree it should be equal and he should be paying MORE especially since he is just as selfish with his time as he is with his money. My point is the AG is not as tough as you think in all cases and that raising children alone is not ALWAYS a choice. I have had an open case with them for four years. Gone through every penny of savings had to move back home for 7 months and now I could lose my great job because I cant afford full time summer care for the kids. Maybe if they had been tougher on him in the beginning he would not think he could just ignore it like most do.
I'm sorry..i removed a couple posts because I get a little "worked up" over all of this. I have read many cases (much more than I care to admit to), and done lots of research on both sides of Child Support Enforcement Policies.
The judges have guidelines that they can follow. But they do not have to, and sometimes its easier for them to believe whatever the AG says over the parents...its just the way it is. The AG's Office sees LOTS of deadbeats. So, like with other jobs,they have become a little numb and disenchanted. The assistant AGs treat most non custodial parents that come through there as deadbeats. But, that is not always the case. The AG likes to throw around something called "intentional underemployment". This allows the AG to base the amount of child support on what they think the noncustodial parent has the "ability" to make, not what they actually do. But most of this is neither here nor there, and I could argue and throw facts and statistics around FOREVER.
The biggest problem, I think, is that an issue like Child Support is quite objective. It just depends on if you are on the receiving end or the paying end. What needs to happen is BOTH sides need to step back and look at the big picture. This needs to be an EQUAL system...50/50. You were right in saying that it takes two to have a child, two should support it...but you left out...two should support it EQUALLY. I do believe that the AGs office has its best interest in mind, not the noncustodial parent's, not the custodial parent's and not the child's.
Child support was initially set up to collect money from noncustodial parents with children/families that were currently receiving federal assistance. Today, nearly half of the cases involve families that never have received assistance and currently are not receiving assistance. The current system is destroying what little is left of American Families after a divorce, seperation, etc.
How many parents are among the dead broke condition?
Then we must ask ourselves as a society why we incarcerate. In this matter, why does a child not have EQUAL access to each and both parents? Then the money incentive would disappear... right?
Speaking of the money incentive we must know that the Texas Attorney General gets a federal monetary kickback for every dollar collected. So in my estimation... the child has been commodified.
Welcome to a people eating world.
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
@ notasheep - kash is correct. It is supposedly 20% of their pay and they take into consideration bills the non-custodial parent have to pay. When you take into consideration ALL that the custodial parent pays for and is responsible for, the non-custodial parent's payment (in MOST cases) is merely a drop in the bucket. That's when they do pay. My ex husband is 4 months in arrears...that is roughly $1500. That may not seem much to some, but when you consider that I like for my kid to do extra curricular activities and have a sitter instead of leaving her alone at home, it is A LOT. Thank God for all of the responsible non-custodial parents that take fantastic care of their children. Custodial parents should greatly appreciate them and be as accommodating as possible. As for all of the DEAD BEATS, grow up, get fixed, and support your FAMILIES!!!!!
The AG does not push for as much as possible, child support is based on a percentage of their income. Why should one parent bear the weight of supporting a child when it took two to bring that child into the world?
823-Dead Beats? Yes, some might be dead beats...but many aren't. They are forced into being delinquent in payments due to the fact that the AG tries to get AS much money out of them as possible. The reason is the AG gets "incentives" from the federal government based on several things...one of which is the amount of money collected for child support. AND, whether they go to jail or not is not dependent on the amount they owe...it depends on how hard the AG pushes the judge and whether or not the "baby momma (or daddy in some cases)" wants them there. Because no matter if they owe $1 or $10,000, they are not being jailed for that, they are being jailed for contempt of court, because they signed a court order...an order that they have no choice but to sign.
823- Try the sheriff's office web site at the following link .......http://www.victoriasheriff.org/ Your answer might be there.
823That would take effort on the VA's part. Don't hold your breath.
Is there a list of these dead beats?