Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    Hi there!
    
    I do know of one case where the wife has to pay child support to
    the ex-hubby.
    The daughter of a good friend of mine being the case. She gave the
    children up willingly. She  has recently re-married and has to work
    the third shift to pay the support for three children!!
    
                          Mike
    

    Yes, there are a number of cases.  In fact, there's a woman who
    notes in this conference who pays child support - perhaps she'll
    write more about it.  There is no law that guarantees the
    non-custodial mother will have to pay (or not have to pay), it
    depends on the circumstances.  It is true that such cases (father
    gaining custody, mother paying support) are extremely rare.  
    Generally the father can't get custody unless the mother wants him
    to get it, no matter what she did.
    
    			Steve

    Isn't this changing now?  How can we discriminate so openly?  Why is a
    man arrested for missing payments, and a woman over-looked or not
    expected to pay?  I'm going for custody next year when my son turns 12
    years.  He wants to live with me.  I'll also go for child support as
    it's only fair. 

    And if a man doesn't get paid support, maybe when her visitation comes
    around the child could also be else where.... 

    I'm probably the woman Steve was referring to.  I pay my ex husband
    child support and have been doing so for nearly 10 years.
    
    As for being "forced" to pay, I find that attitude offensive, as I'm
    sure do the majority of non-custodial parents.  On the whole, we're not
    monsters nor do we deserve the contempt so readily heaped upon us.  We
    love our children and miss having them as a dearly loved parts of our
    daily lives.  We pay support willingly because we recognize the
    responsibility we have for our children and because, like parents
    everywhere, we want to make their lives as good as possible.
    
    Regards,
    Karen

re: 577.0             WIFE PAYING HUSBAND CHILD SUPPORT?             No replies

>If a couple divorces and the husband wins custody of the kid(s), is
>there ever an instance where the wife pays child support to him?

>that most of the time, the wife gets custody of the kids, even in
>cases where she cheats on her husband.  
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Whether or not the woman cheats on her husband is almost never an
    issue, UNLESS a preexisting legal agreement exists, as does with some
    religious groups who insist on one. It is the parents fitness to be a 
    parent which generally carries the legal custody battle.
    
    Historically, men are considered to be unfit to be custodians of
    chidren, and especially daughters, because men ARE men !!

      

>However, if the husband gets
>custody, she won't have to pay him a dime.  IS THIS POSSIBLE?

    I have heard of cases where the woman had to pay support. However, it
    generally follows the rules of who has the greater income/ability to
    pay. Historicallu. men make better providers than women; there fore
    they must pay more. (where better = higher income) It also depends on
    the judge. If its a judge who hates men, then the men are always 
    guilty, and therefore must pay the higher sum.
    
>Does anyone know of any situations where the wife was forced to pay
>child support?  
    
    Dam*n few !

>lately we know too many nice guys that are getting dragged
>over the coals when they *really* don't deserve it ... 
    
    How do you know they're nice ? How about all the unsung women who get
    dragged over the coals, out of bed, into bed, around the house,
    beaten up ..... ???

    -Just an opinion ..
    
    -BobE
    
        
    
    

    re .3
    
    <And if a man doesn't get paid support, maybe when her visitation comes
    <around the child could also be else where.... 
    
    <flame ON>
    
    so, does this mean you, too, would *use* the children as a pawn, or
    weapon against your ex?
    
    my ex *uses* my children.  it hurts me.  but, of vastly more
    importance, is IT HURTS THE CHILDREN.
    
    it absolutely amazes me how otherwise rational, mature beings will
    totally disregard the pain and suffering this attitude brings on
    others.  If you have a problem with your ex, whether that ex is the CP
    or NCP, female or male, then take it up with HIM/HER... and don't abuse
    kids this way!  You want to "get even" or "get revenge"?  Do it some
    other way!
    
    tony
    
    

    Thank you Tony for stealing  a part of my flame 8-)
    IMO there are a number of parts of responses here which accept some
    REALLY unfair generalizations (ie - men abusing women, men not paying
    willingly, women not paying support)
    
    For the record let me say that in MD an MA, the non-custodial parent
    pays child support to the custodial parent.  The main aspects of this
    are htat there are some guidelines for what it costs to raise a child
    and then the incomes of the two parent are considered.  A simple
    example would be that there are no extenuating circumstances (such as a
    handicapped or emotionally disturbed child) and one parent makes $40K
    while the other makes $60K.  Then, according to the guidelines, the NCP
    would pay either 40% or 60% of the expenses for raising the child
    (depending on their income).   It feels more unfair when you have to
    pay than when you get to receive (trust me I have been on both sides
    and am now having to sue my child's mother because she does not want to
    pay support).  
    
