custody and mental stability.......

[kit]

My DH and I are about to give up.  We just don't know what else to do.  DH has 50/50 custody with his ex of their (3) children ages 12, 10, and 5.  Custody has been this for about 4 years now.  Last year his ex took him to court for more support.  She was awarded $1200.00 / mo.  When they figured the support they did not give her an earning capacity because she had a letter from her family physicain saying she suffered from anxiety and stress and couldn't hold a job.  The court then awarded her the $1200.00 which is the maximum amount of support she could get if we only got the kids every other weekend.  We were not given any kind of credit for having the kids 50 % if the time.  She was also given a year to get herself healthy and if within the next 12 months she still wasn't able to work she would need to prove in court by witness testamony what her condition is.  Well, she had been turned down for SSI benefits - she claims because she made too much money from CS.  From what I understand one has nothing to do with the other.  Instead of getting "healthy" or help for her disorders she has been out going to bars and participating in dart tournaments (even traveled out of town for them) and she won an MVP award and her pic was in the newspaper, she has gotten pregnant and her 4th child is due any day now.  It is now time to go back to court but her court appointed atty is arguing that she shouldn't have to prove by witness testamony because it would be a financial harship on her.  She has another letter from another doctor saying she suffers from these disorders.  This is the third or fourth doctor she has had in one year.  She didn't stay on her meds due to the pregnancy.  We financially can no longer afford to support the kids 150% of the time.  She sends nothing to our house as far as clothing or money for field trips etc. for the 50% of the time we have them.  This is totally destroying my DH.  Can anyone point me in the direction of a web site or any where that would have information on anxiety and stress and the ability to work?  If DH would decide to fight for sole custody based on her "menta" state does anyone know if it would even be relevant that if she can't hold a job of any kind that she logically wouldn't be able to care of three children of her own, plus her boyfriends daughter who lives with them with the additional responsiblity of a new born?  DH is only wanting to get the full custody until she can get herself healthy.  Has anyone ever seen or been involved in a situation like this?  Right now we are almost at the bottom of the barrell financially.  We take the kids to all activities they participate in (at least 6 days a week) and to and from school and provide everything for them in our home.  This is by far the last thing he wants, but he is feeling like he is fighting a losing battle and he is going to have to go from being an involved parent to letting his kids live with their BM and only be an eow dad.  Financially we aren't going to have a choice.  Any advice would be welcomed and appreciated.

[ocean]

Do you have 50/50 vistitation on paper with the courts? or is it what you are doing? You need to get it written that way so you can get the credit. I would go into court with the info that she was denied SSI (maybe ask her for a copy to "prove" it to you, then you will have it for court) and a colorful calender with all the days you have the kids and receipts for the things you have been paying for in full. What are you state guidelines? You can look at the child support calculator for your state on-line. Run the numbers and bring a copy with you to court. Show them that you know the amount (if any) that you should be paying and that you have upped it for the past year but now that she is well enough to go back to work I would also mention that she has a note from a different dr then the first time. If you want to go for custody, you need to file seperately for that. You will have to prove she can not handle the kids.... Good luck!

[kit]

The 50/50 custody is in writing thru c/o.  In the state of PA the guidelines say you don't get the reduction if the NCP has the only income no matter how much time the kids are with the NCP.  This rule only applies after the income is more than a certain amount.  The only way we will be able to get a reduction is if they give her an earning capacity or we get custody.  In PA it is highly unlikely no matter what the circumstances are for a father to get custody.  As far as the SSI goes, she had applied a year ago and said she was denied.  She then said about two months ago she was denied due to making too much in CS.  Now she is saying she is waiting on an appeal hearing.  How long does a person have to file for an appeal?  I really don't know what kind of info we need to be digging up to prove she is capable of working.  I would think anyone who can handle 4/5 kids should be able to work.  She only has hers 1/2 the time and they are all in school so that isn't going to be an issue.  She's a licensed hair dresser and does hair on the side for family and friends so why can't she do that?  In the past year she has coached cheerleading and has done other things with the kids - she just doesn't want to work.  We just need some help in trying to get an earning capacity for her and how to prove she is capable of working weather she does work or not.

