SPARC Forums

Main Forums => Father's Issues => Topic started by: sparrowmom on Jan 01, 2008, 06:03:06 PM

Title: So Tired!
Post by: sparrowmom on Jan 01, 2008, 06:03:06 PM
To begin,
 I have experienced all sides of the fence.
CP, NCP,SP, And then some!
(not to mention a child of dysfunction myself)

When I read of a NCP Whining about not being able to attend Sporting Events, I See RED!

  So... How Far do you "NCP" expect to travel to attend sporting events?

As a CP parent living in the "boonies" If I only have to drive 1 hour it is great!  (most games are 2 hours away and we attend EVERY game)

The NCP I currently deal with seems to have a problem attending games and supporting the Team.  

If I can travel 2 hours to a game to watch my child sit on the bench, one would think the NCP could as well.
 (but the NCP won't)

NCP expects a MEDAL for every game they attend Once a Year!
 

 (They seem to Leave before the Game (Christmas Program) is over!
I recently extented an offer to reduce Court Ordered Support in hopes that the NCP would agree to allow a teen to play sports and be allowed to grow up.
NCP refused and made things difficult.  

NCP told child they were to short, to young and will not Drive.
And Yet... the state allowed the child a Drivers Licence.
Hmmmm......

 Also, the NCP did not complain when the child started driving on their own for Visitation.  \
 To Date:
I have reduced Child Support by 20$ a month (only 2 years to go)
Been asked to compensate the NCP Loss (Bonus Money) from the IRS

Child has been driving for visits on my Dime...

Never asked for NCP to pay for Medical or Orthodondic treatment.
 (But NCP took me to court for such things)

Life is the same on the other side??
((No one is ever Happy!((
Hugs! and God Bless


Things That Make You Go
Hmmmmmmm

 
Title: RE: So Tired!
Post by: MixedBag on Dec 28, 2007, 07:35:58 AM
I would agree that there are CPs out there who have legitimate complaints as well as NCPs out there.

No one denies that here.
Title: RE: So Tired!
Post by: mistoffolees on Dec 29, 2007, 09:27:38 AM
>((No one is ever Happy!((

And that's exactly the point I've been trying to make.

The situation is tough all around. There is no solution for divorces with kids that will make everyone happy. It's just not possible - other than perhaps a small number of cases).

Yet every time someone has a gripe, they complain that the system is a failure and that they're being cheated and if only the system treated men (or NCPs or unemployed parents or employed parents or whatever) better, that the world would be fine.

In most cases, the system does the best that it can in a difficult situation. But no matter what happens, someone will be unhappy.

Could it be better? Sure. But it's not a total failure as some would have you believe.
Title: Bobble heading here
Post by: Davy on Dec 29, 2007, 10:51:07 PM

>>(No one is ever Happy!((

Uhmmmm...Hey dad's...we MAY be gaining.  WE have people that are NOT FATHERS (including Mist and Sparrowwoman) blowing smoke up everybody a$$ on a 'Father Issues' board.

I was Happy when 2 of my children under my care and influence liked themselves (again), were doing well in school, stopped fighting, stealing, abusing alcohol and drugs, worked, coached young players, gained college athletic scholarships, pastored others, contributing to society,etc

AT THE SAME TIME :

I was UNHappy when 1 of my children NOT under my care and influence was raped by 3 adult men at 16 yrs old, HATED themselves,  dropped out school, had 2 children born out of wedlock,  continued fighting, stealing, abusing and sold alcohol and drugs, could'nt worked, spent years in treatment, beaten up at home/community many times, avoided prison at least twice, burdered society,etc  


The worst of all.  There are many other situations that are equally bad or worst.  

This is a great country with many many problems to the point that we are losing many of our long held institutions.  

What do you want for our endangered children ??  Happy or UNhappy ??
Title: Yea...
Post by: olanna on Dec 29, 2007, 11:56:19 PM
And neither is the Social Security system, right?
Title: RE: Yea...
Post by: sparrowmom on Dec 30, 2007, 02:17:08 AM
Davy,
You said: ">Uhmmmm...Hey dad's...we MAY be gaining.  WE have people that
>are NOT FATHERS (including Mist and Sparrowwoman) blowing
>smoke up everybody a$$ on a 'Father Issues' board."

I Say:
Could you explain your thoughts a bit more??
I actually have every right to post on the "Fathers" board if you consider that I have acted as both Father and Mother in the past. I can also post for my son's ""DAD"" You know, the one who has raised him from diapers and actually Attends Childs events! As a Step-Father, he has earned the title of "Father" and he has "issues" he would love to discuss.

You said: "
>The worst of all.  There are many other situations that are
>equally bad or worst.  

I Say:
You are correct!!  In fact, there are just as many children that have difficulties in life no matter what type of "Family" they are derived from.
I bet everyone reading this knows of at least 1 child that had been raised in a family of "A Biological Parental Unit" that has caused worry in trouble at some point.  
 A Child in Trouble has Nothing to do with Divorce or unmarried parents.
It can happen either way.

Davy, I cannot even adress the rest of your nonsense.  What institutions are you speaking of?  

As a "Parental Unit" dealing with a NCP who is difficult.
 ((that was the original meaning of my post))
I am happy to say that despite the NCP attempts to attack.
 Example: Telling child they will do Drugs because they live with Mom.
 Accusations of abuse years ago with evidence of a "Birthmark" GASP
 Oh Yea, Child will burn in Hell because Mom is not the same religion.
 (Father is OCD and changed his religion when child attended a NON-Denomination activity with all the other children in the community)  
He was Catholic, Mom is Lutheran, and child attended a Baptist activity.)

Despite what the NCP parent thinks, My Childs involvement in the school, home and community speaks volumes.
Plays sports, is an Officer of a well known national club, is a member of student council, is not known to drink alcohol or take drugs, (although I am not a parent that will ever say "Not my child"... But I am fairly certain as Child is always home.... unless away with a parent or Coach. Child has less than 3 years of HS left.
 How many other parents can say this of their own Teens?

What would YOU People think of a person that accused a boy in the peak of puberty of "Wetting at night"??? My Childs NCP did. He and the Step-mom even required child to submit himself for inspection every morning when visiting.  

WOW, So now that I have gotten that off my chest!  
 (Secretly hoping the NCP is out there reading)
I can backup everything I have said relating to my personal situation.

As I said, I have been a CP, NCP and a SP..... I am also a child of Divorce...  My Mother was a very bitter woman and did her best to deter my relationship with my father. (Heck, I am 40 something , 3 kids, married and happy & she is Still trying to cause conflict!)  I Loved my Father, Call his wife my MOM.
Also, as a NCP... I love and adore my Childs Father... I would also love to have a better relationship with his wife if she would let me. (Even though child is old enough to have a family of their own) We never had to fight and argue about who was better..  We were all good...  We were also insightful enough to deter the point when teens play the "I Wanna Go Live With... ____ "

When I was a SP... DANG! I really did resent the Support taken out every month!  I Guess that is why I Never asked for an increase from the person I am speaking about.
As I said, I requested CP be lowered.. (Still was not good enough for NCP who has never been required to pay the required amount)
Heck, I would refuse it if I could.. But the state Mandates it...  Luck has it.... I can live without the Child Support ..  Every Dime has been put away for years and will provide a very nice "Nest Egg" for this Childs adult needs.  (Things like a home or other important life desires)  

That said,
Anyone remember what my original post was about?
That is what I wished to discuss.

Marching On... but always enjoy a positive debate.
God Bless,
SparrowMOM


OOps... Almost forgot!  
Dave, So where where were you??? and who do you blame for the unfortunate incident you speak of?
 Please explain how this would never happened under Your Care!

And then, Tell us all what you did and where you where when a 16yr old was emancipated and had child + 2...    
((I bet they don't call to Grandpa!))
 If they did.... You would not be posting.

Just to refresh..
  ((I was UNHappy when 1 of my children NOT under my care and
>influence was raped by 3 adult men at 16 yrs old, HATED
>themselves, ))
Title: RE: Bobble heading here
Post by: mistoffolees on Dec 30, 2007, 07:44:42 AM
>
>>>(No one is ever Happy!((
>
>Uhmmmm...Hey dad's...we MAY be gaining.  WE have people that
>are NOT FATHERS (including Mist and Sparrowwoman) blowing
>smoke up everybody a$$ on a 'Father Issues' board.
>

You can't even get genders right -even after being corrected repeatedly. Why should anyone believe anything else you say?
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: Davy on Dec 30, 2007, 09:20:30 PM
Information To Assist Non-Custodial Parents

Welcome to SPARC, the Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center.
SPARC's goal is to ensure that children of divorce continue to have meaningful relationships with both parents, regardless of marital status. We advocate on behalf all non-custodial parents to ensure they get equitable treatment in court and continued access to their children. In addition, we work to promote gender equality in Divorce and Custody issues.

SPARC recognizes the value of fatherhood and supports the concept of true joint custody, where parents work together for the best interests of their children. When joint custody is not possible or workable, we often advocate for fathers as custodial parents. Statistics show that custodial fathers are the most likely to encourage a positive relationship between their children and the other parent and to raise happy, healthy children.

NOTE : the above is the forewood that graciously explains the very essence of why this board exist.  Nothing is gained by you coming to this forum and posting some convulted message berating the father of your child and/or another father expressing sadness because he was not present when his daughter scored a hat trick.  Oh, wait a minute, there is a gain.  You remind some of us of how badly the system is broken ......  
Title: RE: Bobble heading here
Post by: Davy on Dec 30, 2007, 10:11:30 PM
You are greatly MISTAKEN about the reasons this board exist.  This is not a beauty or popularity contest.  