    In MD, this support ends at age 18 unless something else has been
    agreed to by both parties.  In MA, support continues as long as the
    child is in school (yes even college).  
    
    Parents who do not support their children or use their children to
    retaliate against their ex really get me hot.  I've seen some of the
    damage and am now assessing the rest.  AAAargggghhh
    
    jimc

    Can we separate visitation and custody please?  Visitation impacts the
    kid(s), and despite my oldest's father refusing to pay support, I still
    encourage their Sundays together.  I also try not to argue money with
    him in her earshot, it adds no benifit to her.  In fact the reason I
    haven't dragged the "charmer" back into court, is that he has
    threatened to leave the state and cut off all contact with her.  While
    I might find that benificial, Lolita wouldn't.  she is now growing old
    enough to realize that he is ripping HER off and not me, and is
    beginning to do her own negotiations for clothing allowances, etc. with
    him.  

    I AM THE CUSTODIAL PARENT OF TWO CHILDREN, BOYS AGE 10 AND 13, AND 
    I AM A MALE AND RECIEVE NO CHILD SUPPORT. I WAS DIVORCED PREVIOUSLY
    AND WAS CUSTODIAL PARENT OF TWO GIRLS AND I ALSO RECIEVED NO CHILD
    SUPPORT. IN NEITHER CASE DID OR DO I REALLY NEED ANY HELP I WAS JUST
    GRATEFUL THAT I HAD THE KIDS. ONE OF MY DAUGHTERS STILL LIVES WITH ME
    SHE IS 24 AND HAS VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH HER MOTHER.

    Last summer after 9 1/2 years of court battles including three for
    custody I finally won the last one and got custody of my children.
    So I consider myself, by experience, to be somwhat of an authority
    on child support, custody, visitation, and the court system.
    Last month I filed for child support from "her".  Neither the
    kids nor I have heard from her since.
    
    I personally know of at least two women who pay child support. I
    also know of at least two who are supposed to pay but don't.
    In my own openion and experience it is *much* more difficult
    to collect child support from a Non-custodial mother than a
    non-custodial father.  The reason is the same as the reason it is
    so difficult for men to get custody in the first place--The court
    (read judges) still have this "protect the little woman" syndrome.
    The laws have changed considerably even in the last 10 years, but
    the judges just keep clinging to the same old dogma.  With all this
    hubub about "equal rights" I wish we (children and I) *could* get 
    equal rights.  This bs forced my children to live through 9 1/2 years 
    of hell before I could finally get them away.
    
    Which brings me to the the point of *children's* rights.  It is a
    child's right to be supported by *both* parents (I paid mine when she
    had custody).  It is also the child's right to have a relationship 
    with *both* parents.  When you deny visitation rights, you violate
    the rights of *both* the non-custodial-parent *and* the children.  It's
    also a child's right to get a little more consideration in the 
    divorce court than does the furniture (which at this point imho they
    don't).
    
    Saddly, unless and until men and Non-custodial parents ban together
    into some sort of effecitve political group and exert some pressure
    on the legislatures and judges, none of this is likely to change.
    
    BTW  If you live in Colorado and/or your divorce decree is from
    Colorado, the Colorado State Legislature will be holding two public
    hearings this month (April) about custody/child support.  See 
    SPIDER::NON_CUSTODIAL_PARENTS note 99.4 for details.
    
    fred();

    re .5
    
>    Historically, men are considered to be unfit to be custodians of
>    chidren, and especially daughters, because men ARE men !!
    
    Historically, this is utter nonsense.  For many, many years men would
    almost always get automatic custody.  Women were considered less able
    (in all things, including parenting), had essentially no means, and woe
    betide a woman who 'lowered' herself and tried to find work (it was OK
    for a man to pay a housekeeper or nanny, but a women who worked was
    neglecting her children).
    
    It was only comparatively recently that things have changed.

    re:  .6
    
    You're assuming, of course, that the child 'wants' to see the other
    parent.....  This may not be the case however.
    

re:               <<< Note 577.12 by IMTDEV::BERRY "Dwight Berry" >>>
   >                     -< put down your flame thrower >-
>
>    re:  .6
>    
>    You're assuming, of course, that the child 'wants' to see the other
>    parent.....  This may not be the case however.
    
    No, Dwight... I'm not assuming anything.  Your (nearly) 12 year old son
    may NOT want to see his mom... I can't possibly speak to that issue. 
    But, your note (.3) intimated that you would use visitation as a lever
    against non-payment of child support.  And *THAT*, my friend, is
    flat-out WRONG!  Whether your son wants to visit or not is not
    relevant.
    
