Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

custody situation

Expand Messages
  • mikes
    I have been dealing with a very vendictive x-girlfriend in a custody case. I was granted a full evaluation request as things get near and looking very good for
    Message 1 of 29 , Oct 31, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      I have been dealing with a very vendictive x-girlfriend in a custody case. I was granted a full evaluation request as things get near and looking very good for me I would like to know the best way to present myself infront of the judge. On al the other times I had gone to court it was acknowledged that I had completely complied with every requirement and my x was told by the judge that she was not pleased withher performance thus far. Now we go back to court Nov 7 and my x again for the third time has not completed her order to complete an evaluation. I would like to know what to expect and how the prepare or act as we are in court. I had to consult another attorney due to mine is on medical leave and the new sitting in attorney is not up to speed with my case. There is a whole lot to this but anything would be greatly appreciated.
      PS so far the evaluator said I have good parenting skills and said my x has parenting skills but they need to be improved.
      Sincerely
      Mike Smith
    • linda carnahan
      Dear Mike What is it? First you say your X didn t compy and get the evaluation, then further down you say the evaluator said you have good parenting skills,
      Message 2 of 29 , Nov 1, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment

        Dear Mike
        What is it?  First you say your X didn't compy and get the evaluation, then further down you say the evaluator said you have good parenting skills, but your X has some parenting skills?  How would he know this if she hasn't completed the evaluation?  Also, I think that you should read the book by R. Lundy Bancrofft, "the batterer as a parent."  You sound just like my X, constantly having me in court and worried about how to IMPRESS THE JUDGE.  If your concern is about your child, then why worry about impressing the judge?  If you are SINCERE, it will show in everything you do.  Court and custody evaluations are baloney, they do not know you as a person, only by what you put on a piece of paper, and believe me you can LIE on that evaluation to make yourself look good.  One thing of interest is, in all of these custody cases, the men always seem intent on making the X look bad in front of the judge.  Remember, this is your child's mother that you are doing this to.  The more you mar her in court, the more it will come back to bite you in the end when your child is grown up.  Think about what you posted, it sounds pretty vindictive to me.
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: mikes
        Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:31 PM
        Subject: [tips_and_tricks] custody situation

        I have been dealing with a very vendictive x-girlfriend in a custody case. I was granted a full evaluation request as things get near and looking very good for me I would like to know the best way to present myself infront of the judge. On al the other times I had gone to court it was acknowledged that I had completely complied with every requirement and my x was told by the judge that she was not pleased withher performance thus far. Now we go back to court Nov 7 and my x again for the third time has not completed her order to complete an evaluation. I would like to know what to expect and how the prepare or act as we are in court. I had to consult another attorney due to mine is on medical leave and the new sitting in attorney is not up to speed with my case. There is a whole lot to this but anything would be greatly appreciated.
        PS so far the evaluator said I have good parenting skills and said my x has parenting skills but they need to be improved.
        Sincerely
        Mike Smith


        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        tips_and_tricks-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

      • Llana Dyess
        ... Doesn t sound vindictive to me at all. But, then, that could be because I was married to a man whose X was only interested in how much money she could
        Message 3 of 29 , Nov 1, 2003
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          >>>>>Think about what you posted, it sounds pretty vindictive to me.<<<<<<
           
          Doesn't sound vindictive to me at all.  But, then, that could be because I was married to a man whose X was only interested in how much money she could squeeze out of him for herself.  The children's needs were neglected - she would send them to us with a suitcase full of DIRTY clothes (she had a brand new washer/dryer that he bought for her WILLINGLY AFTER they divorced), no toothbrush (toothbrushes are SOOOO expensive), hungry (everytime we picked up these kids up,they were hungry, unless we picked them up at the grandparents) and other assorted things.  She just couldn't afford to do all the things that needed to be done for the children  without more money.  Funny, she always had plenty of money to spend the Saturdays when we had the kids, shopping with her girlfriends and buying herself several  new outfits that she couldn't resist showing off to us.  We helped her move and found clothes in her closet, with $200 and $300 price tags,  that had  never even taken out of the plastic bags they came in!
           
          And I am not even going to get into the crap she told the kids about their father and me.  He never said an unkind word about her, or to her, in front of the children, but she did everything she could to make the kids hate their father.  Fortunately, the kids were smart enough to know who was slinging the mud.
           
          Not all men are guilty of the things their x's accuse them of.  In fact, in my experience in my circle of friends, and working for attorneys and a judge, I have seen that women are much more vindicative and willing to lie about whatever in order to get what they want.
           
          I am not saying that you are guilty of this at all.  Just relating my own experience.  It is well known that the courts today show favoritism toward the women and many, many times put the screws to the men involved.  And, for you to paint Mike with the same brush as your x, is just a bit over the line IMHO.
           
          llana

           
           
          -------Original Message-------
           
          Date: Saturday, November 01, 2003 9:38:26 AM
          Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] custody situation
           

          Dear Mike
          What is it?  First you say your X didn't compy and get the evaluation, then further down you say the evaluator said you have good parenting skills, but your X has some parenting skills?  How would he know this if she hasn't completed the evaluation?  Also, I think that you should read the book by R. Lundy Bancrofft, "the batterer as a parent."  You sound just like my X, constantly having me in court and worried about how to IMPRESS THE JUDGE.  If your concern is about your child, then why worry about impressing the judge?  If you are SINCERE, it will show in everything you do.  Court and custody evaluations are baloney, they do not know you as a person, only by what you put on a piece of paper, and believe me you can LIE on that evaluation to make yourself look good.  One thing of interest is, in all of these custody cases, the men always seem intent on making the X look bad in front of the judge.  Remember, this is your child's mother that you are doing this to.  The more you mar her in court, the more it will come back to bite you in the end when your child is grown up.  Think about what you posted, it sounds pretty vindictive to me.
           