Your post count is meaningless except as an indicator of the turmoil you create and seem to thrive on.

You have not corrected anybody about anything repeatly.  

Get over yourself.

By the way, just how many children have you actually fathered ?
I understand the correct answer is zero.  
Title: RE: Bobble heading here
Post by: mistoffolees on Dec 31, 2007, 08:14:24 AM
>You are greatly MISTAKEN about the reasons this board exist.
>This is not a beauty or popularity contest.  

No one said it was. You're the one who seems to think that it's about your fantasies rather than facts.

>
>Your post count is meaningless except as an indicator of the
>turmoil you create and seem to thrive on.

No one brought up my post count except you.

>
>You have not corrected anybody about anything repeatly.  

Actually, I have. For example, I've corrected you repeatedly about my gender. Get someone to read it to you.

>
>Get over yourself.
>
>By the way, just how many children have you actually fathered
>?
>I understand the correct answer is zero.  

And, once again, you're making things up.

Why don't you try to stick to facts rather than your imagination?
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: mistoffolees on Dec 31, 2007, 08:16:13 AM
And what part of that says that a woman like sparrowwoman can't post here?

Too bad your attempts to monopolize this board by excluding anyone who doesn't agree with you are so transparent.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: SPARC Admin on Dec 31, 2007, 11:21:02 AM
>NOTE : the above is the forewood that graciously explains the
>very essence of why this board exist.  Nothing is gained by
>you coming to this forum and posting


I'll have to disagree. SPARC welcomes all parents without regard to gender or marital status. We welcome mothers as well as fathers, and nothing in the 'forward' on the homepage should be construed to mean anything different.

In short, "sparrowmom" has as much right to post here as anyone, including you. This is indeed the "Father's Issues" board, but that in no way implies women are not welcome or that they shouldn't feel free to post messages here.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: Davy on Dec 31, 2007, 02:19:02 PM
NOTE : the above is the forewood that graciously explains the very essence of why this board exist. Nothing is gained by you coming to this forum and posting some convulted message berating the father of your child and/or another father expressing sadness because he was not present when his daughter scored a hat trick. Oh, wait a minute, there is a gain. You remind some of us of how badly the system is broken ......

I adamantly agree with the full text (ie every word) of the foreword.  My post was CLEAR.  

It said 'NOTHING IS GAINED .... BERATING THE FATHER ... or ANOTHER FATHER....REMIND SOME OF US HOW BADLY THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN.  Nothing more nothing less.  My post was appropriate.  

Please let me know if you would like further clarification or understanding.

Thanks for your response.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: SPARC Admin on Dec 31, 2007, 03:42:00 PM
>I adamantly agree with the full text (ie every word) of the foreword.

It's called a "homepage". And nothing in it rules out the the value of motherhood, nor should it be taken as such.



>It said 'NOTHING IS GAINED .... BERATING THE FATHER ... or
>ANOTHER FATHER....REMIND SOME OF US HOW BADLY THE SYSTEM IS
>BROKEN.


There's no need to shout, Davy, unless I'm typing too fast for you.


>Nothing more nothing less.  My post was appropriate.

I never said it wasn't. Please stop putting words in my mouth.
 

>Please let me know if you would like further clarification or
>understanding.


I doubt that would be necessary, productive, or even worthwhile to spend my time pursuing, nor do I believe you could provide it if asked.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: sparrowmom on Jan 01, 2008, 02:19:50 AM
Hello All!
 Before I even attempt to respond to Davy's reply ...

I want to Thank the SPARC Admin and others that backed me up. So here you go!
       THANK YOU!   :)
Thank you to those that actually read my "Entire" post and understood.

So.... if you all don't mind, and the admin is OK with this, (Please feel free to delete if needed)
The following will contain my ""DEAR DAVY"" reply.

DEAR DAVY,
  Thank You So Much for your warm welcome to Your Space!  
I have read Every Word of your post and am happy to say that...Well I read it.. Did not understand most of it though.
But I am Happy to say that I understand your viewpoint and direction.
Everyone is entitled to have one.

I have mine... You have Yours... and somewhere in the Middle.... There is only the Truth...
Unfortunately, When sides are taken, the middle is the one who Hurts the most.

So, I bet you have wondered WHY it took me so long to respond to your ?? reply.   Well.....
Here it is, New Years Day, (I started this reply after the happy 12 hour) And I know Where my Teenagers are! Do You?
At 12:05am they called and we drove three  blocks to pick them up from a friends home.
Not because they were Drunk, too young to drive or because we did not trust them. We did it because it was cold out (Don't live in a high area of crime obviously) I am now posting at a very late hour because after they came home we spent some time togather, talking about things. Now that they are asleep, I have time to reply.

Now Davy, I could spend the next  three hours replying to everything you perceive as wrong about my right to post here... But I don't have time to waste keyboard energy on someone whom will only read what they wish to see.

But, as I stated before, I have been on every side..  

SO.. YOU QUOTE:
""Information To Assist Non-Custodial Parents

Welcome to SPARC, the Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center.
SPARC's goal is to ensure that children of divorce continue to have meaningful relationships with both parents, regardless of marital status. We advocate on behalf all non-custodial parents to ensure they get equitable treatment in court and continued access to their children. In addition, we work to promote gender equality in Divorce and Custody issues.

I SAY:  Think I covered that in my first post...  You know, where I said that I was... CP, NCP, SP.... So on and so forth?
  ((Do You Read???   anything....))

I also wish to say.....   I was not Berating Anyone...
((except when I responded you your incoherent nonsense))
I was merely stating True and Documented Facts. Issues that cause me concern....... and  guess...... I wished for some other points of view.. (Guess I got Yours!)  
I apologize if I Hit a Nerve. :(

As I said, I could say so much more... But I will say this.... I Bet most posts are made when the Truth is close to the true emotion.

That said, (without even beginning to adress Davy's attack on anyone other than myself)

The SYSTEM is Not Broken....  
However, it is unfortunate that some "Parents" are.....

Sparrowmom
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 01, 2008, 07:52:23 AM
>The SYSTEM is Not Broken....  
>However, it is unfortunate that some "Parents" are.....


I'm a custodial parent, and from my experience I would say the system is badly broken in quite a few different ways. The last 10 years have made this clear to me beyond any doubt.
Title: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: hagatha on Jan 01, 2008, 03:45:00 PM

Guys,
 
While it has been some time since I posted here, I have been a member of SPARC since almost it's inception.

From a NCP point of view I have heard some horror stories that truely made me cry.

By the same token I have heard some NCP's that were not interested in anyone but themselves.

I remember when there was a nasty fight between this site and a mothers site (MAFIA). simply because we thought we were on opposite sides of the fence. I would like to think that issue has been resolved and both sites have evolved to understand and appreciate the others point of view.

I believe the system is broken because there seems to be a cookie cutter solution to individual problems.

There will ALWAYS be parents that can't see beyond their own hurt and anger to give their kids the opportunity to love the other parent.

There will ALWAYS be parents that can't be bothered supporting their children and will look to the other parent or berate the other parent for not being financially responsible. (both NCP & CP)

There will ALWAYS be parents that will put their own needs, wants, and desires before their children.

There will ALWAYS be parents that believe they are the better parent and complain or berate the other parent for what they perceive to be bad parenting.

There will ALWAYS be parents that should have never had children and the children will suffer.

And finally there will ALWAYS be parents that will do whatever they can to make sure their children are happy, healthy, productive people and realize their children are the most important thing in their lives and will swallow their hurt, pain, and disappointment to keep their children happy.

Now as afar as the initial post, if YOU choose to drive 2,3,4 hours to a sporting event, good for you. I'm sure your child appreciates you being there. And in your situation as you have described it would seem the NCP can't see beyond himself to put the child first. However you don't know for sure why he chooses not to attend. If he was an uninvolved father before you were divorced, why would you assume he would change after the divorce?

However, that may not be the situation every time here. When my DH's ex chose to involve his daughter in every single event she could we could not attend all the events. Some of these were scheduled on his parenting time and while he would have loved to e there, there were other family obligations. On the times we were able to attend, we were confronted by the ex and her entire family and the hostility was so bad it became detrimential to the child. We stopped going. And then of corse we were berated for not attending

Where should he have drawn the line with our other children? One thing I made sure of when my husband and I got together was that our lives would not revolve around his daughter. If we had plans we did not cancel because his child was not available. Our other children would never feel less important because they lived with us.  We always made sure to inform the other parent when we had plans on her time and gave her the opportunity to allow his child to be included, She always declined. But by the same token when her plans occured during his time we always allowed the child to attend. .

I could probably go on and on about the difference between my DH's parenting style and his ex's, but it would only show how they were different. It would not prove who was the better parent. I am CERTAIN his ex believes herself to be a good parent. And even though I may not agree with her about this, I am not the one that gets to judge. The kids are the ultimate judge and they will make their decisions on their parents eventually.

As I have said in the past, there was only one perfent family, and their son was crucified by his peers. No one is ever perfect, and it isn't fair to point out others inperfections when we ignore our own.


The Witch

Remember . . . KARMA is a Wonderful Thing!!!!!

This is a game of cat and mouse.. to win, you must become the DOG!
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 02, 2008, 07:40:51 AM
>I'm a custodial parent, and from my experience I would say the
>system is badly broken in quite a few different ways. The last
>10 years have made this clear to me beyond any doubt.


I this this is equivalent to surveying a hospital emergency room and concluding that everyone in the world is sick.

