To Moms W/O Custody

[POC]

One of the reasons I chose ParentOfChild (POC) as my user name was that I always wanted to make it clear that I was not asking for anything as a father that I did not think mothers should have too. I hope the focus of this forum will always be not to ask for things for mothers that you would also not want fathers to have. There are two primary areas that would make things fairer and better for those involved, especially children:

1) Presumptive equal parenting time - long/short, in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the court of wrong-doing, parents should share as equal of parenting time as is practical.

2) Child support should place more importance on providing for the needs of children at each parent's home than it does on a parental label. Custodial parent support is a more accurate term than child support is. Only CP's receive it, and there is no requirement that it even be spent on children.

Apply these two common sense approaches to family law and Waylon could start a different type of website.

[MixedBag]

Hmmm...I'm not sure I totally agree with your two points.

For #1 -- you still say "In the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the court of wrong-doing" and that's the part that bugs me.  Too many "parents" out there still accuse the other of wrong doing and it's all a crock of lies (and I'm talking abuse).  DH (IMHO) is the victim of false allegations.

What about other reasons where there is gray area "wrong doing"....

Like the Parent who has an affair?  Courts don't care yet it's a reason for divorce.

Like the Parent who racks up all the credit cards and forgets to provide for the family?  Courts don't care....

I agree that the going in assumption should be 50/50 in terms of TIME with the children -- and we don't have that in any of our three divorces (and honestly couldn't due to our military careers at the time of the divorce, BUT we could have received more time than we did.)

#2  Well, if you had 50/50 going in, then it could be considered more of a custodial parent support because support would still be exchanged unless the incomes were the same.  But you don't have 50/50....

I believe that Waylon (this site) is already headed in that direction and has been for YEARS and it started when the overall name change to reflect the true focus....children and PARENTS

[POC]

Wow, mixedbag.

I see why you choase your username. I am completely confused as to what it is that you are asking. Waht I read into your reply is that "some" parents tell a bunch of lies by accusing the other parent of wrong-doing. That is just one reason why I said, "clear and convincing evidence". Accusations must be beyond refute to be clear and convincing. I am not saying the assumption should be 50/50. You are reading too much into it. I said that in the absence of clear and convincing evidence of wrong-doing, the time sharing arrangement should be as close to 50/50 as is practical - there is a difference.

It is custodial parent support because, currently you have to be a CP to receive it, and it does not even have to be spent on kids. They might as well hand the check over and wink at the same time.

As for Waylon, bless his tired sole, I am convinced his work will not be done for far too long.

[MixedBag]

It's funny -- I responded without any attacks...and politely did so without calling you a single name.

Yet, you said "I see why you choase your username."

Sorry, but that was uncalled for.

I stand by my opinion and if you don't understand it, that's fine.

[gr8Dad]

Could his statement have been based on the fact that you END your posts with, "A true "Mixed Bag" -- CP/MOM, NCP/MOM, Step-CP/MOM, and a Step-NCP/MOM -- 6 kids, 2 step-grandchildren and 4 dogs."?

And how about the FACT that you COMPLETELY ignored his statement about clear and convincing evidence, and started talking about false accusations?

If you look for the negative, you will ALWAYS find it...

[kitten]

She just wants to argue and be right.  No wonder she's got so many problems.

[Butterfly]

Oh my...

What relevance does MixedBag's signature line have with the price of tea in China?

And before you go off half-cocked again...let me clarify what I mean by that...

The price of tea in China" is an expression which is used to denote something which is unrelated to the current topic of discussion.

Please, please, please...if you would answer me this then please explain why you appear so ready and willing to start a fight in this forum?  

You do realize gr8Dad, that MixedBag has been a respected member of the SPARC community for years now just like you, right?

Are you even willing to offer support and positive assistance here or does that only happen on the Father's Issues board and/or the Custody Reform website?

[Butterfly]

Interesting assertion considering that I had the same thoughts about what you've been posting...not only in this forum but you took your dissension from this board over to the Father's Issues board to continue the 'fight'.  

Note:  No one was interested enough in debating your misguided notions over there because the fight wouldn't produce any positive fruit for our energy invested...there is a Dilbert quote that comes immediately to mind...

"Never argue with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level
then beat you with experience."
- Dilbert

[Butterfly]

I agree with shared parenting when there is 'clear and convincing evidence' that BOTH parents are healthy, fit parents to a shared child.

Also, I agree that there is a disparity in how the financial responsibility for a shared child is being enforced however I cannot offer up, yet, a better way to hold both parents responsible for their fair share of the child care costs.

How would you change the current child support laws that effectively meets the actual needs of the child and enforces financial responsibility for a child on BOTH divorced parents?

[MixedBag]

The mere fact that you two jump into this conversation or thread shows that you two are the ones that want to "fight" because of what happened in a previous thread....

You added nothing to this thread concerning the subject that it was started under.

C'mon...

POC's reference was to the fact that he didn't understand my opinion and had NOTHING to do with my situtation as a person who experiences being is a divorced family from all sides which is what my name reflects.

Stick to the topic -- and stay away from name calling because that's childish.