WOW WOW WOW..
Here it is again..
How many ways do we have to see it, hear it before something gets done about it?
The courts and the FOC (friend of the court) get paid more money from the federal government when they assign and enforce higher child support.
There are a ton of other equally astonishing and alarming links included on this page.
PLEASE...
Check it out here.... http://www.scribd.com/doc/630611/A-Quick-Summary-of-Title-IVD-Funding-and-Incentives
Lots of good reading.
Thanks for the great site!!!
Monday, May 19, 2008
Imputed income .. The amount a person is able to earn, even if s/he currently is not earning at that level. Here it is from dictionary.com.. im·put·ed
/ɪmˈpyutɪd/ –adjective
estimated to have a certain cash value, although no money has been received or credited.
Wow, bummer for me. I have been unemployed for almost a year. Things are mighty tough here in Michigan as you might have heard. When a family (mom and dad that are married and their kids) fall on hard times and income is low they adjust and learn how to get by. Work hard at odd jobs, eat less fancy foods, accept some charity from friends, church, etc. It is amazing how much less income you can actually get by on when you really have to. I know, I've been there, am there.
NOT SO IF YOU ARE DIVORCED!!!
The state and county does not care in the slightest about the current economic conditions or lack of jobs available. The dad will pay as much as the state/county sees fit no matter what his income is or he faces JAIL!
What a system. I petitioned my local friend of the court to temporarily reduce my child support because I do not have a job and can not afford to pay the currently enforced amount of child support. They almost laughed at me. Needless to say they gave me no relief and even said that I was lucky they were not increasing my support obligation. What happened to living a little leaner during tough times. My children's mom gets all the help available from the state, all her income, and tax-free cash from me in the form of child support. I, in the meantime, live in poverty.
No wonder far more divorces are initiated by women than men. They "think" there is so much to gain by it. Sadly the women, post divorce, find out that their quality of life is lower than ever. Meanwhile, interestingly, the mans quality of life is almost always higher. Don't believe me? Look up the stats.
What does all this mean? Maybe if women were not offered such a succulent carrot on a stick that propels them into divorce, maybe if the local government and all the attorneys didn't profit so much from divorces a few more marriages would endure. Maybe more children would get to have a full time mom and dad in their lives. Maybe, like we have seen proven so many times, there would be less fatherless children as a drag on society. Maybe our great country would turn out more high achieving adults to compete with the rest of the world. Maybe vows to God would be honored. Maybe..(you get the point).
/ɪmˈpyutɪd/ –adjective
estimated to have a certain cash value, although no money has been received or credited.
Wow, bummer for me. I have been unemployed for almost a year. Things are mighty tough here in Michigan as you might have heard. When a family (mom and dad that are married and their kids) fall on hard times and income is low they adjust and learn how to get by. Work hard at odd jobs, eat less fancy foods, accept some charity from friends, church, etc. It is amazing how much less income you can actually get by on when you really have to. I know, I've been there, am there.
NOT SO IF YOU ARE DIVORCED!!!
The state and county does not care in the slightest about the current economic conditions or lack of jobs available. The dad will pay as much as the state/county sees fit no matter what his income is or he faces JAIL!
What a system. I petitioned my local friend of the court to temporarily reduce my child support because I do not have a job and can not afford to pay the currently enforced amount of child support. They almost laughed at me. Needless to say they gave me no relief and even said that I was lucky they were not increasing my support obligation. What happened to living a little leaner during tough times. My children's mom gets all the help available from the state, all her income, and tax-free cash from me in the form of child support. I, in the meantime, live in poverty.
No wonder far more divorces are initiated by women than men. They "think" there is so much to gain by it. Sadly the women, post divorce, find out that their quality of life is lower than ever. Meanwhile, interestingly, the mans quality of life is almost always higher. Don't believe me? Look up the stats.
What does all this mean? Maybe if women were not offered such a succulent carrot on a stick that propels them into divorce, maybe if the local government and all the attorneys didn't profit so much from divorces a few more marriages would endure. Maybe more children would get to have a full time mom and dad in their lives. Maybe, like we have seen proven so many times, there would be less fatherless children as a drag on society. Maybe our great country would turn out more high achieving adults to compete with the rest of the world. Maybe vows to God would be honored. Maybe..(you get the point).
Here is the bar that dads have an extremely tough time reaching... Shared economic responsibility (SER) The circumstance in which a noncustodial parent has a child with him/her frequently enough (at least 128 overnights annually) to be considered directly contributing to the child's care.
As long as the dad gets less than 128 overnights then he just visits his children. The mom technically, supposedly, has all of the economic responsibility. This is what the moms want because it will maximise the child support they can collect from the children's father.
Forget about any financial help for the dad because he has the children less than half of the time. I'll see my children well over 150 days over the next year. Every other weekend and one full half of summer vacation, Christmas break, and spring break they will be with me over night (24 hours a day). That is a lot of meals, entertainment, presents, etc. Does not matter. The mom gets the same amount of child support (the Max!) as if she was taking care of them 365 days a year 24/7. She gets the daycare support from the state, all the food stamp money for the children, and maxed out support from the dad. I have asked my children's mother if she would be willing to share any food, since she only has the children half of the time, over the summer vacation. Not a single crumb was offered. I asked the state for help and was told it (the food money) was only available to the mom because the children lived with her over half of the year. No splits, no help for the summer when they are with the dad half of the time. Hmm. I then sent a couple of emails to congressman Mike Rogers asking him if there was any help available but got no response.
