Conference quokka::non_custodial_parents

    re. -1
    
    You're probably closer to right than not.
    
    fred();

    
    
    When John got a lower paying job he was still expected to pay
    what he would with the higher paying job.  This was in Mass.
    Not sure if he even bothered to fight it.  I would talk to
    

    The courts local in New Hampshire would say that your *UNDER ENPLOYED*
    as in, not making your full earning potential. You could get fired, or
    get laid off, or your business could go away, bancruptcy, etc. Under
    these conditions, locally you could have a chance to have your child
    suport and alimony/maintence reduced. But, if you were to take a lower
    paying job because you got to find yourself. Good Luck! Cause your
    gonna find yourself in court agian, and its gonna be a life
    awakening!:)
    
    When a NCP cannot make ends meet, he/she has to go out and get a second
    job. The CP, in many cases, just reaches out and touches the lawyers
    phone number. :) The NCP is capable of earning more with over time,
    second jobs, third jobs, overtime from the second job, over time from
    the third job. I am the CP and am working two jobs, the 40+ hour, and
    alt weekends as a chaufuer. No fun. 

    re.3
    
    I'm not saying that your info. is totally incorrect, however it is
    exaggerated.  I speak from my own experience as a CP.  Never, was
    the NCP expected to work 2nd job in order to meet set and agreed
    upon child support, but rather he was allowed to pay what he could,
    and I on the other hand had the 2nd job.  This 2nd job helped buy
    food for myself and 2 kids.  My only bills were rent @ $250/mo and
    my car w/ ins. @ $225 +/-.  Then utl., gas, neccessities.  I was
    lucky and received clothes from friends or relatives.  I was quite
    thrifty.  My income was under $5.50/hr from the 1st job.  My 2nd job
    was part-time on and off again.
    
    I think people are taking their own issues and prosecuting the rest
    of the NCPs or CPs into the total picture, which does not represent
    the total picture as it really is in America.
    
    I'm just glad that I'm through with tough times as they were then
    and recognize that the reasons for non-payment were relative to
    my own life and not all of the rest of the divorced families.
    
    What the U.S. is in need of resolving is "encumbering responsibility
    where responsibilty should lie" and for the most part that's in
    getting NCPs to meet their obligations in financial form.  And if
    that is not going to come around, as it appears so far, then getting
    the CPs in a position to where the NCPs financial responsibility
    is more or less "not a make or break it" matter, then America's financial
    poorer children will be better off, as well as, our citizens' dollars.

    re.4
    
    I donno, I have seen a number of men go to the pokie for non payment, I
    have seen a numeber of men go to court and when they told the judge
    that alimony/maintence and child suport were killing them off fincially
    they were told to get a second and third job. I watched a man who was
    paying his child supor, his alimony/maintence and was STILL DENIED
    visitations. For she had some trumped up wild idea that the children
    would be emotionally hurt, would be sexually molested, etc etc etc.
    The guy had no chance, the courts listened to her, and he has a
    restraining order on him for just being a NCP. 
    
    I really don't think any of what I have said is exaggerated, incorrect,
    or thought up. There are a few noters here who are members of the same
    fathers suport group as I am. And witness these things too.
    
    George

    I agree with you George.  Sadly, our court system has gone to stupid
    extremes instead of trying to find the balance.  I guess what I am
    hearing is that your support is trying to get the system to find that
    balance.  I applaud the efforts and if I was in Mass, I would attend
    the meetings.
    
    As first a CP that never received a dime in child support and now a NCP
    who is paying child support I can see all sides of the issue.  And they
    all stink, the way it currently is.  IMHO of course.
    
    Karen

    Karen,
    
    That is the problem, those who have a decient paying job with companies
    like Digital, Wangs, IBM's, get the short end of the stick. Folks in 
    the game like Della is in, get to walk scott free, unless she does 
    something about it. Men who are non-paying NCP's. And to make it worse, 
    abondoning their offsprings. Bottom line, got to get those who are not 
    paying pay. For those of us are paying are paying directly via our out 
    of pocket, and through our tax dollar which makes it even tuffer to handle. 
    The two sided soward that cuts deeper one way than both ways. Making
    things fair and equal and just for all is going to be a tuff hill to
    climb. 
    
     

Hi,

Just an update to what is happening as far as the base note I posted.

After this person had looked into things and taking the job market and risks
into consideration, has decided to stay put. As someone pointed out in another
note;

< ROCK > < NCP > < HARD PLACE >

A new job was possible, but the salary would have been lower with a new
company in a small town. Since it was by own choice to make such a move, getting
the child-support payment adjusted would have proven to be difficult and
expensive to obtain. The bottom line, end up with less each month to live on.