There are certainly lots of problems with the system, but so far, no one has provided a better one (the only proposal was the suggestion that compliance with support payments would  be greater if there were no enforcement - which is clearly absurd). What you're ignoring is the huge number of people who DON'T post here and who manage OK. The two studies that have been provided so far demonstrate that the system works for a very large percentage of people.

That doesn't preclude trying to make it better, but arguing that the system is entirely broken isn't very helpful. That leads to despair and people doing foolish things.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 02, 2008, 09:48:34 AM
>What you're ignoring is the huge number of people who
>DON'T post here and who manage OK.

I this this is equivalent to surveying a gymnasium and concluding that everyone in the world is healthy.



>The two studies that have
>been provided so far demonstrate that the system works for a
>very large percentage of people.

And there are dozens of studies that demonstrate the exact opposite. Why are the studies you cite more believable?


>That doesn't preclude trying to make it better, but arguing
>that the system is entirely broken isn't very helpful.

1) I never said it was "entirely broken". I said it was "system is badly broken in quite a few different ways" and I stand by that statement. I deal with the system as a custodial parent and I can tell you for a fact that in general, things are a mess.

2) Denying that the system has problems won't make it better either, nor would I consider it helpful.

3) Saying the "system has problems" is like saying that "the Titanic stopped for ice". It's true, but it hardly communicates the scope of the issue.



>That leads to despair and people doing foolish things.

And the way things are handled now doesn't?

Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 02, 2008, 10:36:44 AM
>>What you're ignoring is the huge number of people who
>>DON'T post here and who manage OK.
>
>I this this is equivalent to surveying a gymnasium and
>concluding that everyone in the world is healthy.

Fortunately, no one has ever done that.

>
>
>
>>The two studies that have
>>been provided so far demonstrate that the system works for a
>>very large percentage of people.
>
>And there are dozens of studies that demonstrate the exact
>opposite. Why are the studies you cite more believable?

Funny, but no one has ever provided any studies here that say that the system fails in a majority of cases. Where are these 'dozens of studies'?

The studies that I am referring to are the only ones that have been provided so far.

>
>
>>That doesn't preclude trying to make it better, but arguing
>>that the system is entirely broken isn't very helpful.
>
>1) I never said it was "entirely broken". I said it was
>"system is badly broken in quite a few different ways" and I
>stand by that statement. I deal with the system as a custodial
>parent and I can tell you for a fact that in general, things
>are a mess.

Based on what? Your experience? The experience of people who come to a board set up to complain?

How about some statistical evidence to support the claim that it fails in a large percentage of case?

>
>2) Denying that the system has problems won't make it better
>either, nor would I consider it helpful.

Fortunately, no one has done that.

>
>3) Saying the "system has problems" is like saying that "the
>Titanic stopped for ice". It's true, but it hardly
>communicates the scope of the issue.

That's true. I'm still waiting for valid evidence that 'Titanic' is a relevant analogy.

>
>
>
>>That leads to despair and people doing foolish things.
>
>And the way things are handled now doesn't?

At least if people work through the system you don't get foolish advice like the person who keeps posting that child support is unconstitutional and people should stop paying it. Or the advice that you can tell a judge that he has no say in how divorced people raise their kids.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: olanna on Jan 02, 2008, 01:27:54 PM
What if all we had to get around was a coal-powered locomotive?  Would we view that as a great way to get around? Or would we say, hey, there has to be a better way, as this thing is using something we are quickly finding way to expensive and polluting the air so much, we aren't going to have any breathable air left!

Look how far things have come.  We now drive hybrid and electric cars because people realized the need for change in gas-guzzling, atmospheric polluting cars.  While the others may have served the purpose, they were hardly something anyone considered effective in meeting all the needs we have.

Same thing is true for the current CS system.  It *is* all we have currently but it is in serious need for reform. Mostly because those NCP parents realize just how inefficient the system is for them and their children.  
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 02, 2008, 05:00:28 PM
>>I this this is equivalent to surveying a gymnasium and
>>concluding that everyone in the world is healthy.
>
>Fortunately, no one has ever done that.

You did.



>The studies that I am referring to are the only ones that have
>been provided so far.

The studies exist and I have no doubt you'd find them if that happened to be the point you wanted to make. Why don't you contact ACFC or similar parenting groups and see what they have to say? I'll tell you why: because it doesn't fit your paradigm.



>>parent and I can tell you for a fact that in general, things
>>are a mess.
>
>Based on what? Your experience?

In a word, yes. I've been at this a while. And yes, based on thousands of real-world experiences and interactions with thousands of people and numerous Child Support Offices across the United States, the system has some major problems.



>That's true. I'm still waiting for valid evidence that
>'Titanic' is a relevant analogy.

You won't be convinced with mere proof, so I'm not going to bother trying. You're welcome to seek alternative evidence out on your own if you desire. I do not think you will do that.




>At least if people work through the system you don't get
>foolish advice like the person who keeps posting that child
>support is unconstitutional and people should stop paying it.
>Or the advice that you can tell a judge that he has no say in
>how divorced people raise their kids.

I personally don't agree with either of those ideas myself. I have no idea whether child support is "constitutional", and I doubt anyone here does either. None of us are constitutional scholars. Frankly, it's beside the point.

As for whether or not judges "have no say" in how divorced people raise their kids, I would say that it's obvious beyond any argument that they do have some say in it.

Those are all side issues. In the end, yes, my experience and observations over the last decade tell me the system is deeply flawed ("broken") in many ways.

Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 02, 2008, 05:26:21 PM
>>>I this this is equivalent to surveying a gymnasium and
>>>concluding that everyone in the world is healthy.
>>
>>Fortunately, no one has ever done that.
>
>You did.

Where? When did I say that the system ALWAYS works?

Don't put words into my mouth.

>
>
>
>>The studies that I am referring to are the only ones that
>have
>>been provided so far.
>
>The studies exist and I have no doubt you'd find them if that
>happened to be the point you wanted to make. Why don't you
>contact ACFC or similar parenting groups and see what they
>have to say? I'll tell you why: because it doesn't fit your
>paradigm.

Sorry, you're the one claiming that the system is inherently broken - you need to provide the evidence. After all, you're the one claiming that there are dozens of studies supporting your position. Either you're making that up or you must know about these studies - so it should be much easier for you to provide evidence than for me to search the web looking for something.

I already searched for evidence of the status and came up with evidence - and based my conclusion on that.

>
>
>
>>>parent and I can tell you for a fact that in general,
>things
>>>are a mess.
>>
>>Based on what? Your experience?
>
>In a word, yes. I've been at this a while. And yes, based on
>thousands of real-world experiences and interactions with
>thousands of people and numerous Child Support Offices across
>the United States, the system has some major problems.

I never said it didn't have problems. My position is that more often than not, it works. Where's your documentation that it fails more often than not?

Furthermore, 'thousands' of cases doesn't prove anything. There are millions of divorces in this country every year. The fact that a few thousand (or even a greater number) have problems is not evidence that the system is fundamentally broken.


>
>
>
>>That's true. I'm still waiting for valid evidence that
>>'Titanic' is a relevant analogy.
>
>You won't be convinced with mere proof, so I'm not going to
>bother trying. You're welcome to seek alternative evidence out
>on your own if you desire. I do not think you will do that.

Actually, I WOULD be convinced with proof. Sadly, you're unwilling to provide any.

>
>
>
>
>>At least if people work through the system you don't get
>>foolish advice like the person who keeps posting that child
>>support is unconstitutional and people should stop paying
>it.
>>Or the advice that you can tell a judge that he has no say
>in
>>how divorced people raise their kids.
>
>I personally don't agree with either of those ideas myself. I
>have no idea whether child support is "constitutional", and I
>doubt anyone here does either. None of us are constitutional
>scholars. Frankly, it's beside the point.
>
>As for whether or not judges "have no say" in how divorced
>people raise their kids, I would say that it's obvious beyond
>any argument that they do have some say in it.

Then you should read some of the posts from someone here who advocates that judges DON'T have any say.

>
>Those are all side issues. In the end, yes, my experience and
>observations over the last decade tell me the system is deeply
>flawed ("broken") in many ways.

I never said that the system wasn't flawed. I said that it is not fundamentally broken. There's a huge difference.

Since you are arguing that I'm wrong, why are you unable to provide evidence that it's fundamentally broken?
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 02, 2008, 05:38:02 PM
>Since you are arguing that I'm wrong, why are you unable to
>provide evidence that it's fundamentally broken?

I'm not unable to, I'm just not going to bother. It's obvious that nothing could or will change your mind.

The fact is that I have better, more important things to do than engage in some trivial mental masturbation with you. I'm getting remarried and starting several new businesses this year, so you'll just have to pardon me if I don't have the time to satisfy your overweening need to be "right" about everything. :)
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 02, 2008, 07:46:21 PM
>>Since you are arguing that I'm wrong, why are you unable to
>>provide evidence that it's fundamentally broken?
>
>I'm not unable to, I'm just not going to bother. It's obvious
>that nothing could or will change your mind.
>
>The fact is that I have better, more important things to do
>than engage in some trivial mental masturbation with you. I'm
>getting remarried and starting several new businesses this
>year, so you'll just have to pardon me if I don't have the
>time to satisfy your overweening need to be "right" about
>everything. :)

The funny thing is that it's always people who are making things up who say that.

If you had any facts, you'd present them. I can only assume that the 'dozens of studies' that you claimed would support your position were all fabricated.

In the real world, evidence matters.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 02, 2008, 08:08:29 PM
>The funny thing is that it's always people who are making
>things up who say that.

The funny thing is that it's always people who have trouble letting go who say that.



