It might be best to post your question on the main Child Support Board (http://www.deltabravo.net/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=163), unless it's specifically a Minnesota-related question.
- Welcome to SPARC Forums.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
#2
Louisiana State Forum / Message from Louisiana Dads
Jul 03, 2004, 06:21:57 AM
Louisiana Dads
Saturday July 3, 2004
P. O. Box 216 Milton La. 70558
//www.ladads.org
Member ACFC
Children need BOTH Parents
Happy Independence Day!!
Topic: Louisiana Dads, LCF and others to hold a press Conference.
Dear Group;
In a House and Senate Conference Committee on the LAST DAY of the session, 3 senators and 3 representatives REMOVED any safe guards that SB 633 had amended to it. The bill was restored to its original form and rushed through both the house and senate. This bill is being called for not by DSS, but by Ouachita Parish District Attorney Jerry Jones.
Louisiana Dads, LCF, and other organizations are holding a press conference on Tuesday July 5, 2004 at 10:00 am in front of the Governor's Mansion in Baton Rouge. This will be to announce to the media our displeasure with SB 633 and request Gov. Blanco to VETO it!! We are requesting that ALL members show up Tuesday morning in front of the Governors Mansion and just stand behind us in support. Signs to veto SB 633 would be great!!
I know it is the first day of work back for a lot of you, but you MUST get there to help STOP this bill!!! Gov. Blanco MUST VETO SB 633 or our unemployed, disabled, and returning National Guardsmen will be arrested by greedy District Attorneys. Ouachita Parish YOU have to most to fear! Jerry Jones is pushing this bill so you WILL be targeted. If he can't run his office with the funds he has that is not our children's fault. If some rich person is out there shirking their responsibility to their children then fine, lock them up, but it should not be a crime to be unemployed or in the National Guard!! This is simply a money grab by them to get YOUR money and matching federal funds. THIS IS NOT ABOUT CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT!! How do we know this? An effort to make the fines in the bill go towards payment of support was KILLED in the legislature. This is about getting the DA offices money at the EXPENSE of your children. There are better ways to do this.
IF by chance you can not make it. We want to FLOOD the capitol switchboard with as many phones calls and emails as we can. Mothers, Grandmothers, Aunts and Uncles must also call. The more women who call the better. Here are the numbers.
Office of the Governor.
The fax number to the gov's office is 225-342-7099.
To send and email. http://www.gov.state.la.us/govemail.asp
If Gov Blanco allows this to become law, the DA's will lock up hundreds of people who, through no fault of their own, can't pay their full amount of support. Fines will be HUGE, and in the end, collections will not go up that much. What is needed is a realistic assessment of support obligations, the money to be accounted for and spent ONLY on the children, and for BOTH parents to be a part of their children's lives on as equal a basis as possible. ONLY THEN will we stop this epidemic of divorce and rescue our children.
Thanks and God Bless;
Derek
Saturday July 3, 2004
P. O. Box 216 Milton La. 70558
//www.ladads.org
Member ACFC
Children need BOTH Parents
Happy Independence Day!!
Topic: Louisiana Dads, LCF and others to hold a press Conference.
Dear Group;
In a House and Senate Conference Committee on the LAST DAY of the session, 3 senators and 3 representatives REMOVED any safe guards that SB 633 had amended to it. The bill was restored to its original form and rushed through both the house and senate. This bill is being called for not by DSS, but by Ouachita Parish District Attorney Jerry Jones.
Louisiana Dads, LCF, and other organizations are holding a press conference on Tuesday July 5, 2004 at 10:00 am in front of the Governor's Mansion in Baton Rouge. This will be to announce to the media our displeasure with SB 633 and request Gov. Blanco to VETO it!! We are requesting that ALL members show up Tuesday morning in front of the Governors Mansion and just stand behind us in support. Signs to veto SB 633 would be great!!
I know it is the first day of work back for a lot of you, but you MUST get there to help STOP this bill!!! Gov. Blanco MUST VETO SB 633 or our unemployed, disabled, and returning National Guardsmen will be arrested by greedy District Attorneys. Ouachita Parish YOU have to most to fear! Jerry Jones is pushing this bill so you WILL be targeted. If he can't run his office with the funds he has that is not our children's fault. If some rich person is out there shirking their responsibility to their children then fine, lock them up, but it should not be a crime to be unemployed or in the National Guard!! This is simply a money grab by them to get YOUR money and matching federal funds. THIS IS NOT ABOUT CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT!! How do we know this? An effort to make the fines in the bill go towards payment of support was KILLED in the legislature. This is about getting the DA offices money at the EXPENSE of your children. There are better ways to do this.