[dealin with it]

Here is a website that may be helpful.  http://www.adaa.org/ .
 
 My exgf also suffers from this. After she moved out, she left behind a bunch of medical documents from counselors, and doctors...etc. Did she suffer this disorder when your husband and her were together. Did she attend any counseling. If so, did she sign a consent document giving your husband the right to view, and ask questions about these appointments. You may want to look into that option.
  As for the support. Here in Michigan if the custodial parent doesn't work. They automatically give an earning capacity of $7 per hr. It would seem like most states would be like that.

Sorry I can't be more help

[backwardsbike]

It may be to your benefit to hire a vocational expert to do a voc. evaluation on her.  SSI is needs based.  if you ear over a certian amount you don't qualify for benefits and you will be denied without your medical information even being considered.  

SSI is basically welfare for disabled people.  SSD is based entirely on disability.  But one must have the correct amount of work credits to qualify even if one is legitimately disabled.  FI she was a SAHM or didn't work much she may not qualify for this.

But a voc expert can determine what types of work she could do and what her earning capacity would be.  May be well worth your money.

[reb_kat]

SHe sounds totally phony and totally lazy to me. YOu guys are being played. Are you keeping track of how much you're spending on these children on top of the child support? If not, you should be.
It's very hard to go into court and prove that she is a mental case...DH and I are going through kind of the same thing right now.. IMO.....if they don't want to HELP take care of these kids, then full custody should go to the parent who is more willing and ABLE to provide for the children and that does not include welfare. The parent who is working and doing the majority of supporting the kids should have custody....not the parent who is relying on the state and everyone else to pay their childrens' way!
We just moved out of PA and it depends on what county you're in...some are worse than others when it comes to this stuff.
Good luck!
Have you tried calling Children's Services?

[Bolivar]

BY KAT

Part of the child support is going to pay the mgt. on their homes. Do you see the tax deduction? NO.

Do you ever see equity in the home that is partially paid for out of your own pocket? NO.

This antiquated system needs a serious overhaul.

First of all, what in the heck is custody? How can the courts GIVE a person to another person? It's a child not a table. You can't will a child since a child is not chattel.

What is child support but slavery? Look up the definition. "A condition of subjection or submission characterized by lack of freedom of action or of will." The courts force the non custodial parent to work & pay a nice size portion in child support. In most cases, the non custodial parent doesn't have the *right* to obtain an education because if support doesn't get paid, they go to jail. The non custodial parent can sit on their ever increasing fat behinds, not work and basically do what ever they want without having to provide documentation as to what the child support covers. This is sickening especially in the case of large support awards.

There needs to be a cut in stone rule that parenting is 50-50 in divorce unless one person is proven UNFIT beyond a shadow of a doubt (not just on hearsay from the other parent). False allegations will have mandatory jail time, heavy fines, loss of parenting time, no deviations are allowed.

There is no child support changing hands. Guess what ladies & gentlemen; it's time to obtain an education before you start having children! You just might have to support them part of the time on your own!

Gee, what a novel thought huh? Children will no longer be pawns in a game that carry rich cash rewards. I'm sure this will piss off uterus opportunists, but oh well!

A parent can lose their 50 percent of parenting time by (as examples) moving from the area (no custody battles, you lose, that's it. It was your choice to move), or being proved unfit such as mental health, incarceration, drug use ect.

Support for parents who have lost partial parenting is calculated by what the states pay out in welfare benefits per child. Come one, the states know how much it costs to raise a child why do they put extra burdens on divorced families then?

Let's say for each child the state pays $600 a month in cash/medical/food stamps. Half of this amount is the responsibility of each parent. $300 a month or approximately $10.00 per day. If the parent with less time has the child 4 days per month that is subtracted from their obligation this would now equal $260.00. The tax burden falls on the payor.

I guess lawyers aren't going to like this either, probably have to find another field.

We can probably get rid of many family courts too since custody battles will be pretty much moot. Family court judges will be elected by the people, heaven help your obviously bias ones.

