mother kills teens then self

[catherine]

I agreed with Bolivar that men and women should have equal custody rights.  I believe in the presumption of joint custody barring that both parents are fit.  I agreed that women kill their own children more then men.  I agreed that it's not right that an NCP should be the only one who financially supports the children.

However, I put my own thoughts into why these things are the way they are.  Is that wrong?  Have you MSD, lived on both sides of the equation, a CP and NCP?  My theory has long been that if one is a crappy CP, they will be a crappy NCP and it's proven 100% true in our own case.  I don't think it's a gender problem, it's a "once an ahole always an ahole" thing.  My husband and I have FELT your pain of not seeing the kids and having a controlling bitch in your life.

What is with this statement, MSD:
"You seem to have many opinions..."

And you don't?  

And you're not trying to cause "trouble"?

Care to explain?

[catherine]

I shouldn't answer people back when they ask me questions?  

[Stepmom0418]

As another poster has already said.......you are only here to cause trouble.

This was an informational post and there are people who post things like this all the time here.

If you dont like what is posted here maybe you should find another site to go hang out at cause we are all here to learn and try and change things with the current system!! EQUAL RIGHTS for mothers and fathers alike!!!!!!

[MYSONSDAD]

You have many opinions regarding a simple article. And yes, I have many opinions, but don't go on the defense so quickly. Usually sit back and wait to see what developes.

Showing facts is trying to avoid more conflict...Bottom line, men face many obsticles and bias in most areas of the courts.

And what about you, CP? NCP? I am NCP, would love to see the other side of things. Many fathers would relish that, but will never have a chance to prove that they could be the better parent. I know I am the better parent, basing this on facts.

Bias has never been my issue on these boards. MANY stepmoms, grandmothers, aunts, sisters and NCP moms that are all here fighting for the same cause. They see what fathers deal with.

If things upset you on what is posted, go on to another forum...

"Children learn what they live"

[catherine]

Such resistance.  Lady, look at my post count - well over 1800.  You have 215.  I am not a newbie here.  Don't tell me to "go away" - I don't see what I said that was so offensive to begin with.

Stop the handholding and back patting!

[catherine]

because you are holding onto to past incidents.

Look, I'm not stepping into anything.  I "picked apart" Bol's post to me, not the articles.

I had a few extra minutes at the end of my day and posted back to people.... and got crucified for it, apparently.

[MYSONSDAD]

Stepmom has been a valued, respected member of these boards for quite some time. It does not matter how long you have been here and how many posts you've made. It is the information and knowledge you share, the willingness to help others that make you an important asset.

If you can not see how you offend, then I feel sorry for you...

"Children learn what they live"

[MYSONSDAD]

"Children learn what they live"

[kitten]

>>>My premise:
>1.  A child needs 2 FIT parents to raise them.  A FIT mother
>and a FIT father.  Both FIT parents are EQUAL in nuturing the
>children.
>2.  Both parents "SHOULD" share equally in monetarily
>supporting the children, EXCEPT FOR in cases of divorce in
>which one parent gave up career paths to be a SAH parent for
>the child(ren).  That parent is at a disadvantage fiancially
>and can not be expected to be as a high an earner as the other
>post divorce.  I propose that after a set amount of time,
>things are considered equal in ability to earn.

1.  Both parents were deemed fit in Will's case, yet court allowed children to be moved 3000 miles away and only see him 10 weeks per year.  
2.  Will paid for her college education so she could fulfill her dream of being a teacher.  Quit her job because she was "tired" of working.  She has very good earnings potential, but no order from the court to resume her career so that she may share financial resposibilities equally.  



>>> Bolivar, I know many NCP's that do not pay.  When they do,
>they pay a very small amount, just enough for the enforcement
>proceedings to squeak by.  An NCP must be VERY deliquent in
>supporting their child before they will ever go to jail.  Not
>only that, but I have read many stories when the CP parent
>chooses to stay home, their income is still imputed.

>>> Personally, when my DH was the NCP, he paid her $866 a
>month for 2 children and was never late and volunatrily had a
>wage garnishment.  For a little over 2 1/2 years he has been
>the CP, firstly, he voluntarily gave her one year CS free, to
>help her get on her feet.  Once the CS wasn't rolling in, she
>went into major financial despair and actually had 2 cars
>repo'ed.  Since that time, he went to CSE and it took them
>another year to get a hearing.  Because of the way the
>agreement was worded, she went into arrears for that year she
>was supposed to be paying.  In the last 6 months or so, we've
>seen her quit two jobs, and only make about 2 months full
>payments.  And her payment is only $360 a month for the same
>two children.

Hmm...Will pays over $1600.00/mo. for 3 kids, overpaid a few times and didn't get it back, never refused to pay, never paid late yet had his wages garnished without warning.  Also pays $400.00/mo. to maintain health insurance for the children, she pays nothing.  
>
>>> in our case I will say that your statement that the NCP is
>the only one who is mandated to pay CS is wrong, wrong, wrong.
> I think you should say that the parent who is responsible and
>has the children's best interests at heart is usually the one
>who takes the financial burden, regardless if they are NCP or
>CP.
and is usually the one who loses the children to PB ex and a corrupt court system.
>
>If the NCP is not making payments, the CP can go to the
>government and
>get assistants.
>>> And that's wrong?  How would you expect a single CP to get
>a full time job that would cover daycare bills, lawyer bills,
>and everything else if they are very poor to begin with?

How do you expect a NCP to live on only %50 of his take home pay?

>>> False again, a majority of states use the shared income
>model, and not just a straight % of the NCP's salary.
Yes, but the judge can choose not to.

>>> The laws fail on both sides of the equation.  I really can
>say I haven't read of any alternative propsed laws that make
>any better sense or cover all the loopholes.  Minus, of course
>the presumption of shared parenting, unless one parent can be
>proven to be unfit.

Once again, neither parent in our case was proven unfit, 10 weeks out of 52 is NOT shared parenting.

[Stepmom0418]

I could care less how many posts you have.........It is the information one provides and how they provide it that really matters!! I came here seeking help for myself and my DH and there are many here that have GOOD advise ........you are not one of them people. I have also offered advise to those who have needed it as well.

Throughout this whole thread you were being critical of Brent and of MSD! Some of us do like to keep up on what is going on in the world, no matter what the information is about. If you dont like reading the informational posts then dont read them and you sure as hell dont have to post your sarcastic remarks either. As I said before some of us enjoy reading the post!!

Come to think of it I havent seen you here hardly at all since I came here! What do you do come around and stir trouble, leave and then pop back in and cause troube again??

I am a consistant member on this board. Here almost everyday and don't plan on leaving!!