what percentage of single moms receive child support payments?

nyc runner wrote:

I never used all caps.

how often do you see full grown men walking around with a baby? I cant remember a time that ive ever seen that. of ya that rights, I saw it a few years ago in that adam sandler movie Big Daddy.

some men do indeed love their children and want custody. however, if you don't see that judges constantly anoint full custody to the mothers simply because they feel sorry for the mother and because it came out her vagina, then you are blind.

Please see post by luv2run.

Oh, and "are ALWAYS based" - maybe my eyes are just tricking me but the word, 'always' certainly appears to be in all caps to me.

LOL

Harold Davis wrote:

Im shocked that nobody has mentioned this yet.....

If you go to the d.h.s. to apply for food stamps, and you accidentally tell them that you have a child and the father is not around, guess what happens? The social worker is REQUIRED TO SUE THE FATHER FOR CHILD SUPPORT BECAUSE THE MOTHER IS NOT CURRENTLY DOING IT.

This.

what I want to know is can the police/courts REQUIRE you to take a paternity test? what happens if you refuse?

you cant pay child support if they cant prove its yours.

Miranda Raymond wrote:

Harold Davis wrote:

Im shocked that nobody has mentioned this yet.....

If you go to the d.h.s. to apply for food stamps, and you accidentally tell them that you have a child and the father is not around, guess what happens? The social worker is REQUIRED TO SUE THE FATHER FOR CHILD SUPPORT BECAUSE THE MOTHER IS NOT CURRENTLY DOING IT.

This.

So? Shouldn't the state be trying to get the parents to take financial responsibility rather than the taxpayer?

What is your point?

trackstar44 wrote:

what I want to know is can the police/courts REQUIRE you to take a paternity test? what happens if you refuse?

you cant pay child support if they cant prove its yours.

The mother can claim that you are the father. It will be up to you to prove that you are not. If you cannot prove otherwise (and a paternity test is just about your only option in most circumstances) then the mother's word will be enough to carry the day.

So Man wrote:

Miranda Raymond wrote:

This.

So? Shouldn't the state be trying to get the parents to take financial responsibility rather than the taxpayer?

What is your point?

So, you want to bring up the real man thing again? Ok.

Criteria for being a real man:

1) Military service

2) Primary caretaker for elderly or disabled person that's NOT your vocation -- so like a parent or other family member.

3) Worker in some way in a war zone -- construction, journalist, whatever.

4) Married, active father to 2-4 children. You must live in the same house with those children and the mother, and you must take care of them financially and emotionally. You can't be a BAD father and be a man. You also do not have to procreate. You could be a father to them by adoption or marriage (wife had kids from previous marriage for example). Need at least 2 to fully feel what it's like to be a father, and more than 4 just allows the kids to take care of themselves too much, so 2-4 kids is the range. Now, if you had 4 and then one moves out and you had a 5th, then I'd accept that.

Those are the main ways to be a man. I would consider others if you want to provide them.

A single guy though who never has children and works to support himself and his lifestyle and doesn't fall into any of the other criteria I spelled out isn't a real man in my opinion. To be a real man requires serious responsibility, and that isn't fully realized for most people unless they are a GOOD father to 2-4 children.

* wrote:

.

A woman may want revenge on a man that left her with a child to raise on her own?

Wait... the woman filed for divorce, but the man left her with a child? They were together... the woman filed for divorce, which is leaving the man... and you conclude that the man left her with a child to raise on her own?

For some reason, I'm not following your logic.

Well there is always this wrote:

trackstar44 wrote:

what I want to know is can the police/courts REQUIRE you to take a paternity test? what happens if you refuse?

you cant pay child support if they cant prove its yours.

The mother can claim that you are the father. It will be up to you to prove that you are not. If you cannot prove otherwise (and a paternity test is just about your only option in most circumstances) then the mother's word will be enough to carry the day.

Paternity tests are used most often in civil matters--no crime has been committed, two people suing each other. The complainant can request the court order a paternity test, but the court will usually only do so after some preliminary investigation/hearings. If the court issues an order for a paternity test and the man refuses, he can be held in contempt of court. The man could also ask for a paternity test and if the mom refused to have the baby tested, she could be held in contempt. (Those ARE criminal).

Tangent: what gets me is when a man who has been paying child support proves that he is not the father and the courts require him to continue to pay. Yes, the child needs the financial support so the biological dad should be the responsible party.

I work in child support specically, and despite the use of caps this is the correct post. Most states are given federal incentives (read 'mandates') to determine the paternity for every child-- the goal in my state is 95% paternity establishment, I believe. My state does initiates the entire process when cash benefits are granted to a parent, but not food stamps. Paternity first, then support obligation. Child support amounts are determined as a composite of biological (read 'legally obligated') parents' earnings. This is weighted. Obligor pays. There are a trillion factors that may confound that explanation, but it's the gist of the matter.

