Conference quokka::non_custodial_parents

    Lenney,
    
    	Theory the cannot, but, interperation of the laws would could leave
    your new SO to handle more than her fair share of a joint effort. As in
    you are working for nothing, all funds go to the suport of the former
    wife. And your new wife is burdened with suporing you, and perhaps
    offsprings of your present marriage, and off springs of her former
    marriage. Gee, sounds confusing� AND if you seperate from the wife #2
    remember that a 45 magnum for your ticket out is a viable solution.:)

re: -1

Boy isn't that the truth when you think about it.

I can't afford to live in a place of my own because of child support payments
and a short term loan (which was to my ex's gain and not mine).

You meet a new flame in your life, fall in love and begin living together only
to realize your new flame supports you because you are unable to do so for your
self. These days it just seems to take two to make ends meet and live some sort
of life.

I must admit, feeling unable to do it on your own is a real kick in the butt. It
just seems so unjust that she must support me so I can effectively support my
ex. I don't know, I just seem to have a real problem with this right now. Well
any words of wisdom on this would be helpful.

Re: .0

Getting back on track here, I don't believe they can garnish your new loved
one's wages, just yours. They will however take her wages into consideration
when support variances are being sought as I found out. It seems the court
expects your other half to be contributing to your good heath and living
standard. I know when I went in looking for some relief, the court asked if my
loved one's wages and contributions where included in the financial statement
supplied to the court. I think is totally unfair solely because she has no
responsibility to your ex family. I would also expect this may vary from state
to state and Canada vs. U.S..


John

    I believe that should you quit your job and fail to get another your
    new wife would be accountable for your debts.  I believe that the
    courts would have to see evidence that you stopped work to avoid the
    payments to you children's support.  If the courts find you "playing"
    this game they can indeed garnish the new wife's income for your
    "family income is community proberty.  This is very rarely used thank
    

    .3 perhaps you should join us in a meeting sometime.  Not to sound like
    a wizeguy or a wiseass. But it does happen more than you would like not
    to believe it is. I can assure you very very much that it is happening.
    
    
    Peace

re: -1

I am not aware of any cases where I have seen the courts go after the support
payers spouse. Maybe it's different here than in the U.S., even if you did quit
work, what would this have to do with your new spouse? She has no obligation to
your ex in any size,shape or form.

What's the difference living with your new spouse vs. living with a family
memeber? Are they going to go after who ever is supporting you?

John

    John,
    
    	The fact that in the US, one thing is said and another is practice.
    Guess it goes on where ever you live. Justice is a oximoron within it
    self.:)

    To the best of my knowledge, they cannot require your new SO's
    financial info but they can make youthink you have to provide it.  It
    is fair for them to only use things like 1/2 the rent is yours if you
    are living with another person though.
    
    Yeah, it is unfair and difficult if the SO is supporting you so you can
    meet your Child support obligations.  Though I find the way to look at
    it is this: If your SO weren't there for you, you would just have a
    MUCH poorer standard of living.  If your SO willing contributes to your
    enhanced wellbeing, it is to your benefit as well as hers/his>
    
    Essentially the way it works is this, if you make $20,000per year and
    pay $5,000/year child support, your income is $15,000/year.  If that
    were all you were making, would you SO still want to be associated with
    you?  If yes, fine, if not, better to know that up front because the
    problem now becomes one of a couple with different income levels.  Is
    it OK with both of you that one brings home significantly less than the
    other?
    
    This whole situation can lead to long term resentment.  In my case it
    has manifested itself in the "if onlys".  You know, if only you didn't
    have to pay support all those years, we would have a house and be able
    to take fancy vacations, etc, etc, etc, ad infinitum.  That can be a
    real bummer.  I could go on for a long time, straight into my personal
    rathole, but it won't change anything.
    
    Bootom line
    My obligation to my children is real and necessary.  Until they are
    grown and independent, they will come first.
    
    jimc

    jimc,
    
    	But lad, the issue is that the courts are going to reach deeper
    into that pocket of yours than they would have if you were not
    remarried. Isn't the issue of going on with your life is not to be so
    impovished that it takes the two of you to do more than a fair level of
    suport to the children. Granted that they need all of the above. But!
    I feel that you might need to see some of these folks first hand and
    the way the courts and the system that we suport care for all of the
    above. Wow! I saw a couple, who was working very hard. He was a sales
    person. Made a decient wadge to suport his ex and children and the
    house that the ex got in the settlement that he has to suport as well
    as his new SO and himself live in an apartment. Both work very hard,
    both have little to show for their hard work execpt to see the children
    on alt weekends and try to keep from going into the finical hole. Gee.
    Whats the problem with that? Bottom line, the real world out there
    is having a terrible time with money. And the courts say that he
    is NOT EARNING HIS POTIENTIAL IN SALES.  And because of this interp of
    the laws he has less than ever before. He is working for nothing.
    Getting into the car in the morning and realzing that he will not see a
    farthing of what he earns. I rather doubt that you can relize that
    feeling for your not there. But, for a moment, just visualize what its
    like. Visualize what would you do if the courts of the land told you
    to make more money. Take up a part time job as a bag boy in the local
    shopping store??? Pump gas? Where is there a quality of life for you
    here? Where is the time to bond with your new SO and the children? Or
    are you just a working machine. Work till the day you die to suport
    things that were never yours to watch grow, to help input into for
    development of their little lives. Perhaps if you are lucky you might 
    have an extra hour with them this Christmas. 