           
          ____________________________________________________
            IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
        • Reena Sommer
          I thought I would jump in and take a stab at this issue. As a new list member, I am not yet familiar with them dynamics of this group and I sincerely hope I
          Message 4 of 29 , Nov 1, 2003
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            I thought I would jump in and take a stab at this issue. As a new
            list member, I am not yet familiar with them dynamics of this
            group and I sincerely hope I will not offend anyone by my comments.
            By way of a brief introduction, my interest and involvement with
            the issue of divorce began when I personally went through the process
            and got a taste first hand of what a custody battle is like.

            Academically, I have a background in psychology & family studies
            (ph.d.) and my academic interests have been in the area of high
            conflict relationships and families. It wasn't much of a leap to
            venture over to divorce.Having said all this, I would like to add
            the following comments to this discussion on custody evaluations,
            noncompliance and presentation in court.

            I am not speaking as an attorney, but as a divorce consultant
            and "on and Off again" custody evaluator. I see the latter as being
            a "recovering" custody evaluator because I am seeing less value in
            doing them as time goes on (and more pain, hardship and financial
            expense caused as a result of them).

            It is not uncommon for one parent to be noncompliant in a custody
            evaluation. The noncompliance serves more than one master. If it
            is played right, it can stall time and if the noncomplying parent has
            physical custody, it is an excellent way to establish status quo.
            Secondly, I have yet to see any severe penalty imposed on the
            noncompliant parent by a judge at the pretrial level. Most often
            judges may show their dismay, chastise the offending parent and
            order them to comply. And then more time is wasted in waiting for
            that noncomplying parent to show that he/she continues to be
            noncompliant.

            My gut feeling is that when you go to court next week, I would
            develop a "one track" argument to present to the judge. As I do
            not know you personally, I can't tell you what that would be exactly.
            But I would be inclined to develop an argument that ties in the
            parent's noncompliance with a long history of related conduct that
            makes raises questions about that parent's ability to make the
            children's needs a priority. You argument must be factual and backed
            by evidence not just your word.

            I am running a free tele-seminar on the issue of custody
            evaluations tomorrow. Unfortunately, it is all filled up as of this
            morning. However, I am audiotaping it and it will be available as a
            downloadable audiofile. If anyone is interested, please email me
            offline.

            Reena Sommer
            http://www.reenasommerassociates.mb.ca


            ____________________________________


            I was granted a full evaluation request as things get near and
            looking very good for me I would like to know the best way to present
            myself infront of the judge. > Mike Smith
          • Steve Van Osdell
            My story.... I m in Warren Country, Ohio. I m 54 years old and a professional computer systems administrator. I have 2 older children who both chose to come
            Message 5 of 29 , Nov 2, 2003
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              My story....

              I'm in Warren Country, Ohio. I'm 54 years old and a professional
              computer systems administrator. I have 2 older children who both chose
              to come and live with me when they were about 11 years old. They are
              now 19 and 24. The 19 year old (son) still lives with me and is in
              college. My 24 year old daughter is about to finish college.

              I was remarried in 1993 to a girl from Russia. She is 20 years younger
              than me. We have a son who was 7 in April. After reaching all her
              personal goals (citizenship and career development and getting our son
              out of expensive private pre-school/kinder) she left home in August of
              2002 and had a boyfriend at work who is a citizen of Switzerland (her
              company is international with its headquarters in Switzerland). He is a
              big shot her on a work visa. Also, during all our years of marriage,
              try as I would, I could not get her interested in attending church. She
              never would even really say she believed in God. So, she went sometimes
              just to go along. Other than that, life was pretty crisis free and my
              only complaint was that she didn't do anything for my older son, or
              participate much in family get togethers (was very coldish). She was a
              good mother except that she was over-protective to the point of being
              paranoid.

              Now, she tricks me into getting our young son to her apartment and thens
              files papers. She refused to budge (during collaboration) toward my
              request for 50/50 shared parenting (she would only offer every other
              weekend stuff), and the court bungled the case several times by
              scheduling conflicts. The magistrate granted my request for a guardian
              ad litem, but my lawyer couldn't find one, so that fell by the wayside.
              Then, this past April, we were ordered to get a psychological
              evaluation. I was a pilot in the US Navy and really wasn't too
              concerned over my mental condition other than suffering from high
              temporary anxiety. Well, the doctor the court ordered us to go to was,
              in my opinion, inept and 3rd rate. I knew something didn't feel right
              when I stepped into his office for the first time. It was a fairly 3rd
              rate house turned into an office. It was cramped and fairly outdated
              and unkept. When I met him, I didn't like him from the first. He was
              tackily dressed and sloppy looking. During my talks with him, he
              usually was sitting there with his eyes closed as if asleep.

              He gave me two tests - the MMNP? and the Rachush ink blot test. I later
              looked on the internet, and my answers to the inkblot test were in line
              with the 'good and expected' answers. One of the things I told him
              during our interviews was this my son's mother was an atheist and that
              all my family had been brought up in the church (conservative
              Presbyterian and Baptist). At the end of our last meeting, I told him
              as I was parting that I hoped that God gave him guidance during with
              writing his report. His reply was a sarcastic 'God doesn't have
              anything to do with this'. I knew then, for sure, that I was done for.