During the past 2 years Mr. KAT has paid over $50,000 to the biotroll. She doesn't work, tell me how that kind of obligation isn't hidden alimony? The little pink trailer payment is only $350. per month. High support obligations do nothing to encourage the other party to seek an education or employment level in order to be able to support themselves. All it does is make them dependant.

Let me tell you something. Mr. KAT's (former) daughter turned 18 last month. The amount of support didn't drop but she is no longer supported. But guess what boys & girls! You ALL get to pay for her now!! She's going to have a baby!!

Biohag has been on welfare & knows all the rules! They also have a slip/fall lawsuit going on too. Funny how all this came about when support stopped for the oldest huh? And being that the younger one will be 18 in Sept 2005, well, they are going to need to make some money right? Yeah, just as long as they don't have to work for it. Which I guess would be pretty hard since both children only have 8th grade educations & criminal records. For biohag that nice rap sheet that includes numerous shoplifting charges kinda puts a damper on things. I mean, who wants to hire a theif?

Pissed, yes, I am. When Mr. KAT had custody she didn't pay a dime, not a loaf of bread, not a gallon of milk. She had 7 years to get an education or a job. But instead lived off men & the system. I gave up my needs for their wants for years. I treated them better then my own children. But the courts wouldn't have any of it. They needed to bond with biomommy, they wanted to live with her since our rules were strict.

So there you go.

The courts just gave you two more beings to support not including how many more illegitamite puppies SD will push out within in the next few years. SD will probably be on welfare until social security kicks in & well SS is heading to jail for selling drugs....which do you think costs more? Welfare or keeping them in prison? I gotta research it. This is the burden for all of us to carry unless things change. It effects everyone, divorced or not, children or not.

Even though it's almost over, I am still fighting for changes...are you?

KAT

[Bolivar]

Court-ordered sexism

By ROBYN E. BLUMNER, Times Perspective Columnist
Published May 16, 2004
________________________________________
Except for the battlefield, family court has to be the last bastion of legally enforced sexism in our society. State statutes that determine child custody arrangements and child support may be written in gender-neutral language, but they are not applied that way.

Traditional concepts of the family - where the father is breadwinner and the mother controls the domestic sphere - permeate the process, often disadvantaging men who want an equal opportunity to rear their children.

David Blankenhorn, who wrote Fatherless America, says absent fathers are "the most destructive trend of our generation." But our institutions are adding to this crisis by overwhelmingly preferring the mother as the primary parent. Mothers make up five of every six custodial parents, with the system essentially telling fathers that their worth is that of check-writer.

Why is a father who gets up and goes to work every day in order to provide his children with a decent standard of living seen by the courts as less nurturing than the parent who stays home, enjoying the fruits of that labor?

I see both acts as at least equally caretaking.

Yet due to a series of unwritten and unspoken gender-related assumptions, family judges tend to give mothers both decisional control over the children and financial support after a family breakup. This gives women an incentive to dissolve their relationships, as demonstrated by the fact that women initiate divorce in about 70 percent of cases.

I can imagine what dads must feel in receiving "visitation" with their children. The very notion that fathers are just "visiting" is deeply disturbing, suggesting that a father's company is like a trip to grandma's.

In a 1998 Florida State Law Review article on gender bias in family court, editor in chief Cynthia McNeely wrote: "If the treatment fathers receive in family court occurred in the workplace, an affirmative action plan would likely be implemented to rectify the pervasive discrimination and barriers fathers encounter as they seek meaningful access to their children."



Interestingly, this is one form of sex discrimination that is not only accepted but jealously guarded by feminist groups such as the National Organization for Women (N.O.W.).

 In a memorandum written by NOW's government relations director in 2000, the organization denounced "men's custody groups" such as the nonprofit Children's Rights Council, because they aid "noncustodial dads in reducing their child support obligations and (in) taking away custody from moms."

(According to its Web site, the mission of the Children's Rights Council is "to assure a child the frequent, meaningful and continuing contact with two parents," a dangerous notion to those feminist groups that want fathers to pay up and shut up.)

When men gain reasonable access to their children, women's groups cry foul.

