Quote:
Originally posted by Sexy Mocha:
Dang Original, I apologize for implying that your boy wasn't living up to his full parental capacity. You didn't give us the full story in your first post. When you break it down like that, I guess it is administered unfairly. I was just thinking about the kids, you know I have a weak spot for children.
However, do you think there's a better way? If not the present system, then what?
for every man out there like your friend...there's about ten that, if the money wasn't taken directly out of their paychecks, could not be trusted to pay the money on their own free will. Do you know how many dead beat dads there are out there? Even with the system...some men will find a way around paying. I actually had a guy tell me once that he'd rather quit his job instead of having the system garnish his paycheck...and that's exactly what the fool did. ( I was like Ooooh! You really showed them!)  I feel for your friend, but the system is set up just so the low lives have no choice but to help support their children. It's an unfortunate situation for men like your boy.
[This message has been edited by Sexy Mocha (edited September 02, 2000).]
|
I agree with the idea of garnishing if the parent in question has shown no interest in trying to support the child. If however the parent HAS shown interest and offered to pay the balance of his/her check beyond living expenses(net income), then garnishing is not necessary. Also, robbing Peter to pay Paul does not solve a problem. The intent of the Child Support Agencies should be to provide ALL support necessary for the child-not just financial. By that I mean it should check to see if the custodial parent is actually using the money for the child's benefit-and not his/her own. Secondly; how could the paying parent have quality time with the child if he/she has no place to stay, or not enough room for the child to stay if the child wants to spend a weekend? Presently a four digit number is multiplied against the paying parent's GROSS income. The product is the monthly amount of support the paying parent must pay. The amount ordered INCREASES if the paying parent gets a raise or another job. Now if after deducting that amount from your check you didn't have enough to pay rent or your utilities, what would think about the program then? Would it still be a fair program?