>If you had any facts, you'd present them.

If you wanted any facts, you'd go get them. It's not my job to do your homework.


> I can only assume that the 'dozens of studies' that you
> claimed would support your position were all fabricated.

People used to assume the Earth was flat, too. They were wrong too.

Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 02, 2008, 09:00:57 PM
>>The funny thing is that it's always people who are making
>>things up who say that.
>
>The funny thing is that it's always people who have trouble
>letting go who say that.
>

I see you still can't back up your assertions.

>
>
>>If you had any facts, you'd present them.
>
>If you wanted any facts, you'd go get them. It's not my job to
>do your homework.

You're the one who made the claim. In fact, you specifically stated that you had dozens of studies. It's not my job to back up your claim -that's your job (if you weren't making up the dozens of studies, of course).

>
>
>> I can only assume that the 'dozens of studies' that you
>> claimed would support your position were all fabricated.
>
>People used to assume the Earth was flat, too. They were wrong
>too.

That's right. They stopped believing the earth was flat WHEN EVIDENCE WAS PROVIDED. Since you haven't provided anything, there's no reason to ignore the evidence that HAS been presented.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 02, 2008, 10:20:01 PM
Lol...you're still having trouble letting go, eh? That's okay, I've seen loads of people like you who can't be bothered to consider an alternative point of view. With an attitude like that it's no wonder you ended up here. ;)

I'm curious, though...if you know so much and have all the answers to everything, why don't you start your own site? Then you could pontificate freely there without feeling so threatened by dissenting opinions. )


>there's no reason to ignore the evidence that HAS been presented.

I find your devotion to groupthink amusing. :)

 
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 03, 2008, 08:08:35 AM
>Lol...you're still having trouble letting go, eh? That's
>okay, I've seen loads of people like you who can't be bothered
>to consider an alternative point of view. With an attitude
>like that it's no wonder you ended up here. ;)

You must have been looking in a mirror when you said that.

Let's look at the two positions:

Me: "I have found evidence which leads to one conclusion. I'm perfectly willing to consider alternative evidence if you can provide it which might change my mind"

You: "I don't have any evidence and I refuse to even consider your evidence because my mind is made up. In fact, I'll pretend that there are dozens of studies which support my view even though they don't exist"

Which one is the closed mind?

>
>I'm curious, though...if you know so much and have all the
>answers to everything, why don't you start your own site? Then
>you could pontificate freely there without feeling so
>threatened by dissenting opinions. )

I'm not threatened by anything. I'm actively seeking alternative evidence. You, OTOH, are not interested in evidence.

And I see you're back to the usual refuge of people who are incapable of rational discussion - you make things up and pretend I've said them. I never claimed to have all the answers to everything.

>
>
>>there's no reason to ignore the evidence that HAS been
>presented.
>
>I find your devotion to groupthink amusing. :)

See above. Seems to me that you are the one so enmeshed in groupthink. You are convinced of something and insist that you're right - without any evidence and you're willing to ignore any evidence presented.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 03, 2008, 08:43:08 AM
>I'm actively seeking alternative evidence.

No, you're whining because people aren't serving it up to you on a silver platter. Don't be so lazy, do your own research.


>Which one is the closed mind?

Yours.


>You are convinced of something and insist that you're right -
>without any evidence and you're willing to ignore any evidence
>presented.

You must have been looking in a mirror when you said that. :) lololol
Title: Start with this Mist...
Post by: olanna on Jan 03, 2008, 08:12:34 PM
That should keep you busy for a bit and help you to understand that the system isn't working and it isn't just a reflection of the "whiners" on this board..

http://www.caltax.org/MEMBER/digest/May99/may99-5.htm
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,219497,00.html
http://www.fathermag.com/907/child-support/
http://www.massnews.com/2003_Editions/2_Feb/022003_mn_child_support_system.shtml
http://boards.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/WebX.fcgi?14@184.9yufgjJOidD%5E0@.ef0686f/2035
http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2003/0923.html
http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/r/robbins/2005/robbins051305.htm
http://www.glennsacks.com/federal_child_support.htm
http://www.fathers4kids.com/html/ChildSupport.htm?article_id=71
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56382
http://www.fathersunite.org/
http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/w/ward/03/ward072703.htm
http://www.la-legal.com/modules/article/view.article.php?c4/16
http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/site/news.php?id=53
Title: RE: Start with this Mist...
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 03, 2008, 08:51:34 PM
>That should keep you busy for a bit and help you to
>understand that the system isn't working and it isn't just a
>reflection of the "whiners" on this board..

OK. Let's have a look. But before even looking, I'm willing to bet you've found a stack of anecdotes and completely irrelevant articles.

For the record, the claim you are trying to support is that the system fails more often than not. In order to establish that, your 'evidence' must provide factual information to support that claim.

>
>http://www.caltax.org/MEMBER/digest/May99/may99-5.htm

States that there is lots of child support owed - which I never denied. In fact, this uses roughly the same figures as the study I already provided which shows that > 90% of support is being paid.

Nope, doesn't provide evidence that the system fails more often than not.

>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,219497,00.html

Case of one individual. Considering that tens of millions of people are divorced, one individual is hardly proof that the entire system is broken.

>http://www.fathermag.com/907/child-support/

A discussion of whether the current system is ethical. Doesn't have any evidence of how often it fails.

>http://www.massnews.com/2003_Editions/2_Feb/022003_mn_child_support_system.shtml

A letter written from one person to another - with absolutely no statistical evidence.

>http://boards.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/WebX.fcgi?14@184.9yufgjJOidD%5E0@.ef0686f/2035

A board much like this one for people to complain about an issue - but no evidence of the frequency of the problem.

>http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2003/0923.html

The only 'fact' is the claim that 250,000 fathers are incarcerated for failure to pay child support. Aside from the fact that they never documented this claim (and it would constitute 12% of the entire prison population - which is pretty hard to believe), let's say for a second it's true. That doesn't dispute the figures I provided - that well over 90% of all child support is being paid on time and of the remaining percentage, most of it is caused by people who don't have a job.

Can you do the math? There are something like 25 million divorced fathers in this country. Even if we accept your made up figure, that's only 1% of the total.

>http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/r/robbins/2005/robbins051305.htm

A long whine about injustice - with no facts.

>http://www.glennsacks.com/federal_child_support.htm

This is a good one. It affirms that most of the people who don't pay child support simply can't afford to do so. Other than that, there's someone's speculation that if someone does something the world's going to go to pieces, but that's the usual alarmist stuff that politicians throw around. Feel free to provide facts rather than fearmongering.

>http://www.fathers4kids.com/html/ChildSupport.htm?article_id=71

Same estimate of 250,000 fathers incarcerated for failure to pay support. Same lack of reference for that figure. Same response as above.

>http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56382

As above, they have a couple of anecdotes - but no evidence on the frequency of problems.

>http://www.fathersunite.org/

An organization set up to provide a "single voice to change the broken, biased and often corrupt family legal system". Clearly, not an unbiased source. Even so, there's nothing there that provides evidence that the system fails more often than not.

>http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/w/ward/03/ward072703.htm

Anecdotes.

>http://www.la-legal.com/modules/article/view.article.php?c4/16

No evidence- just a typical sensationalistic article without facts.

>http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/site/news.php?id=53

More anecdotes.


Just as I predicted, you've provided a bunch of sensationalistic articles with no facts.

I readily agreed that the system is imperfect - and all these articles managed to do is to affirm that the system is imperfect - so they don't disprove a thing I've said.

The issue that's being discussed is your insistence that the system is broken so badly that it fails more often than not. None of these articles even remotely address that issue. In fact, several of time affirm that the problems occur in a relatively small number of cases.

So where is the evidence to support your claim that the system fails more often than not?
Title: RE: Start with this Mist...
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 03, 2008, 09:50:17 PM
>so they don't disprove a thing I've said.

What they prove is that nothing will convince you.

We both know that it wouldn't matter how many studies you were shown or what they said- your mind is made up and that's that. And now you have so much emotionally invested in defending your position that you're utterly incapable of considering anything that contradicts it.

You hide behind a closed mind and pretend it's critical thinking. It's not.


Title: Have mercy...
Post by: speciallady on Jan 03, 2008, 10:05:05 PM
Come on now Mist, you can't negate personal experience nor articles that reflect that. That is why boards like this exist. You can quote stats all you want but I really feel your stance on all this is quite harmful to folks looking for help. Most come to boards like this in desperation--your claims make it seem like there is no justification in that. You're hiding behind "I readily agreed that the system is imperfect..." and cannot see beyond that. It's insulting to see you write that folks are making things up, that their own experiences show nothing, that your "study" concludes that the system works more than not.........I strongly disagree and while I did find studies to prove you wrong, I agree with Waylon, you need to do your own legwork.
Your stance is just disturbing because folks come here looking for help. While you do answer posts and try to be helpful (although "ask your attorney" is a no-brainer...) you have to realize that many many folks are at the end of their ropes. If they read your posts, like these latest ones, they'd be inclined to think there was no hope. By your posts it would seem that you advocate for believing in this system and do nothing. Just go along with it because it works in most cases?
Again, I strongly disagree.
I feel you are doing more harm than good lately and if I was a newbie here, I'd definetely wonder why you are here? You obviously are happy with your custody and support orders. You obviously think the system is working. All things the folks on this board are not happy with.
Boy I wish someone would get POC back on here--I'm sure he'd have some stats for ya--
Please Mist, understand what this board is for--why folks are here. You are not helping anyone here when you argue with admin or posters. You have stated your opinion and there's no changing that. I am happy you have an ideal custody and support order. Most folks here do not or have fought tooth and nail to get what they have. You should show respect to the many that have been through the court trenches and have been members of this board for many many years.