              Sure enough, when the report came in, he concluded that in his opinion,
              sole custody should be awarded to the mother. This was in spite of the
              fact that he did not point to anything specifically wrong with my tests
              other than to say that he was suspect that I faked the MMNP test. Also,
              from the interview with my son, there was some test he gave him that
              evaluated who my son looked to most for parenting. I scored 19 and his
              mother scored 12. This was also strongly in my favor, but he ignored
              this. Somehow, out of thin air, he came up with the conclusion that I
              had a narcissitic personality (gave no empirical data to support this),
              and that any shared parented plan would suffer continual conflict in
              dealing with me.

              So, I went out and paid $5000 for a second opinion from a very
              professional and highly recommended psychologist. My son was
              interviewed by a child psychologist on his staff, and I was also
              interviewed by another lady on his staff who specialized in evaluating
              potential for domestic violence. I was also given 9 difference tests
              (the most intriquing of these was being shown pictures and I had to make
              up stories to fit the pictures). I got a glowing report - only
              mentioning that I was under heavy anxiety but this was to be expected in
              this situation.

              We go to court and guess what? The magistrate would not allow my 2nd
              evaluation in as evidence because it was a unilateral report (meaning my
              ex wife wasn't interviewed by the same doctor). Well, when evaluating
              the safety of the chicken house, do you go and ask the fox for his opinion?
              So, I got shared parenting barely. By barely, I mean that I can't say
              anything about my son's raising in any way. I just have a thread of
              legal custody. I get him every other weekend from Friday after school
              until Monday morning when I take him to school, and every Wednesday
              night. Also, was ordered to pay $850 per month child support. My
              salary is $78,000/year and my ex's is $45,000 per year. But, last year
              was a banner year for my company and I got a $20,000 bonus, so the court
              looks at it like my salary is $98,000 per year when I'm not really
              making that much.

              Also, they awarded her $900 per month alimony for 30 months! This is
              even though she was always a working mother, has university degree, and
              works as a professional chemist. Any guesses as to why the magistrate
              didn't award her $450/month for 60 months? Well, because she didn't
              want her to have to wait that long to get her money and not be able to
              remarry. This is even with me being at the end of my productive years
              and her just 34 years old and she was the one who left home with a
              boyfriend! (which the court could care less about)

              Now, I might also mention that Warren County has the (by far) highest
              divorce rate in the whole state! Any guesses why? Because the word gets
              out that women have it made in this court more than any other in the
              whole state.



              Reena Sommer wrote:

              > I thought I would jump in and take a stab at this issue. As a new
              > list member, I am not yet familiar with them dynamics of this
              > group and I sincerely hope I will not offend anyone by my comments.
              > By way of a brief introduction, my interest and involvement with
            • Ray Lautenschlager
              Steve, You say that your attorney could not find a GAL. That is laziness on his part as every court in Ohio has a list of available and court accepted GAL s at
              Message 6 of 29 , Nov 3, 2003
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Steve,
                 
                You say that your attorney could not find a GAL. That is laziness on his part as every court in Ohio has a list of available and court accepted GAL's at their disposal. Many of them are nothing more than whores of the court but they are still on a list.
                 
                Psych tests must be done by the same psych on both parties for the results to be valid although you could have challenged his results and asked that he be removed from the case.
                 based on his bias.
                 
                You also need to be aware that Ohio's custody law is presently being challenged as unconstitutional in Dayton federal Court. Ruling on this is expected by the end of the year. Briefs in this case can be viewed at http://www.pacegroup.org under Galluzzo case in the title bar.
                 
                There is also a new bill before the House (HB232) that will change Ohio law to a presumption of EQUAL parenting. Info on that is also on the PACE site.
                 
                After reading the information that i have directed you to, should you have any questions, please feel free to use the webmaster email link to contact me off forum for further information.
                 
              • Trooper753@aol.com
                ray- there are a few states- i know GA is one- where they are sayiing the child support is unconstitutional......maybe the method of computation- but its
                Message 7 of 29 , Nov 3, 2003
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  ray- there are a few states- i know GA is one- where they are sayiing the child support is unconstitutional......maybe the method of computation- but its interesting anyway.
                  char
                • Trooper753@aol.com
                  biased judge, void judgment, lack of jurisdiction on the judges part- why a magistrate judge? appeal........i am sure i can think of more options. char
                  Message 8 of 29 , Nov 3, 2003
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    biased judge, void judgment, lack of jurisdiction on the judges part- why a magistrate judge?  appeal........i am sure i can think of more options.
                    char
                  • Ray Lautenschlager
                    GA Child Support was found unconstitutional by a lower state court in GA. That decision was overturned by Georgia State Supreme court. The case is being moved
                    Message 9 of 29 , Nov 3, 2003
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      GA Child Support was found unconstitutional by a lower state court in GA. That decision was overturned by Georgia State Supreme court.
                       
                      The case is being moved to US Supreme Court and is at the point now where they are waiting to see if USSC will hear it.
                       
                      Galluzzo is in Federal court system not STATE court system.
                    • Steve Van Osdell
                      This may be true in the eyes of the court, but any psychologist will tell you that an accurate (if that is what is really sought) psych evaluation DOES NOT
                      Message 10 of 29 , Nov 3, 2003
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        This may be true in the eyes of the court, but any psychologist will tell you that an accurate (if that is what is really sought) psych evaluation DOES NOT depend on talking to the other parent who is obviously adversarial.  This would be like asking the fox how the chickens are doing.  Psychologists will tell you that a properly done evaluation depends on empirical data, NOT the accusations and 'observations' of an adversarial ex-spouse.

