Messages

I hated paying my ex when my boy was young....My ex and I had the same income and we spent exactly 50% of the time caring for him. But the legal paper said she had "physical custody"....and she would not hesitate to call her lawyer if I was ONE day late.   Several years later and tens of thousand of lawyer fees later...she now pays me (of course it is less than what I paid her)...and I just know it drives her nuts for her to pay me money every week.    The good news for you is that if you are buying bras...you are looking at the tail end of the whole mess.  And take comfort that it will piss her off something fierce that some day the gravy train won't be there for her.  IT WILL END! Hang in there...

I was just about to post this, but you beat me to it.  Unbelievable.....she agrees to have the child, then changes her mind.  No child support.  Key word there is SHE!

 Rison facing 20 days for failing to pay support
 
 
   
DECATUR, Ga. (AP) - A judge ordered the arrest of former star receiver Andre Rison on Monday for failing to pay $107,000 in child support.

Superior Court Judge Cynthia Becker said Rison should be jailed for 20 days and asked that other jurisdictions outside the state assist in arresting the former football player.

Rison's attorney, Max Richardson, declined comment. Rison was not at court Monday.

An attorney for Raycoa Handley, the mother of two of Rison's children, said he thinks Rison is in Michigan or Florida.

Handley's attorney, Randy Kessler, said this is the fourth or fifth time Rison has missed a child support hearing involving Handley.

Rison last played for the Oakland Raiders in 2000, finishing with 41 catches for 606 yards and six touchdowns while helping them reach the AFC championship game. He was suspended for four games in 2001 for a repeat violation of the league's substance abuse policy and has been out of football since.

Rison, who played from 1989-2000, had 743 catches for 10,205 yards and 84 touchdowns in 12 seasons with seven teams.

I'm thinking it is $200..IF they reduce it...If they don't reduce it...then it's $209.20.

I've heard the husband being responsible if he is already paying support for the child,(and the test is done later)  but not if the child is known not to be his before it is born.  I would be interested in knowing any cases of this happening....if that were the case the woman could have child after child and have the first husband be responsible....that's just nuts!

Unless I'm missing something..you are not responsible for this other man's child.  I don't know if the judge was blowing smoke up your behind or what, but check it out with a lawyer if you can and keep us posted.  I'd be interested in the rationale behind that one!

You should only be paying support for your child.  If she tries to claim the second one is yours, then a DNA test would be in order to prove otherwise.

>Look, I'm not trying to make excuses for that mistake. His
>exGF is psycho & wouldn't even talk to him when she was
>pregnant or take his phone calls.
>
>I don't think that has any bearing on my inquiry.

Pardon my French, but bullshit! People on this site would give their right arm to get to be in their kids lives and you're telling me that because he has to pay support only THEN will he be a part of his own child's life?  Sorry, you won't get any sympathy from me.  And to answer your question, yes, he will probably have to pay back support, and the mother's income is figured into it (although I'm not sure about your state).  

>BF & I are expecting our first child together in October. BF
>has 1yr old w/exGF who has not asked for child support until
>she found out we are pregnant! She claims that if he wants
>this to go to court, he will have to pay support going back to
>day their daughter was born. Admittedly, BF has not had much
>contact w/daughter but that is what GF wanted and now he will
>pursue visitation for sure if he's going to pay support.
>
>ExGF makes more $$ than BF but also claims her income is not a
>factor in support decisions in IL, that he has to pay 20% of
>net income plus half of what she pays for daycare. She said he
>is lucky she already has baby on her medical & is not "coming
>after" him for that. [???!!!]
>
>Is this all true? I won't get into the gory details but she
>got pregnant after they broke up & were together only once
>after. He didn't want her to have this baby - she did anyway &
>wouldn't even talk to him while she was pregnant. I'm not
>saying he shouldn't take care of his responsibilities, but to
>make him pay for back to a year that he didn't even see the
>baby & she didn't ask for support & worst of all wouldn't even
>talk to him when he tried to call after the baby was born -
>how can he be held responsible for THAT? Was he supposed to
>force $$ on her? And why is his income the basis & hers not
>even a factor?
>
>Sorry, this just seems so unfair. Money is really tight for us
>as it is & we are expecting & planning a wedding & she comes
>out of the woodwork like this. Anyone know if she has her
>story straight?

Wondering why he didn't "pursue visitation" when no money was being exchanged?

Do the two of you make similar incomes?..If you do then I completely understand your point.  In either case,  you should track all the time you have with your kids and get joint physical custody....then the child support may go away.