I agree with Waylon--you should start your own board.
Title: RE: Start with this Mist...
Post by: olanna on Jan 03, 2008, 10:33:23 PM
Word.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: sparrowmom on Jan 04, 2008, 02:48:03 AM
>>The SYSTEM is Not Broken....  
>>However, it is unfortunate that some "Parents" are.....

>
>I'm a custodial parent, and from my experience I would say the
>system is badly broken in quite a few different ways. The last
>10 years have made this clear to me beyond any doubt.

Because I can't find anywhere else to start, I have to go with this.

But first, could someone Please tell me how I got caught up in this

mistoffolees Debate???  
 
If I didn't know better, I would swear I was reading something from 2 parents ((that happen to be Lawyers)) argue!!  

Just to clarify.... I feel the "parents and not the system" are broken because.....   If parents were able to communicate just enough for the child.... there would be no need for the court to be involved!!!

I DO agree that the system is "Broken" to a point. I will certainly agree that the Judges might be swayed by personal opinion most of the time. I can also agree that a Judge is bound to look at the case law everytime and base the ruling on that.  But show your face in the courtroom complaining with "fluff and stuff"..  enough...  The Judge will soon be able to sift the "Stuff from the Fluff"  If you have been there done that and still think the system has failed you.... You might be the one filled with "Fluff"

 Beyond that, if you don't care for the "Code and Legal points"
CHANGE IT!  
You have every right to contact those that write and revise the Code.

No offence intented... But if you can't find a way to make it work yourself.. it is no fault of the court.  It may not even be your fault.. (As in my case)   It IS a Parental problem.

So what do you want me to say????  In a Perfect world... the court should get rid of the opposing parent??

BTW, as a NCP, my Daughter was raised by her Father. (that was the best for my child at the time)

As a CP, I have begged the NCP father of a son to work with me without involving the court...   This Was Refused Many Times!

Also, As brought up earlier....
I am quite aware of the NCP's reasons for not being able to attend games.!!  
  Last year, it was because of the Child Support they were required to send me every month.  (Even had a "family meeting to discuss this" and told the child + his 6 bonus siblings... they would not get any Christmas presents if NCP went to that 1 Game... You see, he was supposed to pick child up after the game as well. NCP chose to forgo the entire weekend and wait..  I have email that can back this up.

Also... Reason I see sports as an issue...  
NCP refused to take child to All School related activities in the past when child was with NCP on parental time.  NCP made promises and then called me a few hours before  the activity to tell me not to be there... Child was not going...  
 One of my Favorites was a Wrestling Tourney a few years ago! Believe it or not, The Coach was my Daughters Father... (The one that I was NCP of)  The NCP called my Ex first and we all laughed...  I adore and am am happy that my daughters father and I work so well together..

So... anyone care to tell me how to make the NCP ((FATHER)) listen and work with me??

That is what I need help with!
Why turn this into some personal debate that I stumbled upon?

BYW! I am NOT Everyone/Your bitter EX.. or your Ex's mother.
I happen to be one of a kind...
I really would like opinions on MY situation alone..
(From both NCP and CP point of view)

Thanks!
Title: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: brwneyedmom on Jan 04, 2008, 02:54:53 AM
only 39 minutes to read, digest and reply to the list.  You must be a speed reader to have absorbed all those articles in that amount of time.  I agree with speciallady that newbies may be turned away. If I had only known now what I've learned, sometimes painfully, over the years from board posters, I like to think that I could have prevented at least some of the acrimony of my divorce.  For some people the system is broke and studies won't help them cope with their circumstances.  

I used to appreciate your advice.  Now I'm beginning to read your posts as you just want to argue.
Title: RE: Yea...Sparrowwoman ...read it and reap
Post by: MixedBag on Jan 04, 2008, 07:00:30 AM
you can't make the other parent listen, or do anything....and that's where you start and continue.

I have a situation right now I'd like to bring up to the NCP, but I won't because the NCP isn't ready to listen and I know that.

So....I just keep loving our child, keep doing the best that I can, and our child is not only surviving, but thriving.

I remember when a particular sport was soooooo important according to the other parent that my child's relationship had to stop so our son could participate in this so important sport.  Well, I decided to take him to an event -- and the other parent didn't even come to watch him.  Sad...

But in the end it backfired....

Love the child, support the child -- and continue to support a relationship between the three of you -- dad, child and mom
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 04, 2008, 01:28:25 PM
>only 39 minutes to read, digest and reply to the list.  You
>must be a speed reader to have absorbed all those articles in
>that amount of time.  I agree with speciallady that newbies

So I must be wrong because I can read faster than you? Strange logic.

If you can find a flaw in my analysis, feel free. Personal attacks aren't justified.

>may be turned away. If I had only known now what I've learned,
>sometimes painfully, over the years from board posters, I like
>to think that I could have prevented at least some of the
>acrimony of my divorce.  For some people the system is broke
>and studies won't help them cope with their circumstances.  

Yes, for SOME PEOPLE, there are problems with the system. I never denied that. That doesn't mean that we should pretend the entire system is broken.

>
>I used to appreciate your advice.  Now I'm beginning to read
>your posts as you just want to argue.

I like people to get facts right. When people are being given inappropriate information that might lead to erroneous action, I will point out what I see as the error in that position. WHy are you opposed to my pointing out errors?
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 04, 2008, 02:01:16 PM
>I like people to get facts right.

As long as they support what you personally believe in. Otherwise it's dismissed out of hand.


>WHy are you opposed to my pointing out errors?

Why are you opposed to the idea that you might be mistaken about something? You look at a study or two and suddenly it's like the clouds parted and you heard the Word Of God.  

Did you examine the methodology of the reporting criteria, the sample size, the error rate, external factors, or any of the other things that factored into the report? No, you didn't. You saw something that fit your personal beliefs and agenda and *boom*, now it's the One True Way and nothing else can possibly be right. Do you realize how ridiculous that makes you look?

Really....if the system works as well as you seem to think it does, why are you even here? Aren't there weightier problems that demand your vast, clearly infallible expertise? If things are working as well as you claim, what exactly are you doing here?

Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: olanna on Jan 04, 2008, 03:39:59 PM
Reading faster doesn't mean that you comprehend better.  The more you post, the more you prove that.

Why don't you go start your own board? You seem to want to devote your time to foolishness and distractions.

Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 04, 2008, 09:49:01 PM
And, yet, you STILL haven't provided any evidence to back up your repeated claims.

Do you believe that repeating the same fabricated claims will somehow make them become true?
Title: C'mon Mist!!!
Post by: MixedBag on Jan 05, 2008, 07:05:16 AM
just because Ola provided them and Admin didn't...???

Knock it off.....and go back to being helpful.

Title: RE: C'mon Mist!!!
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 07, 2008, 05:55:53 AM
>just because Ola provided them and Admin didn't...???
>
>Knock it off.....and go back to being helpful.
>
>

Ola didn't provide anything to support the issue being discussed. So far, NO ONE has provided any evidence that the system is fundamentally broken. All that anyone has provided is anecdotal evidence that some people have problems - which no one has ever denied.

As for 'knock it off', why don't you ask Ola and Admin to do that? They're the ones who are constantly throwing around personal attacks and making statements that they can't substantiate (and, in the case of admin, just plain making things up such as the 'dozens of studies')? Why aren't you asking THEM to knock it off?
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 07, 2008, 05:56:26 AM
>Reading faster doesn't mean that you comprehend better.  The
>more you post, the more you prove that.

And, yet, you haven't shown any errors in my analysis. Go figure.

>
>Why don't you go start your own board? You seem to want to
>devote your time to foolishness and distractions.

Why don't you?
Title: RE: C'mon Mist!!!
Post by: MixedBag on Jan 07, 2008, 06:43:40 AM
Because it's Admin's site.

Because Ola is a moderator and has been here since the beginning of time.

And so have I....

It was Admin's vision to create this site and work to evolve it into a non-profit organization.

Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: MixedBag on Jan 07, 2008, 06:45:45 AM
SPARC Admin started this board.

Like I said in the other answer, Ola, Kent, myself, and the other moderators have been here from the beginning.

That's why none of "us" will leave and start another board -- we're already home.

Let it go, stop this nonsense, and get back to helping.
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 07, 2008, 08:59:38 AM
>And, yet, you haven't shown any errors in my analysis. Go
>figure.


The errors are in your thought process. Your rather shallow "analysis" is another story. I noticed you couldn't answer any of my questions about the methodology, the error rate, the sampling, etc etc etc. That's because you simply found a "study" that supported your conclusions and ran with it. That's the exact opposite of how the science of statistics are supposed to work.


>>Why don't you go start your own board? You seem to want to
>>devote your time to foolishness and distractions.
>
>Why don't you?


That question was asked of you (not of her), but for the first time in recorded history you seem to have no substantive answer. Are you afraid to answer the question, or are you unable to?

From your posts, it's plain to see that you're one of those people who just loves to argue pointlessly and has a deep-seated need to be "right" at any cost. If this is any indication of how you manage your interpersonal relationships, it's no wonder you ended up here.

Title: RE: C'mon Mist!!!
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 07, 2008, 09:10:14 AM

>Ola didn't provide anything to support the issue being
>discussed.

She did, and you immediately dismissed it out of hand. As for anecdotal evidence, once you have a mountain of it I'd say there's something there.