                        Ray Lautenschlager wrote:

                        Psych tests must be done by the same psych on both parties for the results to be valid although you could have challenged his results and asked that he be removed from the case.
                         based on his bias.

                      • Terry Pitts
                        Ray et al, ... The USSC decided not to hear the case, so the lower court ruling stands. There is a second finding of unconstitutionality, though. A different
                        Message 11 of 29 , Nov 3, 2003
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Ray et al,

                          On Monday, November 3, 2003, at 04:04 PM, Ray Lautenschlager wrote:

                          > The case is being moved to US Supreme Court and is at the point now
                          > where they are waiting to see if USSC will hear it.
                          >
                          The USSC decided not to hear the case, so the lower court ruling
                          stands. There is a second finding of unconstitutionality, though. A
                          different judge found that the guidelines were unconsitutional because
                          the didn't comply with the federal requirement of being updated every
                          four years with new economic data. I don't believe that the state has
                          appealed this one. (Kind of hard to appeal something that blatant.)
                          There is a third case in the works as well.

                          On February 10, 2003, Judge Sidney L. Nation, Sr., Chief Judge of
                          Rockdale Superior Court, Rockdale County, Georgia, granted the motion
                          of Laura Jean McFall to declare the Georgia Child Support Guidelines
                          Unconstitutional in a temporary order.
                          Judge Nation granted the motion based upon the Supremacy Clause or
                          Article VI of the Federal Constitution because Georgia has failed to
                          comply with the Federal mandate for the state to adopt and periodically
                          revise the guidelines in line with current economic data.
                          READ MORE!
                          Judge Nation stated as follows:

                          "The evidence before this Court is clear and uncontroverted that the
                          State of Georgia has not complied with federal requirements in setting
                          and/or revising its child support guidelines.
                          It has not considered economic data on the cost of raising children nor
                          analyzed case data in reviewing the guidelines as contemplated by 45
                          C.F.R. §302.56(e) and (h). Georgia’s failure to comply with the federal
                          mandate makes the application of the state’s child support guidelines
                          inconsistent with federal law under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S.
                          Constitution, which this Court is bound to uphold.
                          Until such time as the General Assembly brings O.C.G.A. §19-6-15 into
                          compliance with the federal mandate pursuant to which it was adopted,
                          this Court stays the application of Georgia’s child support guidelines
                          and declines to apply the statute in future cases.
                          Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motions for Modification of Child Support and
                          Declaratory Judgment are GRANTED.


                          *Modified press release orginally written by Daryl LeCroy

                          Take a look at http://www.gachildsupport.org

                          Terry Pitts
                          Augusta, GA
                        • cassandra vannostrand
                          true, but I have seen the psych opinion even from a phone call to the person, taken as PER SE EVIDENCE FOR THE COURT,,,,, IT REALLY DEPENDS,,, BUT ANY
                          Message 12 of 29 , Nov 3, 2003
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            true,
                            but I have seen the psych opinion even from a phone call to the person,
                            taken as PER SE EVIDENCE FOR THE COURT,,,,,
                            IT REALLY DEPENDS,,,
                            BUT ANY TESTIMONY IS REAL FACT FOR THE COURTS,,,,,,,
                            i WROTE THIS ON ANOTHER EMAIL,
                            CHECK IT OUT.
                            CP. AND DAVID,

                            Steve Van Osdell <svanos@...> wrote:
                            This may be true in the eyes of the court, but any psychologist will tell you that an accurate (if that is what is really sought) psych evaluation DOES NOT depend on talking to the other parent who is obviously adversarial.  This would be like asking the fox how the chickens are doing.  Psychologists will tell you that a properly done evaluation depends on empirical data, NOT the accusations and 'observations' of an adversarial ex-spouse.

                            Ray Lautenschlager wrote:

                            Psych tests must be done by the same psych on both parties for the results to be valid although you could have challenged his results and asked that he be removed from the case.
                             based on his bias.



                            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            tips_and_tricks-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                            Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals

                          • mikes
                            Thanks for your input Steve. There are some parts to your story that parallel mine on your other email. We are getting the evaluation by the same Psyc and
                            Message 13 of 29 , Nov 3, 2003
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Thanks for your input Steve.
                                There are some parts to your story that parallel mine on your other email. We are getting the evaluation by the same Psyc and evaluator. So far I am the only one willing to negotiate, shows the best interests for our son, thinks that our 2 year old should have as much time with both parents as they are available, have consistancy in my every day activities and on and on. The MMNP was long and boring and the blot test was more a joke than anything. The best defense I had other than my personality was the LEGAL tape recorded conversations my x, her mother and I had that proved my claims and squashed her lies as to what was said. So far my x does not know the evaluator had requested thes recordings. I should say thank you to the Sheriff deputiy that was called out to our home one day and suggested that I begin recording our conversations because she is wishy washy and contradics herself in the same sentence. I go to court Nov 7 and will keep you all posted as to what happens about the contempt or other issues that might be brought up. Thanks to all in this group that respond or support.
                              God bless
                              Mikes
                               
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 3:55 PM
                              Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] custody situation

                              This may be true in the eyes of the court, but any psychologist will tell you that an accurate (if that is what is really sought) psych evaluation DOES NOT depend on talking to the other parent who is obviously adversarial.  This would be like asking the fox how the chickens are doing.  Psychologists will tell you that a properly done evaluation depends on empirical data, NOT the accusations and 'observations' of an adversarial ex-spouse.