IF by chance you can not make it. We want to FLOOD the capitol switchboard with as many phones calls and emails as we can. Mothers, Grandmothers, Aunts and Uncles must also call. The more women who call the better. Here are the numbers.
Office of the Governor.
The fax number to the gov's office is 225-342-7099.
To send and email. http://www.gov.state.la.us/govemail.asp
If Gov Blanco allows this to become law, the DA's will lock up hundreds of people who, through no fault of their own, can't pay their full amount of support. Fines will be HUGE, and in the end, collections will not go up that much. What is needed is a realistic assessment of support obligations, the money to be accounted for and spent ONLY on the children, and for BOTH parents to be a part of their children's lives on as equal a basis as possible. ONLY THEN will we stop this epidemic of divorce and rescue our children.
Thanks and God Bless;
Derek
#3
Florida State Forum / RE: Vocational Evaluation
Jan 11, 2004, 05:57:49 AM>I want to request a vocational evaluation.
>Is this admissible is the state of Florida??
I don't see why it wouldn't be, and I'd gop ahead and request one.
#4
California State Forum / Nope, not alone :)
Dec 03, 2003, 07:56:34 AM
The site just changed over to a new set of message boards, so it'll be a while before people start trickling in here.
#5
Child Support Issues / Unfair to dads? You Bet!
Aug 25, 2004, 10:34:05 AM
Only MEN pay child support, and this proves it. How can ANYONE look at this and not scream "UNFAIR!!"?
What about all the men who've had "informal agreements" to have a child with a woman? How come they have to pay support? Oh, that's right- it's because they're MEN.
BOSTON -- A woman who agreed to have a child with her lesbian partner, but split up with the mother before the baby's birth, cannot be forced to pay child support, the state's highest court ruled Wednesday.
The split ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court -- which legalized gay marriage in a landmark ruling last year -- comes in the case of a Hampshire County lesbian couple, identified in court documents as "T.F." and "B.L.," who lived together from 1996 to 2000.
B.L. at first resisted T.F.'s wishes to have a child, but later changed her mind.
The couple broke up after T.F. got pregnant by artificial insemination. After the baby was born, T.F. sued her former partner for child support. A Probate and Family Court judge turned to the state Appeals Court, which in turned passed the case the case up to the Supreme Judicial Court.
Associate Justice Judith A. Cowin wrote that the informal agreement between the two women to have a child together did not constitute an enforceable contract, and B.L. can't be forced to pay child support.
Three justices -- including Chief Justice Margaret Marshall, who wrote the ruling legalizing same-sex marriage in Massachusetts -- disagreed with the majority conclusion, saying that the implied contract between the woman is enforceable.
"The child may have been abandoned by the defendant, but he should not be abandoned by the court," Justice John M. Greaney wrote in the dissent.
Copyright © 2004, The Associated
What about all the men who've had "informal agreements" to have a child with a woman? How come they have to pay support? Oh, that's right- it's because they're MEN.
BOSTON -- A woman who agreed to have a child with her lesbian partner, but split up with the mother before the baby's birth, cannot be forced to pay child support, the state's highest court ruled Wednesday.
The split ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court -- which legalized gay marriage in a landmark ruling last year -- comes in the case of a Hampshire County lesbian couple, identified in court documents as "T.F." and "B.L.," who lived together from 1996 to 2000.
B.L. at first resisted T.F.'s wishes to have a child, but later changed her mind.
The couple broke up after T.F. got pregnant by artificial insemination. After the baby was born, T.F. sued her former partner for child support. A Probate and Family Court judge turned to the state Appeals Court, which in turned passed the case the case up to the Supreme Judicial Court.
Associate Justice Judith A. Cowin wrote that the informal agreement between the two women to have a child together did not constitute an enforceable contract, and B.L. can't be forced to pay child support.
Three justices -- including Chief Justice Margaret Marshall, who wrote the ruling legalizing same-sex marriage in Massachusetts -- disagreed with the majority conclusion, saying that the implied contract between the woman is enforceable.
"The child may have been abandoned by the defendant, but he should not be abandoned by the court," Justice John M. Greaney wrote in the dissent.
Copyright © 2004, The Associated
#6
Child Support Issues / RE: HMMMMM
Aug 16, 2004, 11:09:15 AM
>Sounds to me like he's for making it easier for women to keep
>milking money out of their ex husbands and continuing the
>deadbeat Dad myth.
Although it's very carefully worded so as to be "gender neutral", that's what I'd guess too. You can never go wrong demonizing 'deadbeat dads' and as a politician Kerry knows this all too well.