It's actually kind of amusing to watch you demand 'evidence' of this, while surrounded by loads of it. But 'anecdotal' evidence isn't good enough for you, you need to see it in print before it's 'true'. Nonetheless, tens of thousands of people visit boards like this one every day discussing how the system has failed them, and in your world they should all be ignored- their stories and personal accounts mean nothing to you.

Did you ever notice that there are no message boards or web sites where people gather to discuss how great the child support system is and how wonderfully it's working? Gee, I wonder why that is...
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 07, 2008, 09:26:24 AM
>>And, yet, you haven't shown any errors in my analysis.
>Go
>>figure.

>
>The errors are in your thought process. Your rather shallow
>"analysis" is another story. I noticed you couldn't answer any
>of my questions about the methodology, the error rate, the
>sampling, etc etc etc. That's because you simply found a
>"study" that supported your conclusions and ran with it.
>That's the exact opposite of how the science of statistics are
>supposed to work.

I already provided the link to the studies I cited. The methodology was there. Unlike, of course, the studies that you made up.

>
>
>>>Why don't you go start your own board? You seem to want
>to
>>>devote your time to foolishness and distractions.
>>
>>Why don't you?

>
>That question was asked of you (not of her), but for the first
>time in recorded history you seem to have no substantive
>answer. Are you afraid to answer the question, or are you
>unable to?
>
>From your posts, it's plain to see that you're one of those
>people who just loves to argue pointlessly and has a
>deep-seated need to be "right" at any cost. If this is any
>indication of how you manage your interpersonal relationships,
>it's no wonder you ended up here.

And if you think you can analyze someone on the basis of what they post on a bulletin board, then it's no wonder you think the world is nuts. That's an extremely juvenile and unprofessional thing to do - just what I'd expect from someone who makes up data.
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 07, 2008, 10:51:30 AM
>And if you think you can analyze someone on the basis of what
>they post on a bulletin board, then it's no wonder you think
>the world is nuts.

I never said the "world is nuts". I think that comment tells us a lot more about you than you realized. Apparently you're here because your life is going so well and everything is fine, right? That's why you came to this board, mistoffolees- because your life is in perfect order and you have no problems. Riiiiiiiiight.


>That's an extremely juvenile and unprofessional thing to do -
> just what I'd expect from someone who makes up data.

I'd say the same thing about you- it's just what I'd expect from someone whose mind is closed and who's convinced that only they Know The Truth.
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 07, 2008, 09:06:24 PM

>>That's an extremely juvenile and unprofessional thing to do -
>
>> just what I'd expect from someone who makes up data.
>
>I'd say the same thing about you- it's just what I'd expect
>from someone whose mind is closed and who's convinced that
>only they Know The Truth.

You know you've lost the argument when you have to make things up and pretend the other person said them.

I never claimed that only I know the truth - far from it. In fact, I'm actively seeking information to help get closer to the truth.

I'm done with this. You've made it clear that you think it's OK to make up 'evidence' to back your claim, that you refuse to provide any real evidence to back your claim, and you're convinced that your claim is correct simply because you said so. I'm willing to look at alternative evidence and asked you for some - and the best you could do is fabricate it (because in your mind you don't need evidence to back your position). And, in spite of all of that, you attack me and claim that I'm the one with a closed mind.

Rather amazing. But I'm done arguing with you. It's impossible to have a rational debate with someone who insists that that kind of irrational position makes sense.
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: olanna on Jan 07, 2008, 09:38:54 PM
http://www.acsblog.org/equality-and-liberty-suit-challenges-constitutionality-of-childs-best-interest.html

http://books.google.com/books?id=dRY1-7WFlTwC&pg=PA136&lpg=PA136&dq=l+mendel+rivers+jr+as+a+family+court+judge&source=web&ots=TuySyPa_m1&sig=sP1RTi9tuYoAY0OMoce2okW91OA

I've posted this before.  
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 07, 2008, 11:26:29 PM

>I never claimed that only I know the truth - far from it. In
>fact, I'm actively seeking information to help get closer to
>the truth.

Except for the part about going out and actually doing research, seeking alternate opinions, or listening to people who say something you disagree with. Aside from that, yeah, you're just an information-seeking machine.



>I'm done with this.

Fine with me. I'm not intimidated by your vociferous bullshit, unlike a lot of people you buffalo, browbeat, and shout down.


>you're convinced that your claim is correct simply because
>you said so.

Actually that sounds more like you. Remember, you're the one that won't answer my questions. Why is that?



>Rather amazing. But I'm done arguing with you.

Lol, that wasn't even close to an argument. That was you trying to drill through a battleship with a Q-Tip. Your 'argument' consisted of "I saw a study and I believe it, so I'm right and everyone else is wrong."



>It's impossible
>to have a rational debate with someone who insists that that
>kind of irrational position makes sense.

That's exactly the way a lot of people here feel about you. Ask me how I know.

Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: olanna on Jan 08, 2008, 12:29:46 AM
I've never understood why Mist came to this board if everything was working for him.  It is hard to admit defeat, and everyone wants to be the winner..but truth be known, when it comes to the court and government involvement in families, no one wins...especially not the children.

Anyone saying the system is working quite well either isn't involved with it or is in denial.  It's the comparative of blowing up the coral reef to move the yacht closer to the mansion to save time....
Title: RE: I see that you gave Ola's list of 14 sources
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 08, 2008, 07:27:25 AM
>Anyone saying the system is working quite well either isn't
>involved with it or is in denial.

I agree.

Mist appears to be defining the system "working well" in terms of efficiency or percentage of support paid. That's not necessarily the benchmark I'd choose. If all one cares about is 'efficiency', then they'd be right at home in the [a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Germany]Third Reich[/a], which was notoriously efficient. Not fair, friendly, or rational, but very, very efficient. I understand that for the Nazis it worked well.
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: escape2paradise on Jan 08, 2008, 03:55:41 PM
Mist, I see your point.  This is just more dribble from whiners who want to blame things on everyone else but themselves.  Guess what folks, not one single person visiting this board would be in the position they are if they had not been flawed in whom they chose for a partner in parenting their child/children.  I count myself among those people.  I picked a frog as the father for my child.  Guess what?  The kiss did not change him into a prince!  

The system is not perfect and Mist does not deny that.  There is no one system that will be perfect for everybody.  That is impossible!

I have yet to hear any suggestions from any of the naysayers posting as to what would make the system better.  Anything you come up with may be a positive for some, but inherently will be a negative for others.  

For instance I am apauled at my situation in that I don't think my X should have ever been allowed to start the custody action against me in the first place.  

My X is a druggie, doesn't work and has never been a consistent parent either in time, effort or money.  His own family can't believe the gaul he has in instituting the current custody dispute.  

I on the other hand have provided a safe loving home for the child for all her 13 yrs.  I have encouraged the X's involvement and his family's.  I have provided completely for the financials and necessaties for said child.  The child is a well adjusted straight A student who participates in numerous sports and extracurriculars.  

From my point of view this is a flaw in the system.  His right to start this fiasco has cost me $20K and we haven't even gone to trial yet.  It has cost the X his visitation (druggies shouldn't start court proceedings when they can't pass a hair follicle).  Can it be fixed?  I doubt it.  Everybody has to have their day in court and the ability to prove their points, otherwise the court wouldn't have the information they need to determine what is in the child's best interest.  

Mist is no way said the system is perfect.  However, for every thousand people who have been let down there are 100 thousand that it has worked for just as it was intended.  The flaw that starts it all is the parents and the choices they make.  For there mistakes their children will suffer and the "system" can't be responsible for fixing that!
Title: Here's one.................
Post by: Kitty C. on Jan 08, 2008, 04:57:17 PM
......that I've already offered in this thread.

This is what I proposed to a presidential candidate:  take the adversarial atmosphere out of the family court system (because it never belonged there in the first place) and not only would it solve many of the problematic issues, but I think it would also cause a drop in the divorce rate.  Now, before anyone gets their knickers in a twist, let me explain and CONSIDER this in your opinion.

If you remove the adversarial atmosphere, there will be no 'winners' or 'losers', because forcing this situation only makes the kids the losers.  IF, and I do mean IF, a parent might be a possible threat to the children in any way, that must be decided by the court.

Remove the mediator process (where both parents bring their own plans to the table, but it's left to the mediator to decide) and bring in 'coaches', who will work with both parents to come up with one plan TOGETHER.  Apparently, this is something that has already been implemented in some states, tho I can't put my finger on the specifics at the moment.  What they have found where the 'coaching' process is used, is that the divorce rate is starting to go down.  When the parents realize they have to work together, regardless of whether they stay together or not, it is apparently changing their prospective on the whole process.

And I'm going to counter this as well, as many of you are probably shaking your heads and saying it's not possible if the parents refuse to work together.  In this type of system, they are FORCED to!  They are both going to be parents until the child(ren) turn age of majority (and that should be the same for EVERY state).  If the parents know GOING IN to this situation that, NO MATTER WHAT, they will have to work with the other parent in order to maintain a relationship with their child, then they will think differently about getting into it in the first place.  And through that, it might make men and women think differently about bringing kids into the world and whom they do that with, as well.  

The whole problem with any major change in thinking is getting everyone on board.  Which is why states that have passed joint physical custody laws are still having problems.  Why?  Because old school judges refuse to consider it.  We've seen this quite often here in Iowa since ours was passed.

Do not ask me about specifics and details.........if you want to disseminate and shoot holes in it, be my guest.  But you wanted ideas, so have at it............
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 08, 2008, 06:43:40 PM
>Guess what folks, not one single person visiting
>this board would be in the position they are if they had not
>been flawed in whom they chose for a partner in parenting
>their child/children.  