    You have some points there George, and I really do not want to argue
    about it.
    
    Most support agreements feel excessive.  Mine did.  Nevertheless, it is
    still true that the custodial parent (usually a woman) and the children
    have a significantly diminished  lifestyle while the NCP has a better
    one.  Of course there are exceptions.  The courts are the place where
    the worst of the problems occur, but then, if it wasn't such a problem,
    it would have been resolved out of court.  Both sides contribute their
    share of wrongs here.  Would you suggest that since someone wishes to
    "go on with thier life" that maybe they should just take the children
    from any previous parts of their life and kill them?  (I doubt it).
    So how would it be just for them to walk away and ignore them?  You
    know as well as I do that the courts will almost always make it worse
    rather than better.  They have to work with demostrable facts from
    flawed sources in an adversarial environment, would you like the job? I
    wouldn't!  
    
    You and I have both managed to get necessary and positive things out of
    the brain-dead court system, but I think we both believe there should
    be a better way.
    
    jimc

    The real truths about child suport are sexually biased reports writen
    by women. And do not show the entire demographics of the custodial
    parrent. Granted that the custodial parents life style goes down some,
    I have seen a NCP who lives in his car. I know several others who are
    presently living in a place that has been condemed. Still another
    is going to be staying with me for a week. Gee, what so exssive about
    that? Or whats so excessive about the guy living on crackers and water? 
    Got another woman who was on this talk show about, "Dead Beat Dads", no
    moms mind you even though I know my share of them too! This woman wants
    to sterolize men after they get a divorce. Why not! Where are the arm
    bands and the jack boots? I hear martial music playing in the back
    ground? 
    
    I know a woman who is an able body person, the custodial parent, and
    will not work as her husband is now looking for a second and third job.
    Wow? Did I say kill off the offspring of the last marriage? Gee, I
    think your putting words in my mouth. 
    
    Yes, the court system is not only brain dead, its crooked, sexually
    biased, and promotes adversairal games vs what can we both do to help
    our children who are to take over this system and this country when we
    go to rest in the grave yards.
    
     
    
    

    I think I've said this before.  It's OK to be married and destitute but
    if you're divorced and the non-custodial it's illegal to be destitute. 
    I have a friend who just went through the same thing.  Owns his own
    business selling business cards and the such.  His gross wages before
    taxes was $312.50/week.  The ex- came back after 6 years and said I
    want the kids and I want support.  The judge (a woman by the way) said
    he could earn more and awarded the ex- $250.00/week in support.  The
    ex- and the new husband had a financial statement in court which showed
    gross wages before taxes at $125,000.00 on a joint tax return by the
    ex- had no income because she worked for the new husband and didn't get
    a paycheck.  I want to be on the other end of that deal....
    

 .9> They have to work with demonstrable facts from flawed sources
 .9> in an adversarial environment...

       Boy, you got that right!!!


       IMO, gender bias has a lot to do with this issue.  When I was
       first "out of the house" the ex had temporary custody and my
       amended support order amounted to $450/month more then I made!
       The court and all three lawyers (hers, mine and the GAL)
       immediately admitted that an error had occurred. THEN IT TOOK 7
       MONTHS AND 3 COURT HEARINGS to correct it.

       This past June, I was awarded temporary custody.  She and her
       boyfriend were about to (and did) move to Washington state from
       NH.  She has a degree in English Literature and teaches.  She
       quit her substitute teaching job here and has no job out there.

       What made it interesting was, that when she said, she didn't feel
       she should have to pay support because I made more then the
       average teacher, the judge went into this long dissertation on
       support.  Basically he said, every NCP was to pay according to a
       formula regardless of gender or difference in income between CP
       and NCP.  Every child was entitled to the best effort of each
       parent.  He also said that the court can consider the income of
       the CP's or NCP's new mate.

       Then, the judge issued NO support order AND continued my order to
       pay her alimony for an extra 3 months!
       
       Interesting how the system works.  I wonder; if the average male
       NCP quit his job to be with a new mate, would he receive alimony and
       not have to make child support payments?

       Richard

    
    Well i just talked to my lawyer and he said that there is no way that
    my X-wife can attach my girlfriend's pay or assets and as long as we
    wait the required waiting period of 3 months after the divorce is final
    in November , we can get married and she can't give us any crap, and he
    is placing it on a legal document and sending me a copy.
    
    
    Hope he's right!!!!
    
    Lenny
    

    .12
    
    CONGRADULATIONS ON YOUR CUSTODY OF YOUR SON!!! ATTA-WAY!! I am happy
    for you! So you gotta pay three extra months! Yes, it stinks!! BUT YOU
    GOT YOUR SON HOME!! Home where he belongs, and not in another state
    so dam far from you that you may kiss it all good-bye!!!:)
    
    

    
    
    re .0
    
    I was told by a lawyer in Mass that in this state the new spouses
    income can not legally be called into play.  The only thing that the
    ex's can legally get a part of are the joint purchases you might
    make with your new spouse.  But again there are ways around this too.
    If you want to buy a house with new spouse make sure the deed is 
    for a trust for both you and your new spouse.  If it is in trust it
    can not be touched at all.  I was told this would solve any joint 
    purchase problem, but it costs money to have a trust set up and
    it does impact when tax time rolls around.
    
    Michele