    There are a lot of replies here, and in the Non Custodial Notefile
    from wounded people, and experienced people, that attest to the
    FACT that parents who interfere in the visitation rights of the
    opposite parent may cause grave and often irreparable damage to the
    children.  I won't bother adding my story to the list.  
    
    This is not intended to be an attack on you... but, on the notion that
    we are free to use our kids as pawns to fight our own battles.  I hope
    you take these comments in that vein.
    
    tony

re .7

	That formula is not correct.  I don't have the percentages in front
	of me but they are on the back of the form in the court for applying
	for child support in MA.  

	The custodial parent gets the $15K dollars of their income without
	consideration.

	A base amount is calculated for the non-custodial parent based on 2
	or 3 income levels I don't remember, also based on the number of
	children involved.

	A base amount is calculated for the custodial parent using the same
	criteria with INCOME LESS $15,000.00.

	The difference between the two is what is paid with I believe a 
	minimum of $50.00/week for the non-custodial parent.

	The income used above is allowable expenses( try defining that one).

	The base amounts are calculated like so:

	LEVEL 1 INCOME:

		28% of income for first child plus 28% of the 28% for each
		additional child.

	LEVEL 2 INCOME:	

		33% of income for first child plus 33% of the 33% for each
		additional child.

	I don't remember if there was a 3rd level, if there was it had to
	be for a pretty high income bracket.

	So.

		Non-custodial parent income $60,000.00 or $1,200.00/week
		          Less expenses      10,000.00 or    200.00/week

			1 child                              280.00/week
			2nd child                             78.40/week

			total                                358.40/week

		Custodial parent income     $40,000.00 or $800.00/week
		          Less               15,000.00 or  300.00/week
		          Less expenses      10,000.00 or  200.00/week

			1 child                             84.00/week
                        2nd child                           23.52/week

			total                              107.52/week

			non-custodial pays                 250.88/week


	Don't forget the issue of income taxes and alimony to be considered
	as part of the non-custodial parents expenses.

	It's best to stay married and just hide as much money as possible
	from your spouse if your marriage goes sour.  Rare coins and art
	work good for this purpose because of the nontaxable cash transactions.

	If only I had thought of this before she spent it all.

    According to the Texas Child Support Guidelines, section 14 of the
    Texas Family Code:
    
    An order for child support is based, in part, on the "net resources" of
    both the obligor and the obligee...
    
    The "net resources" are carefully defined and include all sources of
    income, and exclude all deductions and expenses.  The term "net
    resources" infer: the gross income, less social security taxes, federal
    income tax withholding for a single person claiming one personal
    exemption and the standard deduction, union dues, and expenses for
    health insurance coverage for the obligor's child.  That's all.
    
    Then, the court may  consider the amount of the obligee's net resources
    when such net resources exeed $1,600 per MONTH, and other needs.
    
    The amount ordered is then based on a percentage range of the obligor's
    net resources:
    	1 child		19% - 23% of Obligor's net resources
    	2 children	24% - 28%
    	3 children	30% - 34%
    	4 children	35% - 39%
    	5+ children	Not less than the amount for 4 children
    
    tony

    
    Simpson,
     What you said may very well be true on your side of the pond, but
    not here.Historically any woman that left her husband for whatever
    reason, got the kids and a boot out the door from the old man.Only
    recently did we wake up and say h*ll no she won't be put on welfare
    the Father is going to own up.I pay support and am da*n proud to
    do my share for my son(unrelated to anything you said, I just felt
    like saying that :-0)...
    
    Sincerely,
    Cool Dad

    re 16
    
    I've checked my sources and I am correct.  I suggest you review the
    history and aims of the suffragette movement in the United States.  One
    of their stated goals for women was custody after divorce.

    re .16 and .17
    
    How it *used* to be is a moot point.  A big problem I have with a
    lot of the *xxx Rights* movements is their attitude at "we used
    to be the down trodden, so now it's ok for us to have our turn
    to do the trodding".  I make a *big* effort to avoid that sort
    of thing from either direction.
    
    fred();

    I am about to final my divorce. I have proven that the ground fault was
    adultry, have proven mom to be relitively unfit. And I have been
    advised to give the soon_to_be_ex "two years" child suport free! It
    wasn't even a week before I had to pay full amount! Plus, if I were
    to have lost the game:
    
    	ex=70%
    	me=30%
    
    But!!! Adivse is 50/50!!! Suffering suc-a-tash! I believe that if this
    is the hand made, this is the hand plaid! But, being a forgiving
    person, and as Fred has stated this is not a fair set of cards to be
    playing with!!!
    
    	Yes, I am happy to have my daughter! Yes, I am happy I won the
    game! But as someone pointed out in another part of this note, you can
    win and loose in the same breath. You can win custody and be financialy 
    devistated! You can be living with your kid(s) under a rock for the
    system called the bad card for you. 
    