                              Ray Lautenschlager wrote:

                              Psych tests must be done by the same psych on both parties for the results to be valid although you could have challenged his results and asked that he be removed from the case.
                               based on his bias.



                              To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              tips_and_tricks-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                            • Ray Lautenschlager
                              Thanks for the update Terry. We had not heard what was going on in this case. Some how this does not surprise me entirely. Once was told the reason that it was
                              Message 14 of 29 , Nov 4, 2003
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Thanks for the update Terry. We had not heard what was going on in this
                                case.

                                Some how this does not surprise me entirely. Once was told the reason that
                                it was called 'Child Support' was so that people would not get mad and rally
                                against it. We couldn't do anything to hurt a child.

                                In reality, CS is nothing but hidden alimony and unreported income to an
                                ex-spouse. While alimony is taxable and deductible, child Support remains
                                unreported and unaccountable because it is for the 'child'.

                                Tell that to my neighbor whose wife got the boob job after being awarded a
                                CS lump sum. She even flaunted the fact that his CS money paid for it.
                              • Steve Van Osdell
                                Frieda, Most of what you say is true, but fails to address what I consider the major flaw in child support and that is that standard of living aspect. When
                                Message 15 of 29 , Nov 5, 2003
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Frieda,

                                  Most of what you say is true, but fails to address what I consider the
                                  major flaw in child support and that is that 'standard of living'
                                  aspect. When you talk about struggling to get by, I will take that
                                  literally because that is what many single parents who are only
                                  collecting a couple of hundred dollars a month (sometimes with more than
                                  one child) are doing.

                                  However, on the other end of the spectrum, you have single parents
                                  (usually mothers) who are literally raking in the dough, far in excess
                                  of what is needed to substain a child. The courts award BIG amounts of
                                  child support to children, way more than what was being spent of them
                                  when the two parents were living together, and justify it by calling it
                                  'maintaining the standard of living that the child would have enjoyed
                                  had the divorce not happened'.

                                  In my opinion, this is where the court grossly oversteps its bounds. I
                                  can understand the court seeing to it that the child is allowed enough
                                  money for what I call 'subsistance level', but when the government gets
                                  in the business of deciding a child's standard of living over and above
                                  subsistance level food, clothing, and shelter, then that is where the
                                  government has no business being. It is my opinion that if the parents
                                  of the child (each or separately) are not concerned as to maintaining
                                  some high standard of living for the child post-divorce, then the
                                  government has no business doing so. For example, what if the parents
                                  stayed together but instead of divorce fell on hard times due to failure
                                  of a business or something? Is the government going to step in a
                                  'guarantee' the child's continued previous standard of living? No, of
                                  course not. Life has ups and downs, and if the parents of the child
                                  don't see fit, or are not able, to maintain an artificially high
                                  standard of living for their child after divorce, then why should the
                                  government? Sometimes, the child is better off in the long run if one
                                  or both of the parents aren't financially destroyed and therefore not
                                  able to help the child out later in life when they really need it (like
                                  college for example).

                                  Also, unlike in most European countries, the US doesn't allow for a
                                  major reduction in child support after the mother remarries. Would you
                                  have any objection if this was done in the US? And if so, what would
                                  that objection be?

                                  Also, it is fairly common knowledge that the amounts established by the
                                  Federally mandated support guidelines are set at such a high level (as a
                                  percentage of income) that as the income increases, one would have a
                                  difficult time accounting for how all that money (very common to see in
                                  excess of $1000 per month) is actually spent on the child, and therefore
                                  is to be concluded that it is actually partially alimony disguised as
                                  child support and therefore not even tax deductible!

                                  Steve
                                • sharson2001
                                  ... wrote: I m new to this group but I thought I would just jump right in. ... How does that happen? In Texas, you are entitled to 20% of the
                                  Message 16 of 29 , Nov 5, 2003
                                  View Source
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, Steve Van Osdell
                                    <svanos@q...> wrote:


                                    I'm new to this group but I thought I would just jump right in.

                                    Steve said:
                                    > However, on the other end of the spectrum, you have single parents
                                    > (usually mothers) who are literally raking in the dough,

                                    How does that happen? In Texas, you are entitled to 20% of the first
                                    $6,000/month. If the non-custodial parent is makeing $10,000/mo, you
                                    still only get 20% of $6,000 or $1,200.

                                    So, if a child comes from a home where the monthly income is $10,000,
                                    then suddenly, because of divorce, the monthly income is reduced to,
                                    let's say, the $2,000/mo his mother can earn plus the $1,200/mo from
                                    child support. That's a pretty drastic reduction in standard of
                                    living!

                                    > far in excess
                                    > of what is needed to substain a child.

                                    Who is talking about mearly sustaining a child? Do you have
                                    children?

                                    > 'maintaining the standard of living that the child would have
                                    enjoyed
                                    > had the divorce not happened'.

                                    The child had no choice in the divorce. In fact, the child had no
                                    choice in ANYTHING! Why should a child have to alter his/her
                                    standard of living simply because the parents wanted to divorce?

                                    > enough
                                    > money for what I call 'subsistance level',

                                    That's pretty cold! Subsistence means to provide only the minimum
                                    necessary to sustain life! How on earth could ANY parent live with
                                    providing only enough to sustain life?

