As an NCP, do you feel that child support orders are just and fair in your case and that no matter what, the CP's lifestyle should be maintained for the sake of the children?

[jilly]

"-Of the 11% of obligations that are in arrears, 15% are erroneous (the parent doesn't owe anything)."

If I understand the original post correctly, this is exactly the problem.  The State is trying to collect money that has already been paid and the payor is having a heck of a time convincing them he doesn't owe the money.

[cinb85]

He does NOT pay his child support payments (owes over $35,000), yet he is ENTITLED to government assistance and social services.  Apparently it goes both ways!

[mistoffolees]

>"-Of the 11% of obligations that are in arrears, 15% are
>erroneous (the parent doesn't owe anything)."
>
>If I understand the original post correctly, this is exactly
>the problem.  The State is trying to collect money that has
>already been paid and the payor is having a heck of a time
>convincing them he doesn't owe the money.


So in 1% of the cases, there's an error. And those errors were readily identified by the surveyors. There's nothing in the report that says that 'the payor is having a heck of a time convincing them....'.

I agree that this is a problem and should be addressed. I don't agree that an error rate of 1% constitutes a system that's broken beyond repair.

[mistoffolees]

Absolutely. The system has problems. I've never claimed that it's perfect (nor has anyone else).

But the evidence is that it works most of the time.

[Davy]

Uhm... You just confirmed my point since HE owes over $35k.  Why doesn't the government and/or social services provide support for children of NCP's like they do for CP's.

I have a friend (retired) that volunteers for social services thru his church. Much of his caseload are CP's that have lost their jobs.  In almost all cases the CP is receiving full support.  He establishes a workable budget, works with utilitiy companys, apt. managers, helps  with child care arrangements, medical issues, etc. etc. etc.  At times
he ( and his still employed wife) make cash donations in desperation.

In MOST cases the NCP was DISENFRANCHISED years ago and has no idea the condition of his children while becoming a government statistic as a 'payor' or 'obligor'.  

[cinb85]

He works under the table so they can't go after him for support because he claims that he has no income.  He also works under the table, so he can get welfare, rental assistance, etc.  

My ex knows the condition of his child because I keep in touch with his family (I would keep in touch with him if I KNEW were he was at - he hides his residence so they can't arrest him for failure to pay support).  When I DID know where he was living last year, I kept in touch with him trying to get him to develop a relationship with his daughter.  He can't be bothered.
 

[Davy]

OK OK I'll repeat the post again to help you keep on topic :

... no CRIMINALIZATION should a SM CP lose her job and can not help provide her portion of support to the children. No hounding by CSE, no court appearances, no lost of driving privileges, no jail time, etc.

The 'system' you love and defend so much is designed without accountability to children or any one so ... no crime.

How does this scenario benefit children ??

Cindb your post also points out another huge failure in 'the system'.

It's very nice of you to try to get him to develop a relationship with his daughter so 'THEY' CAN ARREST HIM'.  Please try to explain how the child or any one benefits.  It appears you have bought-in to spoiled goods.
 

[Davy]

<<< As would a male CP. >>>

Dad  : Ok kids here's a large box of laundry soap.

Kids  :  Can we stretch into breakfast tomorrow morning ?!?  

[Davy]

... no CRIMINALIZATION should a SM CP lose her job and can not help provide her portion of support to the children. No hounding by CSE, no court appearances, no lost of driving privileges, no jail time, etc.

The 'system' you love and defend so much is designed without accountability to children or any one so ... no crime.

How does this scenario benefit children ??


 

[cinb85]

It hasn't worked for me.

You assumed that I want him to develop a relationship with his daughter so they can arrest him.  That's not true.  I could have had him arrested last December, but I was hoping that he would do the right thing and start paying support.  He has since moved without notifying the courts or his child of his new address (in an attempt to hide from the CS office).    When I moved I was "required" to notify the court and the NCP of my change of address.

In NJ if the NCP spend a certain amount of time with the child, they can get a break in their CS payments, so spending time with his daughter would only benefit him (not to mention the child).

Our child has NO idea that her father has ever been arrested for non-support.  If he developed a relationship with her, it would be a win-win situation for all of us (him, our daughter, and me).