So, it's their fault for not knowing that their partner would develop a drug habit, become an alcoholic, or turn out to be a screwup? It's their fault for not being able to predict that? How are you supposed to know in advance? Please tell me, because I'll write a book and make a million dollars.



>The system is not perfect and Mist does not deny that.  There
>is no one system that will be perfect for everybody.  


No one said there was or would be any system that will be perfect for everybody.  Where in the world did you hear anyone say that?




>I have yet to hear any suggestions from any of the naysayers
>posting as to what would make the system better.  


Maybe not in this thread, but various suggestions have been being put forth for YEARS. Please, give me a break. Just because you don't hear it here doesn't mean it hasn't happened.


>Anything you
>come up with may be a positive for some, but inherently will
>be a negative for others.  


Thank you, Captain Obvious.




>For instance I am apauled at my situation in that I don't
>think my X should have ever been allowed to start the custody
>action against me in the first place.


What, he should be forced to stay married to you and you to him? What gain is there in that? Should only one parent have the power to initiate divorce proceedings? Which one, and why? How will this sort of thing be fairly determined?




>I on the other hand have provided a safe loving home for the
>child for all her 13 yrs.  I have encouraged the X's
>involvement and his family's.  I have provided completely for
>the financials and necessaties for said child.  The child is a
>well adjusted straight A student who participates in numerous
>sports and extracurriculars.  


Well, since the Family Court system is so fair and just, they should see this and you should surely prevail, right? *cough* It's at least as fair as the child support system. Oh, wait....



>However, for every
>thousand people who have been let down there are 100 thousand
>that it has worked for just as it was intended.


As mistoffolees is so fond of saying, "Show me the evidence". You're just pulling those figures out of your butt. Show me the proof or stats to back your claim up. Otherwise expect mistoffolees to berate you for making unsubstantiated claims.



>The flaw that
>starts it all is the parents and the choices they make.


That's certainly true in some cases, but not in all. To make a blanket statement like that is both ignorant and ridiculous.


Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: olanna on Jan 08, 2008, 07:16:58 PM
Please be sure to look at the reference page for this book...look at all those that were cited and quoted.  I have been on both sides of the coin...both NCP and CP. I can say that I found the system much more responsive to CP's and generally found the resulting order much more in my favor. So long as I am a winner, who cares about the other team, right? So that must mean that for every winner in family court, there is a loser and someone that is unhappy with the outcome.  So your own numbers are quite skewed.  Looks like 100,000 happy customers also means 100,000 unhappy customers. Does fifty percent grade still equal an F these days, or does that mean that its the best that can be done, so there is a Jesus factor giving it an A????


http://books.google.com/books?id=dRY1-7WFlTwC&pg=PA136&lpg=PA136&dq=l+mendel+rivers+jr+as+a+family+court+judge&source=web&ots=TuySyPa_m1&sig=sP1RTi9tuYoAY0OMoce2okW91OA

Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 09, 2008, 08:37:15 AM
You summed up my points well.

Sorry you had to be attacked by the "I'm so sure the system is broken that I don't have to provide any evidence and I'll launch a hundred personal attacks against anyone who disagrees with me" contingent.

You'd expect more for moderators in a group.
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 09, 2008, 08:51:05 AM
>Sorry you had to be attacked by the "I'm so sure the system is
>broken that I don't have to provide any evidence and I'll
>launch a hundred personal attacks against anyone who disagrees
>with me" contingent.


So you agree that your current situation is your fault because you picked a "bad" partner, mistoffolees? Since you obviously agree with what she says, you must agree that your divorce was all your fault because of your poor judgment. If so, it's nice to see you finally accept some blame for your situation.



>You'd expect more for moderators in a group.

Stop trying to make us live up to your expectations. That's NOT what we're here for. That whiny "you disappoint me" crap might work on other boards, but it won't work here.
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 09, 2008, 12:14:06 PM
>>Sorry you had to be attacked by the "I'm so sure the
>system is
>>broken that I don't have to provide any evidence and I'll
>>launch a hundred personal attacks against anyone who
>disagrees
>>with me" contingent.

>
>So you agree that your current situation is your fault because
>you picked a "bad" partner, mistoffolees? Since you obviously
>agree with what she says, you must agree that your divorce was
>all your fault because of your poor judgment. If so,
>it's nice to see you finally accept some blame for your
>situation.

Do you ever get tired of making things up and pretending the other person said them?

Yes, much of my divorce was my ex's fault. But some of it was may fault. Divorces happen. You'd think you've have figured that out by now. But the fact that people end up getting divorced for all sorts of reasons doesn't have any bearing on how well the system works.

>
>
>
>>You'd expect more for moderators in a group.
>
>Stop trying to make us live up to your expectations. That's
>NOT what we're here for. That whiny "you disappoint me" crap
>might work on other boards, but it won't work here.

Of course not. I learned that you're not the least bit interested in an unbiased discussion of facts. This board is your site to express your unsubstantiated, biased opinions and to attack anyone who disagrees with them.

You've made that quite clear.
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 09, 2008, 05:14:45 PM
>Do you ever get tired of making things up and pretending the
>other person said them?

No one made that up. Obviously you can't read, or if you do your comprehension level is very low. She wrote (and I quote):
[blockquote]"not one single person visiting this board would be in the position they are if they had not been flawed in whom they chose for a partner in parenting their child/children."[/blockquote]
Since you agree with what she says, then you must also be agreeing with the 'fact' that your flawed 'choosing skills' are to blame for your divorce. Personally that's one of the stupidest things I've heard in a long time. But apparently you find it valid.



>But the fact that people end up getting
>divorced for all sorts of reasons doesn't have any bearing on
>how well the system works.

Again, your comprehension is appallingly low. No one said that the reasons for divorce had any bearing on "how well the system works". Read again, and this time pay attention.




>Of course not. I learned that you're not the least bit
>interested in an unbiased discussion of facts.

What I'm not interested in is your ceaseless load of self-important bullshit.


>This board is your site to express your unsubstantiated, biased
>opinions and to attack anyone who disagrees with them.

No, that's what you use it for. I do reserve to call BS on people like you who can't be bothered to consider anyone else's opinion or experiences valid. If you'd been paying attention at all then you'd that I rarely post here or get involved in the discussions. Almost never. But even I have limits and I've had my fill of your holier-than-thou attitude and "I know it all" behavior.



>You've made that quite clear.

Apparently not clear enough so you'll take a hint. That's because you don't care what anyone else says or thinks...in your world it's only what mistoffolees believes in that counts. And that's why you can't seem to let go of this. It's another fine quality you display that probably helped sink your marriage like a torpedo below the waterline.

Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: mistoffolees on Jan 09, 2008, 05:20:17 PM
>>Do you ever get tired of making things up and pretending
>the
>>other person said them?
>
>No one made that up. Obviously you can't read, or if you do
>your comprehension level is very low. She wrote (and I
>quote):
>[blockquote]"not one single person visiting this board
>would be in the position they are if they had not been flawed
>in whom they chose for a partner in parenting their
>child/children."
[/blockquote]
>Since you agree with what she says, then you must also be
>agreeing with the 'fact' that your flawed 'choosing skills'
>are to blame for your divorce. Personally that's one of the
>stupidest things I've heard in a long time. But apparently you
>find it valid.

Only because your logical thinking skills are so poor. The fact that your choice was flawed doesn't mean that you are to blame - unless you expect perfection.

Excluding those who are perfect (since you obviously consider yourself to be perfect), EVERYONE is imperfect - or flawed.


>
>
>
>
>>Of course not. I learned that you're not the least bit
>>interested in an unbiased discussion of facts.
>
>What I'm not interested in is your ceaseless load of
>self-important bullshit.
>
>
>>This board is your site to express your unsubstantiated,
>biased
>>opinions and to attack anyone who disagrees with them.
>
>No, that's what you use it for. I do reserve to call BS on
>people like you who can't be bothered to consider anyone
>else's opinion or experiences valid. If you'd been paying
>attention at all then you'd that I rarely post here or get
>involved in the discussions. Almost never. But even I
>have limits and I've had my fill of your holier-than-thou
>attitude and "I know it all" behavior.

Funny, but I'm simply pointing out that your not perfect. Almost everyone in the world knows that they're not perfect (I've already admitted that I'm not) except you.

>
>
>
>>You've made that quite clear.
>
>Apparently not clear enough so you'll take a hint. That's
>because you don't care what anyone else says or thinks...in
>your world it's only what mistoffolees believes in that
>counts. And that's why you can't seem to let go of this. It's
>another fine quality you display that probably helped sink
>your marriage like a torpedo below the waterline.

Once again, you're pretending you know something about a situation that you know nothing about. I'm terribly sorry I'm not perfect like you.
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 09, 2008, 08:43:13 PM
>The fact that your choice was flawed doesn't mean that you are to
>blame - unless you expect perfection.


Well, that's what she said, and you agreed with her.


>Excluding those who are perfect (since you obviously consider
>yourself to be perfect), EVERYONE is imperfect - or flawed.


There you go, making stuff up again.



>Funny, but I'm simply pointing out that your not perfect.

Never said I was, but that won't stop you from claiming such a thing. (I'm not surprised, since you never let facts get in the way of your diatribes.) Let's see who's making things up, shall we? I'll give you cash money if you can show me where I ever said I'm perfect. Show me the post mistoffolees, or admit you're just making it up as you go along.



>Almost everyone in the world knows that they're not perfect
>(I've already admitted that I'm not) except you.


Zzzzzzzzzzz. Wake me when you have something interesting to say.



>I'm terribly sorry I'm not perfect like you.

