I stole this....interesting question though...

[speciallady]

(this was from another board-the idea anyways)

For NCP's---
If you offered the CP continual child support in exchange for custody-would the CP in your case agree?
Meaning, NCP keeps child/ren but still pays support to CP?

I think ours would-the cash coming in but no responsibilites.

[katz]

My dh did that for the first year, he paid court ordered child support on the premise they were 50/50 parents. After the first year, and more like 98%/2% custody (dh being 98), dh went to court and got the child support dropped. His ex said if he tried to get child support from her, she would fight the custody. Basically he bought the right to keep raising his daughter I guess.

[junglechicken]

nm

[SadStepMom]

That is a good question.  I think our BM would also do it in a second, except for that fact that she knows she would then look like she just wants the money.  

[joni]

we;re trying to do that now with my SD...will let you know how it goes.

[heather2662]

Hell... in a heartbeat!!!!!!!!!!

She spends all the money on herself anyway...
new sports car for her, jewelry, clothes, ect.

My husband's name is still on the paperwork for the house and every month WE get the statement in the mail showing the $1,000+ payment is late.

BM just informed kids the other weekend (interrupted visitation to do so) that her and the new husband plan to buy a Hummer...FOR HIM. The kids responded to us saying "Yea right, where is the money for that going to come from? She tells us she can't afford to buy us school clothes this year?"

NO DOUBT at all she would take the money and be JUST FINE with no responsiblity...

The kids keep saying there is no supervision at the house anyway, BM and the SF are never home...Hell, my one SD had an overdose Jan '04 taking some of BM old Depression Med's she had been keeping.

Mark
and
Heather - IL Step Mom

[wendl]

Isn't it sad how some cp's would give up there kids for the continual cs payment and no repsonsibilities of their children.

I know many ncp's that would be happy to continue paying cs if it meant they could have their children more than crappy EOW and to be the primary residential parent.
Really sad.


**These are my opinions, they are not legal advice**

[StPaulieGirl]

From my perspective, I have so many things to say about this topic.  Back when the adult aged girls were little, I didn't know about child support.  I did know what happened when you went on welfare and public housing.  I chose the devil I knew.  My father wanted to help me, but my mother, God rest her soul, was obsessively religious.  Her advice was to pray harder when my head dented the wall studs.  She actually helped sabotage our escape in 1999.  We didn't know she had Alzheimer's.

I would give anything in this world to be well enough to take those child support payments and alimony, and shove them them down his throat.  Unfortunately, right now I need the money.

The answer to  your question is hell no.  My son will turn 17 on the 24th of September.  My little one has just turned 10.  As a matter of fact, my girl broke her leg and finger in a car wreck on 8/13.  This came several days after the last bullshit CPS visit.  Okay.  It is witnessed and admissible in court that the child wanders through the house by herself, because everyone locks themselves in their rooms at her father's house.  Very frequently they stay at 4 star hotels.  So much for fishing, hiking, or camping....of course she can't do that for awhile.

I have decided that I'm going to take my turn at screwing up visitation.  This child will not leave the premises until she is physically able to fend for herself.  She cannot tackle a full flight of stairs, nor can she get in and out of bed by herself.  She has steel rods implanted in her right thigh bone (femur), and a cast on her right hand.  Daddy can stop by.  Actually after what he and his little helper have done, they can eat Alpo and bark at the moon.

[stk_agn]

Wouldn't that be like making payment on your child as you would a house or a car?

I would love to have my children with me but I'm not willing to "buy" them back, that is wrong.

Why can't you just have 50/50 with no CS exchanged at all?

If the CP doesn't want the child/ren then why should the CP get the money?

[stk_agn]

Wouldn't that be like making payment on your child as you would a house or a car?

I would love to have my children with me but I'm not willing to "buy" them back, that is wrong.

Why can't you just have 50/50 with no CS exchanged at all?

If the CP doesn't want the child/ren then why should the CP get the money?