                                    > Also, it is fairly common knowledge that the amounts established by
                                    the
                                    > Federally mandated support guidelines are set at such a high level
                                    (as a
                                    > percentage of income) that as the income increases, one would have
                                    a
                                    > difficult time accounting for how all that money (very common to
                                    see in
                                    > excess of $1000 per month) is actually spent on the child, and
                                    therefore
                                    > is to be concluded that it is actually partially alimony disguised
                                    as
                                    > child support and therefore not even tax deductible!

                                    Please share where you get this "common knowledge"?

                                    Sharon
                                  • sharson2001
                                    ... father s ... I don t either! I don t think ANYTHING takes away the obligation of EITHER parent to support and do the very best for their children! ...
                                    Message 17 of 29 , Nov 5, 2003
                                    View Source
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Frieda Nugen"
                                      <frieda.ebay@c...> wrote:

                                      > Actually, I don't believe the remarriage does take away from the
                                      father's
                                      > obligation;'

                                      I don't either! I don't think ANYTHING takes away the obligation of
                                      EITHER parent to support and do the very best for their children!

                                      > I don't see it all in $$$'s. I see what is the effect on the child
                                      from
                                      > changes across the board.

                                      I agree! Since I've already jumped into this conversation.

                                      Sharon
                                    • David Smith
                                      by that token, what right does either parent (meaning the mother here in 99% of cases) have to deny equal and full access to the children? Why should a father
                                      Message 18 of 29 , Nov 6, 2003
                                      View Source
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        by that token, what right does either parent
                                        (meaning the mother here in 99% of cases) have to deny
                                        equal and full access to the children? Why should a
                                        father be expected to pay his share when he's being
                                        denied access to his kids (sorry, weekend visitation
                                        doesn't qualify as equal), just because it's "legal"?
                                        Many women seem to think that this is a fair and just
                                        situation and I see that neither of you volunteer
                                        opinion on this, although you are certainly free and
                                        forthcoming with your list of demands on men.


                                        --- sharson2001 <sharson@...> wrote:
                                        > --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Frieda
                                        > Nugen"
                                        > <frieda.ebay@c...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > > Actually, I don't believe the remarriage does take
                                        > away from the
                                        > father's
                                        > > obligation;'
                                        >
                                        > I don't either! I don't think ANYTHING takes away
                                        > the obligation of
                                        > EITHER parent to support and do the very best for
                                        > their children!
                                        >
                                        > > I don't see it all in $$$'s. I see what is the
                                        > effect on the child
                                        > from
                                        > > changes across the board.
                                        >
                                        > I agree! Since I've already jumped into this
                                        > conversation.
                                        >
                                        > Sharon
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >


                                        __________________________________
                                        Do you Yahoo!?
                                        Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
                                        http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
                                      • Steve Van Osdell
                                        Sharon, I will respond to each of your points later, but in the meantime, keep in mind that I was referring to what is and isn t the government s business.
                                        Message 19 of 29 , Nov 6, 2003
                                        View Source
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Sharon,

                                          I will respond to each of your points later, but in the meantime, keep
                                          in mind that I was referring to what is and isn't the government's
                                          business. For example, if YOU married a person who isn't responsible
                                          enough to willingly provide for his own children, why is it the
                                          government's responsibility to 'fix' YOUR mistake, and to provide more
                                          money for the child than was being spent on him while the parents were
                                          married. Can you also, in the meantime, explain to all how you would
                                          spend $2000 a month on one child ($1200 from the father and an assumed
                                          $800 from you)? I'd like to see that budget.

                                          Steve
                                        • sharson2001
                                          ... Wait a minute! I wasn t asked for an opinion. It just so happens that I agree with you! I think the father *should* have equal access. In my case, my
                                          Message 20 of 29 , Nov 6, 2003
                                          View Source
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, David Smith
                                            <djsmith_1998@y...> wrote:

                                            > I see that neither of you volunteer
                                            > opinion on this, although you are certainly free and
                                            > forthcoming with your list of demands on men.

                                            Wait a minute! I wasn't asked for an opinion. It just so happens
                                            that I agree with you! I think the father *should* have equal
                                            access. In my case, my son's father hasn't seen him since June 6th.
                                            I would love it if he were involved!

                                            Sharon
                                          • sharson2001
                                            ... assumed ... My son has learning disabilities and has to go to a private school. He also needs occupational and cognitive therapies. It s 50+ miles one way
                                            Message 21 of 29 , Nov 6, 2003
                                            View Source
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, Steve Van Osdell
                                              <svanos@q...> wrote:

                                              > Can you also, in the meantime, explain to all how you would
                                              > spend $2000 a month on one child ($1200 from the father and an
                                              assumed
                                              > $800 from you)? I'd like to see that budget.

                                              My son has learning disabilities and has to go to a private school.
                                              He also needs occupational and cognitive therapies. It's 50+ miles
                                              one way to his appointments and that takes a lot of time. I also
                                              have additional after school and before school expenses.

                                              It doesn't take long to add up.

                                              Sharon
                                            • Steve Van Osdell
                                              Sharon, I m sorry to hear about the difficulties with your son. However, yours is a unique situation. Not to sound harsh, but even with your extreme
                                              Message 22 of 29 , Nov 6, 2003
                                              View Source
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Sharon,

                                                I'm sorry to hear about the difficulties with your son.  However, yours is a unique situation.  Not to sound harsh, but even with your extreme situation, I didn't see any empirical numbers in your response.  If you could, please imagine that your son has no learning disabilities and please show us a budget where you would be spending $2000 (after taxes) a month on HIM?  Can you do that?