 Last month, the California Supreme Court ruled that a divorced mother who had been awarded primary physical custody of two young sons could not move them to Ohio with her and her new husband.

In an eminently fair and reasonable decision, the high court upheld a lower court determination that moving the children so far from their father would preclude them from having an ongoing relationship with him. The Contra Costa County Superior Court had said the mother could move but she would have to relinquish custody to the father.

The California Women's Law Center called the Supreme Court's ruling "a huge step backwards" and said that a "legislative fix" is needed that would return to custodial parents a presumptive right to move away and take the kids.

Talk to Dan Montagna and the real costs of a policy like that become clear. A Pinellas County charter fishing boat owner, Montagna has been battling his ex-wife for years to prevent her from moving to California and taking their 7-year-old daughter. He says he is deeply involved in his daughter's life, accompanying her to school and gymnastics training. "She's everything," he says of his little girl.

Montagna's lucky. Since 1997 the law in Florida has been changed to end the courts' prior practice of favoring relocation for the custodial parents. So far, with help from attorney Peter Meros, Montagna has been able to keep his daughter here. But not every state has progressed to recognize that children need their fathers as well as their mothers to be part of their day-to-day lives.

Part of the problem is the legal standard used to resolve custody issues, where judges apply a "best interest of the child" analysis and thereby allow their inherent biases toward maternal nurturing to seep in.

To ward against that, I suggest the adoption of a new standard recognizing that the children's interests are no more important than the constitutional rights of both parents to actively rear them.

Fathers are becoming an endangered species in part because the family courts don't fully appreciate their equal claim to their children. Sexist notions of gender roles inform too much decisionmaking, transforming too many men from engaged parent to alienated visitor.

[dnverdadof3]

Im not sure who Im writing to and this is my first time here but what I just read made me feel good. Somebody was kinda upset, and it sounds weird but Im glad. I thought when I came here for advice or support It wouldnt be long before people requested I leave because I cant help but get extremely pissed off when people that work so hard and love thier children so much get anything less then 100% parenting time. There is not any small hint of justice or common sense in the courts.  Its nice to see that there is someone besides myself that is a little upset with the system. I really havent started to get mad yet because so far I have 100% custody of all 3 of my girls against pretty bad odds.  Do you have a Lawyer? If you do fire him. Does the judge in your case take frequent 2 minute breaks coming back spraying binaca in his mouth? Are you in a town where its not uncommon for folks to refer to Ma and Pa as aunt and uncle?  Someone was saying stuff about reciepts and paper trails. Hell ya start there! Theres no reason why you cant go into a court room and tell a judge what you said here and noy get everything you ask for. A judge is paid alot of money because of his ability execute justice. I was in a similar situation my ex was having the govnt give her monthly cash assistence pay  her rent pay for groceries pay for utilities pay for her gas pay for daycare and even paid for 6 mos of car insurance,all while she was lucky enough to further her education which also was paid for along with student grant money that also gave her enough money to pay for living costs.  While I worked ass off 6 days a week to give my paycheck  to her too in hopes she would let me see my girls. It gets a million times worse but Ill get to the point. I love my girls and was happening was not right. I collected various paper things, notes, dr appt cards, phone numbers, and anything I could get my hands on. I made calls and talked to social workers, doctors,and every govnt agency I thought she might be taking advantage of. She now is homeless refuses to work and is lucky she still can see the kids 5-8 on wednesdays.  If you tell a judge whats going on and show him evidence and he doesnt side with you let me know because Im pretty sure most americans wouldnt consider that justice and im pretty sure I can get a few thousand people to stand outside that court room  until that judge can pull his head out of his ass. I think if someone wanted to they could convince a judge to issue a warrant for me for threats of mayhem by me stating I can get  thousand people to storm the court house.I also think that you can convince a judge who is the better parent. I know this post is a little off the wall and you may think Im under the influence of something or drunk but Im not. for the last 8 months or so all Ive heard is laws need to be changed and somebody needs to do something and the system sucks. Im ready to start doing something about it. Anyways Id be happy to talk to you about my case and Things I did to have it work in my favor. Good luck