If the change was a result of a layoff, then, adjustment could have been obtain
fairly easily, but yet, still not a 100% guarantee.

IMHO, it's kind of sad that this person must endure a job which is disliked and
because of bad timing, appears to be stuck with it unless an opportunity presents
it's self.  When you consider, when married or the CP, the move would have been
possible and the family just learns to adjust to the reduction of income. I
don't know about you, but if I were in a job that was no longer appealing, your
moral, performance and sanity would certainly pay a heavy price.

I am not saying that CP's do not have their share of problems facing them from
the other point of view, but somehow, there has to be a better way to handle
divorces. It would be nice if both parties had equal freedom to continue to live
a normal life financially and yet, catch the dead beats and deal with them, than
create hell for all NCP's and CP's alike.

    If you think of this, it might help ease the pain. Try taking 25% of
    $100 to live on. Then take 25% of $1000 to live on. Kinda makes it
    easier to justify the pains that the working class person must think of
    before going to find flowery fields of for-evers. Guess one can live on
    the second senerio, in a hypitical case than the first.....

re .9

>A new job was possible, but the salary would have been lower with a new
>company in a small town. Since it was by own choice to make such a move, getting
>the child-support payment adjusted would have proven to be difficult and

>Since it was by own choice

   This sounds alot like slavery to me.  Why should you not be allowed
the same liberties and choices that the remainder of society is enjoying?
I am left with less than what I would get on unemployment after I pay
my child support so I could not afford to take a lesser salary.  How
could the court force me to stay here if I don't like it?  I was offered
the second buyout and wanted to take it, but couldn't because I would have
been voluntarily under-employed.  At the same time I wasn't taking the package,
the ex QUIT her job with no other job lined up and no other source of
income.  In NH both parents salaries are totaled and a percent of that
total is considered child support.  Then each parent is responsible for a
proportional amount of that figure.  So if the NCP is earning 60% of the
total, then the NCP is also responsible for 60% of the child support figure.
Then how is it that the CP can QUIT her job with no other source of income
and no other job lined up and leech off the NCP by using the child support
for her own support?  How is she going to pay her theoretical 40% if she
has no income? If the NCP were to quit or take a lesser position that
was more desirable to him, he'd probably end up spending about 30 days
making license plates.
   
                               

re: .11

>   This sounds alot like slavery to me.  Why should you not be allowed
>the same liberties and choices that the remainder of society is enjoying?

As an NCP, you do not seem to have rights like everyone else and not treated
equal like everyone else. Mind you, they are not stopping you from taking
another job, or make any move you wish in your personal life. The system
expects that you continue to pay the same amount based on the salary is was
originally calculated on. Now if the new job paid 2K or 3K more, I would expect
you would then have to pay more if your ex came after you.

Hmmmmmmmm, let me see, make less and continue to pay the same, make more and
get possibly screwed some more by the system. There seesm to be a problem here
with this equation.

In your latter statements, what you say sounds about right, such is
life......................

    I guess the reason that we are treated like this is because there is
    very little rep for men as a group. Very few goverment studies, grants,
    etc to show that we can be just as good of a parent as the women are.
    

   Hold it a second there, George.  I'm an NCP and share many of the same
   problems as the male NCPs do...


   							Terza

    Terza,
    
    	Sorry, hope I did not ruffel your feathers. But as a whole, men
    do not get custody. Esp in New Hampshire. Unless your SO is a
    ax-wielding, physo, and you have the Pope for an attorney. 
    
    George

The problem with statistics on men vs. women is dependent upon who's doing it,
and will also determine the slant of the figures. The real truth lies in the
middle someplace and very gray. Regardless, I tend to ignore them since
they can only be taken with a grain of salt. I have seen figures which can
support arguments from both camps which is not possible. By this I mean one says
it blue and the other says it green. Both have stats which support their claims
and we can see that it has to be one or the other and not both.

On the surface men seem to be in the NCP role, but there are a number of women
who are in that role also. They too experience the same problems as male NCP's
which I think is the real issue is NCP's being treated fairly. There is an
apparent slant in favor of the CP and an opposite slant towards the NCP whether
male or female.

I also think that a female NCP has one additional disadvantage over a male NCP,
males tend to be in higher paying jobs than females. This would certainly make
their lives a little harder than ours under the same conditions. I look around
the office here and it sure does look that way to me. Think about it, how many
women managers are there vs men, how many secretaries are women vs men, etc,
etc, etc..... Rent for a given apartment is the same for both, except, the higher
paid male has a better chance at affording it. Based on friends and family in my
domain, the males bring home a lot more than the females. There were a couple
instances that the reverse was true, but obviously a much smaller number.

As far as CP's, well that's another story and with their own set of problems and
views.

[end of dribble]

John