>milking money out of their ex husbands and continuing the
>deadbeat Dad myth.
Although it's very carefully worded so as to be "gender neutral", that's what I'd guess too. You can never go wrong demonizing 'deadbeat dads' and as a politician Kerry knows this all too well.
#7
Child Support Issues / RE: I'm not sure I agree
Jun 22, 2004, 08:19:35 PM
>So I think what Brent might be saying, because I find it hard
>to believe that he supports our CS system, is that you are
>suffering because people before you had a book on how to get
>around the system. But there is no way around the system. You
>have to duck your head and go streight up the middle I'm
>afraid.
That's correct. I do NOT support the current CS system, but the fact is that no book is going to make it go away. The current CS system is totally screwed up, but it's there and must be dealt with as it is. That's just plain old reality.
>to believe that he supports our CS system, is that you are
>suffering because people before you had a book on how to get
>around the system. But there is no way around the system. You
>have to duck your head and go streight up the middle I'm
>afraid.
That's correct. I do NOT support the current CS system, but the fact is that no book is going to make it go away. The current CS system is totally screwed up, but it's there and must be dealt with as it is. That's just plain old reality.
#8
Child Support Issues / Sorry, I had to remove that link
Jun 22, 2004, 11:32:26 AM
Sorry, I had to remove that link because you're posting something that's likely to make things worse for unsuspecting users who might actually believe the load of crap that you apparently fell for. See below.
>I did find the link for the book (REMOVED BY MOD) I will
>purchase this and report back my findings.
>I did find the link for the book (REMOVED BY MOD) I will
>purchase this and report back my findings.
#9
Child Support Issues / RE: I'm not sure I agree
Jun 21, 2004, 10:09:11 PM
>Does that mean you know where I can find the link?
Too late, it's been removed. We don't support scammers here and stuff like that gets deleted as soon as we become aware of it. .
>Or are you
>so wupped by the system, that you assume that anything that
>questions the child support propaganda, must be incorrect?
Don't be such a drama queen, okay? We all know that the CS laws are rigged and that support amounts are often (usually) way too high, but the fact is that no book is going to have the magic answer to making your support payments go away. It just ain't gonna happen, and I speak as someone who's dealt with this kind of stuff for years and years.
Trust me, lee, there's no $24.99 solution to stopping child support, or it would be common knowledge around here and everywhere else, too.
Too late, it's been removed. We don't support scammers here and stuff like that gets deleted as soon as we become aware of it. .
>Or are you
>so wupped by the system, that you assume that anything that
>questions the child support propaganda, must be incorrect?
Don't be such a drama queen, okay? We all know that the CS laws are rigged and that support amounts are often (usually) way too high, but the fact is that no book is going to have the magic answer to making your support payments go away. It just ain't gonna happen, and I speak as someone who's dealt with this kind of stuff for years and years.
Trust me, lee, there's no $24.99 solution to stopping child support, or it would be common knowledge around here and everywhere else, too.
#10
Child Support Issues / As I said on the other board, you're in the wrong place.
Jun 21, 2004, 05:20:55 PM
>I saw a link on this board that was for a book that describes
>how to beat the child support system.
I'd be surprised if you saw a link for that here, unless it was someone alerting others to a scam.
>I have looked all over
>and I can not find it. Can someone help me with a link.
In a word, "nope". We're not here to help anyone avoid paying child support or "beat the system". First of all, because it really can't be done, no matter what they say.
Use your head for a moment- if there was really a book you could buy for $24.95 or whatever that would actually show you how to get out of paying child support, don't you think everyone would have heard about it?? It would be famous and well-known. The fact is that there is no book that can actually show you how to do this (but there are plenty that will make that claim)
Secondly, we DO NOT help people to evade paying their child support. We just don't, and that's that. If you want that kind of help, you're in the wrong place.
>how to beat the child support system.
I'd be surprised if you saw a link for that here, unless it was someone alerting others to a scam.
>I have looked all over
>and I can not find it. Can someone help me with a link.
In a word, "nope". We're not here to help anyone avoid paying child support or "beat the system". First of all, because it really can't be done, no matter what they say.
Use your head for a moment- if there was really a book you could buy for $24.95 or whatever that would actually show you how to get out of paying child support, don't you think everyone would have heard about it?? It would be famous and well-known. The fact is that there is no book that can actually show you how to do this (but there are plenty that will make that claim)
Secondly, we DO NOT help people to evade paying their child support. We just don't, and that's that. If you want that kind of help, you're in the wrong place.