                                                Thanks, Steve

                                                sharson2001 wrote:
                                                --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, Steve Van Osdell
                                                <svanos@q...> wrote:

                                                > Can you also, in the meantime, explain to all how you would
                                                > spend $2000 a month on one child ($1200 from the father and an
                                                assumed
                                                > $800 from you)?  I'd like to see that budget.

                                                My son has learning disabilities and has to go to a private school. 
                                                He also needs occupational and cognitive therapies.  It's 50+ miles
                                                one way to his appointments and that takes a lot of time.  I also
                                                have additional after school and before school expenses.

                                                It doesn't take long to add up.

                                                Sharon




                                                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                                tips_and_tricks-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                                              • road goblin
                                                Disclaimer: The following is a rant and is personal opinion based on personal research, and is to directly rebut some of the positions of posts pertaining to
                                                Message 23 of 29 , Nov 6, 2003
                                                View Source
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Disclaimer: The following is a rant and is personal
                                                  opinion based on personal research, and is to directly
                                                  rebut some of the positions of posts pertaining to
                                                  custody issues. That being said, the individuals with
                                                  opposing opinions should feel free to rebut any
                                                  statements or personal opinions with legal
                                                  information.

                                                  For what I am about to say I will probably get stoned
                                                  (and not with any sort of psychological mind altering
                                                  substances LOL) but the truth of the matter is that
                                                  children are property, and this is a well-documented
                                                  truth in law. Now that being said if you are married
                                                  with state permission (marriage �License �) you are in
                                                  a polygamist relationship with your spouse, yourself,
                                                  and the state. In such a situation the �State� has a
                                                  vested interest in the �fruits of the Marriage� or the
                                                  children. When Parents voluntarily give up their
                                                  children at birth to the state (research information
                                                  about Birth Certificates, Certificates of live Birth,
                                                  and Parens Patriae) the child in question is no longer
                                                  personal private property, but public property with
                                                  equal standing in law as the parents. With this in
                                                  mind two individuals who are married with state
                                                  permission can no longer make decisions about their
                                                  child with out the mediation of the silent partner in
                                                  the relationship �The State�. The fact is that there
                                                  were rarely licenses issued before the 14th amendment
                                                  due to the fact that it was illegal to intermarry or
                                                  participate in Miscegenation. The husband had paternal
                                                  ownership of all fruits (or issue) of the marriage.
                                                  The time of paternal ownership varies from culture to
                                                  culture, but in American jurisprudence it is from the
                                                  first breath of the child, the father is also
                                                  responsible for all actions of his offspring until the
                                                  child reaches the age of legal accountability in
                                                  contracts (at the common law normally age 15 for men
                                                  and 12 for women this makes sense due to the fact that
                                                  the act of sex is a contract between two consenting
                                                  individuals, and in times of old the willing
                                                  participation in sexual relationships was considered a
                                                  marriage in place of a ceremony).

                                                  Where does the state (and the Lawyers) make more money
                                                  for its coffers, the answer is through conflict, that
                                                  is why the state is so engrossed in the business of
                                                  marriages and divorces, child care, and alimony.

                                                  The question is then how do we take back our lives
                                                  from all this state initiated conflict. IMHO get out
                                                  of state contracts with reference to the home, and in
                                                  this small way we quit feeding the fire that is eating
                                                  up our nation from the inside.

                                                  Without a Marriage License the state has no right to
                                                  the child or other issues dealing with your private
                                                  property rights. Without the Birth Certificate the
                                                  child is still the fathers property (((Ever wondered
                                                  why on the birth certificate it asks for the mothers
                                                  maiden name and not her married name, it is because in
                                                  the eyes of the state the child is a bastard and has
                                                  no father unless refuted))). If the father of the
                                                  child has not given up his property rights then to
                                                  take from him that which is his would take a jury
                                                  trial. At the common law there are very few allowances
                                                  for a divorce, one that comes to mind is infidelity,
                                                  and another that springs to mind would be abandonment.
                                                  In the case of abandonment the wife or husband would
                                                  be free to remarry. Possession is 9/10ths of the law,
                                                  but to take possession without permission is theft.
                                                  Finally with all the aforementioned information in
                                                  mind, if you can not take care of the child, by
                                                  yourself then don�t abandon your husband, but if you
                                                  do abandon your husband, and steal his private
                                                  property, be ready to take upon yourself all the
                                                  responsibility for the upkeep that your property.


                                                  LICENSE, contracts. A right given by some competent
                                                  authority to do an act, which without such authority
                                                  would be illegal. The instrument or writing which
                                                  secures this right, is also called a license Bouvier's
                                                  Law Dictionary 1856 Edition

                                                  __________________________________
                                                  Do you Yahoo!?
                                                  Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
                                                  http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
                                                • sharson2001
                                                  ... And what happens if the husband is the one who abandons? Sharon
                                                  Message 24 of 29 , Nov 7, 2003
                                                  View Source
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, road goblin
                                                    <goblinatorr@y...> wrote:

                                                    > if you can not take care of the child, by
                                                    > yourself then don't abandon your husband,

                                                    And what happens if the husband is the one who abandons?