I forgive you for being so deeply flawed. lol :)


Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: escape2paradise on Jan 13, 2008, 12:13:02 AM
>>Guess what folks, not one single person visiting
>>this board would be in the position they are if they had not
>>been flawed in whom they chose for a partner in parenting
>>their child/children.  

>
>So, it's their fault for not knowing that their partner would
>develop a drug habit, become an alcoholic, or turn out to be a
>screwup? It's their fault for not being able to predict that?
>How are you supposed to know in advance? Please tell me,
>because I'll write a book and make a million dollars.

You know what there are always instances where situations come out of the blue, but for the most part people ignore the red flags in a relationship and marry anyway cause they are soooo in loooove and it will all work out!  WRONG!  People don't change overnight!

>
>
>
>>The system is not perfect and Mist does not deny that.
>There
>>is no one system that will be perfect for everybody.  

>
>No one said there was or would be any system that will be
>perfect for everybody.  Where in the world did you hear anyone
>say that?


All I hear is you complaining that the system is broke la ti da.  If there is no system that will be perfect then I guess this one is as good as the next.

>
>
>
>>I have yet to hear any suggestions from any of the
>naysayers
>>posting as to what would make the system better.  

>
>Maybe not in this thread, but various suggestions have been
>being put forth for YEARS. Please, give me a break. Just
>because you don't hear it here doesn't mean it hasn't
>happened.

It doesn't matter, there will be problems and unhappy people no matter what system is in place.
>
>
>>Anything you
>>come up with may be a positive for some, but inherently will
>>be a negative for others.  

>
>Thank you, Captain Obvious.
>
>
>
>
>>For instance I am apauled at my situation in that I don't
>>think my X should have ever been allowed to start the
>custody
>>action against me in the first place.

>
>What, he should be forced to stay married to you and you to
>him? What gain is there in that? Should only one parent have
>the power to initiate divorce proceedings? Which one, and why?
>How will this sort of thing be fairly determined?

Who said anything about divorce.  We have not been together for 13 yrs.  I have raised DD by myself.  Now he wants to be a real daddy!  It may have been fairly determined 13yrs ago if he had given a damn.  Why the hell should he be allowed to waltz in this much later and cause the strife and financial burden when he hasn't taken any responsibilty thus far.  
>
>
>
>
>>I on the other hand have provided a safe loving home for
>the
>>child for all her 13 yrs.  I have encouraged the X's
>>involvement and his family's.  I have provided completely
>for
>>the financials and necessaties for said child.  The child is
>a
>>well adjusted straight A student who participates in
>numerous
>>sports and extracurriculars.  

>
>Well, since the Family Court system is so fair and just, they
>should see this and you should surely prevail, right? *cough*
>It's at least as fair as the child support system. Oh,
>wait....

Yes, I surely will prevail.  The GAL see's the writing on the wall. I wouldn't know about the CS system as I don't get a dime from the X.  

>
>
>
>>However, for every
>>thousand people who have been let down there are 100
>thousand
>>that it has worked for just as it was intended.

>
>As mistoffolees is so fond of saying, "Show me the evidence".
>You're just pulling those figures out of your butt. Show me
>the proof or stats to back your claim up. Otherwise expect
>mistoffolees to berate you for making unsubstantiated claims.

I wasn't stating it as solid numbers.  I am just giving an example.  You are just so used to only hearing the negative side of these cases as those are the people here with issues.  The ones that things work out fine for don't feel the need to come on message boards and tell everybody how hunky dory things are going.
>
>
>
>
>>The flaw that
>>starts it all is the parents and the choices they make.

>
>That's certainly true in some cases, but not in all. To make a
>blanket statement like that is both ignorant and ridiculous.

Yes, the choice they make to have sex and reproduce with another individual.  Don't give me the crap about I didn't choose to have a baby with that moron.  Grow up!  If your willing to have the sex you better ask yourself "would I want to have a baby with this person?" if the answer is "no" put your clothes back on!
>
>
>
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: escape2paradise on Jan 13, 2008, 12:22:20 AM
>You summed up my points well.
>
>Sorry you had to be attacked by the "I'm so sure the system is
>broken that I don't have to provide any evidence and I'll
>launch a hundred personal attacks against anyone who disagrees
>with me" contingent.
>
>You'd expect more for moderators in a group.
 
No problem! It's actually been rather entertaining listening to the rantings!  Yes, this particular moderator seems just a tad unbalanced in both logic and mental capacity!  Ahh well, some people can't stop themselves. If this individual was anything like this in court, I can see why they were very unhappy with the outcome!!!
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 13, 2008, 08:49:03 AM
>>You'd expect more for moderators in a group.

Get a clue. As I mentioned earlier, we're not here to live up to your expectations. If you're unable to grasp that concept, there are plenty of other divorce and custody boards for you to go whine on. Please feel free to spread your wisdom on one of them- I'm sure it will be given the deep appreciation it deserves.



>No problem! It's actually been rather entertaining listening
>to the rantings!  Yes, this particular moderator seems just a
>tad unbalanced in both logic and mental capacity!


I see...and you got your Armchair Psychology degree from what university? Also, just for the record, I'm not a moderator. I'm the administrator. (That's why my posting name says "SPARC Admin". I realize that may have been too tricky for you to figure out.)



>If this individual was
>anything like this in court, I can see why they were very
>unhappy with the outcome!!!


Unfortunately for you, this shows just how uninformed you really are.

Actually I've been very happy with my "outcome" in court.  I was given sole custody of my son, and I don't pay child support, I receive it. (Or I would if my ex would pay it, but that rarely happens.)

So basically, you haven't gotten a single thing right. Try paying a little more attention next time so you can keep up.







Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 13, 2008, 09:06:19 AM
>You know what there are always instances where situations come
>out of the blue,


Thank you for admitting that, and for contradicting yourself.


>People don't change overnight!

Actually, some people do. You're obviously not very experienced when it comes to humans.




>All I hear is you complaining that the system is broke la ti
>da.  If there is no system that will be perfect then I guess
>this one is as good as the next.


By your way of "thinking", we should all go back to oil lamps and horse drawn carts. (It was a good system.) Your ignorance it breathtaking and your endless supply of foolish statements is positively amusing. If this is the way you think, no wonder you picked a loser.





>It doesn't matter, there will be problems and unhappy people
>no matter what system is in place.


That's so profound. And your point is what, exactly?




>Yes, I surely will prevail.

Lol, famous last words. The system might work in this instance. Anything is possible.



>The GAL see's the writing on the
>wall. I wouldn't know about the CS system as I don't get a
>dime from the X.


Neither do I. My ex rarely pays any support. Does Support Enforcement do anything? Nope. So, as you can see, the system is working fine.



>I wasn't stating it as solid numbers.  I am just giving an
>example.


Oh, a personal anecdote? Personal experience? Sorry, but by mistoffolees standards, you fail.



>If your
>willing to have the sex you better ask yourself "would I want
>to have a baby with this person?" if the answer is "no" put
>your clothes back on!


Too bad for the world you didn't do that. And I guess you were too ignorant to use birth control, too. Yeah, you're just the person we should all be listening too on matters like this. *cough*

Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: escape2paradise on Jan 16, 2008, 04:20:51 PM
My the anger and hostility.  Hon I've got better things to do than trying to figure out your job description.  If the system is so broken, how did you manage to come out so far ahead of your X?  Are you saying the X got screwed thanks to you?
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: olanna on Jan 16, 2008, 07:10:00 PM
His kid came out ahead. He spent a ton of money on atty's to get his kid out of an unsafe and unhealthy situation, hence the main reason for founding this site as a resource, for the parents of children in the same situation.

Instead of arguing, why not spend a few minutes reading?
Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 16, 2008, 07:18:45 PM
>My the anger and hostility.  

Yes, I noticed that about you. Maybe you should look into some counseling.



>Hon I've got better things to do
>than trying to figure out your job description.  

Then please go do them and stop wasting everyone's time here.



>If the system is so broken, how did you
>manage to come out so far ahead of your X?  

Because I'm a better parent, and even as screwed up as the system is, once in a while it manages to work.



>Are you saying the X got screwed thanks to you?

No, she screwed herself.

Title: RE: Had to respond to the thread...
Post by: SPARC Admin on Jan 16, 2008, 07:19:50 PM

>Instead of arguing, why not spend a few minutes reading?

I don't think that's one of her strong points, to be blunt about it. :)
Title: HIP HIP ...
Post by: FatherTime on Jan 17, 2008, 12:49:39 AM
Who?Ray!


I just want to quote you and see if you are a woman of your words.

"I'm done with this."

To be honest it sounds too good to be true.


There are signs everywhere in the U.S. that show how the lack of fathers participation in the lives of their children IS  a real problem.  Increase in Gangs and teenage pregnancy are examples of this.  The blissful ignorant people don't know any better.  

See my site for evidence in music: http://www.geopics.net/fathertime

The court systems are in disagreement on what is in the best interests of the children.  50 states and 50 different rule books.  The breakdown starts at the state welfare system.  It goes through the "win at all costs" systems of court determination of custody.  Laws are interpreted by commissioners and judges who are in essence, the primary factor in the breakdown of the REAL child support system, both parents.  The judges and commissioners create case law, which trumps the legislative law.

When I went on one of my local television stations ten years ago on this very issue.  I spoke of gender discrimination.  The commissioner responded with a statement as to how Yakima County is more traditional and how fathers don't ask for custody.  Slavery was (is) traditional too, but that didn't make it right.  I asked for custody and was denied.  

IT is what it is .... and it's a crying shame.

It's ..
FatherTime