As long as the dad gets less than 128 overnights then he just visits his children. The mom technically, supposedly, has all of the economic responsibility. This is what the moms want because it will maximise the child support they can collect from the children's father.
Forget about any financial help for the dad because he has the children less than half of the time. I'll see my children well over 150 days over the next year. Every other weekend and one full half of summer vacation, Christmas break, and spring break they will be with me over night (24 hours a day). That is a lot of meals, entertainment, presents, etc. Does not matter. The mom gets the same amount of child support (the Max!) as if she was taking care of them 365 days a year 24/7. She gets the daycare support from the state, all the food stamp money for the children, and maxed out support from the dad. I have asked my children's mother if she would be willing to share any food, since she only has the children half of the time, over the summer vacation. Not a single crumb was offered. I asked the state for help and was told it (the food money) was only available to the mom because the children lived with her over half of the year. No splits, no help for the summer when they are with the dad half of the time. Hmm. I then sent a couple of emails to congressman Mike Rogers asking him if there was any help available but got no response.
Detroit News article raises awareness for children getting equal time with both parents. See it here.. http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage .
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
The drawing at the right is from Kara Bishop's website. She works with children of divorce. Her website can be found at the hyperlink listed below. Tough stuff. Sad stuff. Divorce is too easy. http://www.postcardsfromsplitsville.com/index.html
WHAAAAATT??
Rita Smith, Executive Director, The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, said the following in a statement she issued on January 9th...
"...The questioner's facts were not accurate, and exhibited a widely held belief that men are denied custody without due process and for no real reasons. My experience while working in this field for over 25 years is that just the opposite is true. Mothers are far more likely to lose custody when it is contested..."
WHAT?
GIVE ME A BREAK
Does this give you any indication how "anti men" the NCADV (didn't want to spell it out again and upset my computer) is? WOW. Is it any wonder they so fiercely defend the horrible Violence against Women act? The rest of her piece is just as bad. If you have a strong stomach and want to read the rest it can be found here.. http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-09-2008/0004733977&EDATE=
I don't know about you but I found it appalling.
LAW GETS IGNORED
"Under current law, judges decide custody cases based on the 12 factors delineated in Michigan’s Best Interest of the Child Test."
From my recent experience in a Michigan divorce the Judge does not decide. The friend of the Court is who decides this. When my ex wanted sole custody and I wanted 50/50 custody and parenting time we had to fill out a long questioner answering questions about the 12 factors that are to determine custody. Then the FOC interviewed the family and told us how it was going to be. The Judge would only rule on the custody decision that the Friend of the Court made if the divorce went to trial. Very few divorces (less than 5%) actually go to trial so the Judge never needs to rule on the decision that the FOC made. Even if the divorce does go to trial, the Judge usually simply accepts and calls into law the recommendation from the friend of the court.
The Friend of the Court decides the fate of the children and the parenting time for the parents!
SO.. why make the point that I have?
Remember that the FOC (at least in Michigan) is very crooked. They intend to maximize the parenting time for the mother regardless of what is best for the children. They get paid more federal dollars if they assign more child support. They will max out the parenting time for the mom so she can collect the max support thus generating the max money coming to the FOC from the Government. It is really that simple. It is really that broken. It is really that bed.
Quite a system we have here huh?
Broken!
Do You think this is what is best for our children?
I'm just one guy who lost the bulk of his time with his young children to a crroked system here in Michigan. Dig around my blog for a ton more detail from credible sources including a former FOC Officer Carol Rhodes and see what others have to say. Go to the 2007 entries and find the one about House Bill HB4564 and bug Brenda Clack to quit hiding this bill under her desk and lets get it into action. All the future children if Michigan divorces need your help.
Please!
Thank you!
"Under current law, judges decide custody cases based on the 12 factors delineated in Michigan’s Best Interest of the Child Test."
From my recent experience in a Michigan divorce the Judge does not decide. The friend of the Court is who decides this. When my ex wanted sole custody and I wanted 50/50 custody and parenting time we had to fill out a long questioner answering questions about the 12 factors that are to determine custody. Then the FOC interviewed the family and told us how it was going to be. The Judge would only rule on the custody decision that the Friend of the Court made if the divorce went to trial. Very few divorces (less than 5%) actually go to trial so the Judge never needs to rule on the decision that the FOC made. Even if the divorce does go to trial, the Judge usually simply accepts and calls into law the recommendation from the friend of the court.
The Friend of the Court decides the fate of the children and the parenting time for the parents!
SO.. why make the point that I have?
Remember that the FOC (at least in Michigan) is very crooked. They intend to maximize the parenting time for the mother regardless of what is best for the children. They get paid more federal dollars if they assign more child support. They will max out the parenting time for the mom so she can collect the max support thus generating the max money coming to the FOC from the Government. It is really that simple. It is really that broken. It is really that bed.
Quite a system we have here huh?
Broken!
Do You think this is what is best for our children?
I'm just one guy who lost the bulk of his time with his young children to a crroked system here in Michigan. Dig around my blog for a ton more detail from credible sources including a former FOC Officer Carol Rhodes and see what others have to say. Go to the 2007 entries and find the one about House Bill HB4564 and bug Brenda Clack to quit hiding this bill under her desk and lets get it into action. All the future children if Michigan divorces need your help.
Please!
Thank you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)