                                                    Sharon
                                                  • sharson2001
                                                    ... yours ... extreme ... you ... and ... taxes) ... Steve, I think the whole POINT here is this: My child or any other child has no choice in the decisions
                                                    Message 25 of 29 , Nov 7, 2003
                                                    View Source
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      Steve Van Osdell <svanos@q...> wrote:
                                                      > Sharon,
                                                      >
                                                      > I'm sorry to hear about the difficulties with your son. However,
                                                      yours
                                                      > is a unique situation. Not to sound harsh, but even with your
                                                      extreme
                                                      > situation, I didn't see any empirical numbers in your response. If
                                                      you
                                                      > could, please imagine that your son has no learning disabilities
                                                      and
                                                      > please show us a budget where you would be spending $2000 (after
                                                      taxes)
                                                      > a month on HIM? Can you do that?
                                                      >
                                                      > Thanks, Steve

                                                      Steve,

                                                      I think the whole POINT here is this: My child or any other child has
                                                      no choice in the decisions his/her parents make no matter how foolish
                                                      those decisions may be. Why should an innocent child be impoverished
                                                      while one parent lives in splendor? How can you justify that? Why
                                                      would you or any other mature, loving parent want their child to
                                                      suffer?

                                                      I understand that you are bitter and hurt and so is nearly everyone
                                                      who goes through divorce, myself included! But, you and I and every
                                                      other ADULT should put their feelings aside and work together to
                                                      prevent the children from suffering further! YOU are an adult! YOUR
                                                      happiness should NEVER come before that of your children!

                                                      You asked for numbers, in my case. I don't intend to give you any
                                                      further personal information to justify my situation and, believe me,
                                                      I have plenty to give. I can tell from the tone of your other posts
                                                      that it would make no difference what's so ever if I did.

                                                      For the most part, I would prefer to spend my time on this list
                                                      trying to learn tips and tricks about legal issues such as the IRS
                                                      spiritual tape provided by the listowner. I don't want to waste time
                                                      arguing with you about whether or not the amount of child support I
                                                      have been awarded but will never receive is justified.

                                                      I wish you nothing but the very best, Steve.

                                                      Sharon
                                                    • Trooper753@aol.com
                                                      goblinatorr- well said- why you say we would stone you?! truth is appreciated. char
                                                      Message 26 of 29 , Nov 7, 2003
                                                      View Source
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        goblinatorr- well said- why you say we would stone you?!  truth is appreciated.
                                                        char
                                                      • road goblin
                                                        My reply to Custody Situation in attached word document due to size. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail
                                                        Message 27 of 29 , Nov 10, 2003
                                                        View Source
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          My reply to "Custody Situation" in attached word
                                                          document due to size.

                                                          __________________________________
                                                          Do you Yahoo!?
                                                          Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
                                                          http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
                                                        • Marsha Breazeale
                                                          I don t disagree with anything Road put in his post on 11-6. But I want to draw everyone s attention to the fact that ALL of the family court laws in this
                                                          Message 28 of 29 , Nov 11, 2003
                                                          View Source
                                                          • 0 Attachment
                                                            I don't disagree with anything Road put in his post on 11-6.

                                                            But I want to draw everyone's attention to the fact that ALL of the "family court" laws in this country are based on the "parens patriae doctrine".

                                                            Subscribe to www.versuslaw.com and search on the phrase "parens patriae" and read circuit court and supreme court decisions regarding it.

                                                            Then dive into history books (stay away from revisionist editions) and learn that the parens patriae doctrine is derived from "divine right of Kings".

                                                            Now you are ready to determine the compatability between the use of this doctrine in our courts, and our Constitution for the United States of America, specifically the application of the Ninth Amendment.

                                                            Any comments?

                                                            -----Original Message-----
                                                            From: road goblin [mailto:goblinatorr@...]
                                                            Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 11:58 PM
                                                            To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                                                            Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: custody situation


                                                            Disclaimer: The following is a rant and is personal
                                                            opinion based on personal research, and is to directly
                                                            rebut some of the positions of posts pertaining to
                                                            custody issues. That being said, the individuals with
                                                            opposing opinions should feel free to rebut any
                                                            statements or personal opinions with legal
                                                            information.
                                                          • wlspence1
                                                            In many courts even a shining evaluation as a parent, and unequivocal expert testimony as to the benefit to the child of continuing a child-parent
                                                            Message 29 of 29 , Nov 11, 2003
                                                            View Source
                                                            • 0 Attachment
                                                              In many courts even a shining evaluation as a parent, and unequivocal
                                                              expert testimony as to the benefit to the child of continuing a
                                                              child-parent relationship, just isn't good enough if there's even a
                                                              modicum of parent-parent _conflict_. A finding to that effect will
                                                              trigger recourse to choosing the `better' parent, and in very large
                                                              measure disenfranchising the other. Political correctness and status
                                                              quo custody or historical primary caregiving are then usually the
                                                              paramount criteria: being the source of the conflict or alienating the
                                                              child against the other parent typically count for nil.


                                                              --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Marsha Breazeale"
                                                              <MBreazeale@n...> wrote:

                                                              > Now you are ready to determine the compatability between the use of
                                                              > this doctrine in our courts, and our Constitution for the United
                                                              > States of America, specifically the application of the Ninth
                                                              > Amendment.

                                                              Why the 9th? (The Goldberg right-to-privacy argument
                                                              notwithstanding.)

                                                              The 14th's substantive due process clause has been applied extensively
                                                              to uphold nearly absolute, fundamental parental rights---except in the
                                                              most extreme cases in which the state is allowed to defend the
                                                              child. Family court---distinguished in being where the parents do
                                                              not act as one entity---is however a glaring exception, which we have
                                                              to blame on the `domestic relations abstention' doctrine, and urgently
                                                              fix IMHO.
                                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.