Harold Davis wrote:

Im shocked that nobody has mentioned this yet.....

If you go to the d.h.s. to apply for food stamps, and you accidentally tell them that you have a child and the father is not around, guess what happens? The social worker is REQUIRED TO SUE THE FATHER FOR CHILD SUPPORT BECAUSE THE MOTHER IS NOT CURRENTLY DOING IT.

An administrative child support order may be issued against a woman's husband despite BOTH of them admitting that the obligated parent (husband) is not the biological father. This is presumption of paternity by marriage. In this case, the father is paying for a child he knows isn't his because he is too lazy to petition for paternity testing. THAT is stupid.

I haven't seen the situation in your tangent myself. In which state have you seen this?

Well there is always this wrote:

trackstar44 wrote:

what I want to know is can the police/courts REQUIRE you to take a paternity test? what happens if you refuse?

you cant pay child support if they cant prove its yours.

The mother can claim that you are the father. It will be up to you to prove that you are not. If you cannot prove otherwise (and a paternity test is just about your only option in most circumstances) then the mother's word will be enough to carry the day.

Wrong.

Case Worker wrote:

Well there is always this wrote:

The mother can claim that you are the father. It will be up to you to prove that you are not. If you cannot prove otherwise (and a paternity test is just about your only option in most circumstances) then the mother's word will be enough to carry the day.

Wrong.

INCORRECT! (As seems to be your trademark.)

luv2run wrote:

If both parties make and spend equal amounts and had equal custody time, in theory (I never did run the numbers) then no child support might be the amount. It has everything to do with income.

You are right that it is a formula. However, not every state takes custody time into account. Some states will require the same amount of child support whether custodial time is 0% or 50%.

For all of you who seem skeptical that a man should pay to support the children he creates: if you read between the lines of the Mark Coogan interview you can deduce that he and Gwyn are divorced. She lives elsewhere with the minor children. You can bet he pays child support every month for those kids even though she left him.

Highlighter of Intelligence wrote:

* wrote:

.

A woman may want revenge on a man that left her with a child to raise on her own?

Wait... the woman filed for divorce, but the man left her with a child? They were together... the woman filed for divorce, which is leaving the man... and you conclude that the man left her with a child to raise on her own?

For some reason, I'm not following your logic.

OK. Just make up the part of the woman filing for divorce.

That wasn't mentioned in my post.

But even if that's the case, would that absolve the man from financially supporting his child if the woman filed for divorce?

Case Worker wrote:

luv2run wrote:

Tangent: what gets me is when a man who has been paying child support proves that he is not the father and the courts require him to continue to pay. Yes, the child needs the financial support so the biological dad should be the responsible party.

I haven't seen the situation in your tangent myself. In which state have you seen this?

Paternity fraud happens all the time and fathers are frequently required to continue paying support after the truth is learned. Here is one article about it:

This one talks both about cases in which the couple was married and those in which they were not. There are dozens and dozens of other articles if you google it.

skoolhouse arts wrote:

For all of you who seem skeptical that a man should pay to support the children he creates: if you read between the lines of the Mark Coogan interview you can deduce that he and Gwyn are divorced. She lives elsewhere with the minor children. You can bet he pays child support every month for those kids even though she left him.

Both parents should financially support their children. Both parents should also play an active involved role in raising them and have an equal say.

It bothers me that women are overwhelmingly the ones to sue for divorce and courts overwhelmingly choose to award her custody and reduce the fathers' roles in their life to "visitation". It is a disgusting term and arrangement.

Women sue for divorce because often the way couples arrange their lives, the women end up being part house slave in addition to all the other demands in her life. Just like him she works, has hobbies, has to raise the kids and then on top of it all, she (going by percentages here) is usually the one who is master mind of all kid stuff, cooking, cleaning, shopping, keeping track of kids appointments, classes, sports, etc.

For many women, the reality of all this pales and they figure divorce is better for them and the kids since she'll be happier.

If it bothers you that women are overwhelmingly the ones who file and sue for divorce then maybe you should look at WHY that is - most men, not all, but most men would be completely inept running a household with children. Call it social training or whathaveyou but that's the way it goes. Most men wouldn't want to be the primary caregiver either because of their lack of skils or because of their work or whatever. Get over it.

The subject is taking a turn.

Who filed for divorce? What reason?

Were they ever married? Is he the father?

Who did most of the work?

If you have a case where a man has fathered children (for sure) and he does not have those children living with him, then he should pay child support.

The reason he is not living with them does not matter.