    	The problem is not the kids, or the ex, it is the system that is
    working unfairly agianst us all. I feel that it should be 50/50
    reguardless of moneys kids or what ever. And hopefully soon when the ex
    gets her act together. She and I will share a joint physical custody
    of our daughter. For as was pointed out, you miss the daily adventures
    of your children and their experiences they face with the world around
    them, or the just watching them growing! 
    
    	Divorce is one of the most barbaric acts of the 20th century. To
    only rival the holocost of WWII.
    
    George

    
    > I've checked my sources and I am correct..
    
     Gee what a surprise:-)Please elaborate on your source..I will
    certainly crack open my American history book tonight and review
    the sufferage movement.Off hand >I don't recall child custody
    as being part of there movement,but I could be wwwwrrrr,,,wwrrrr
    oooooo,,,nnnnnnnn,gggg..There I said it..:-)
    
    Sincerly,
    David

    Having been divorced for quite a number of years, I've been on 
    both sides of the Child Support fence. Originally I paid Child
    Support, pre-"Guidelines" in Mass. This amounted to about, as I
    recall about $35.00 per week per child (there were two from that
    marriage) as I had a higher weekly earnings then my ex-wife. Over
    the years that figure went up so that a couple of years ago the
    figure was closer to 210.00 or so a week. Again, the Mass Guidelines
    eventually figured into the whole scenario and they are my kids also.
    I honestly didn't begrudge that because I accept the fact that
    as their father I have a responsiblity to them. I think in the
    entire period I paid child support I missed making that payment
    three times as far as being on-time goes. In all three cases,
    unfortunately, I was flat on my back in a hospital with any
    number of tubes and monitors attached to me. Once able I 
    made them up with the next ensuing payment. Again, bearing in
    mind that I accept the fact that I have some responsibilities
    here.
    
    About two years ago, on the 5th (not the 4th) of July my ex called
    and stated she had an opportunity to transfer out of state and
    as I recall stated "and I don't want to be lugging these two 
    (Expletive deleted) around with me so I want them to live with
    you..." memory doesn't serve me totally there but the gist of
    the conversation was in that spirit. Anyways, I thought it prudent
    to get an attorney involved and make sure that all the legalities
    were covered. While we had Joint Legal Custody the kids 'primary'
    residence was with their mother. 
    
    So we trot back into the Courthouse and go before a judge who
    I had been led to believe (by my attorney no less) had a reputation
    for not being too easy on those of the male gender. Anyways the
    Judge rumages through all the papers and looks over his glasses
    and says "I don't see anything in here about Child Support?" to
    which my ex-wife responds "well I figured since he was taking the
    kids he wouldn't have to pay me child support anymore."!!!!!!!!!!
      The Judge then calmly puts all the papers back into the folder and
    tells her attorney and mine that they had better go back outside
    and have a chat because someone isn't doing their job and it isn't
    him! The upshot is that after some dickering between these two people
    (well PAID people I might add as any of you who've gone through this
    exercise know) my ex was ordered to pay me child support based on
    the guidelines with some downward modifications. It amounted to 
    $50.00 per week for the two kids. In the ensuing 30 months I think
    I may've seen something like the equivilent of 15 months worth of
    checks and those have been to the tune of $30.00 per week. That
    about covers their school lunches (one's a teenager and takes in
    enough food to feed at least the US Olympic Hockey and Downhill
    Skiing teams!) So, it does get awarded, collecting it is a whole
    different matter, however, there are plenty of ex-wives who have
    difficulty in collecting Child Support as well. As far as denial
    of visitations goes, that doesn't work for me, and more importantly
    for the Court system as well. If the Non-Custodial Parent fails to
    pay their Child Support that is in essense a Contempt of Court 
    ruling with penalties that at times are perhaps not quite appropriate
    but they are there nonetheless. Failure to allow visitation is
    likewise Contempt of Court and the penalties are different but
    they're there as well. These are two separate and distinct issues
    and the court system does subscribe to the philosophy that two
    wrongs do not make a right.
    
    Long winded but perhaps helpful as I said, I've been on both sides
    of the fence. 
    
    J
    
    

My "X" and son have continued to have bad relations.  Recently they fought
verbally and she finally resorted to physical fighting, slapping him in the
face.  She told me that she slapped him 12 to 15 times.  He then ran away from
home and phoned me at work.  I had my wife go to meet him at a Seven Eleven
store.  My "X" had cornered him there and he was resisting her, crying and
screaming, "leave me alone."  My wife got him and he spent the night.  After
talking with him and my "X", I returned him.

I called my "X" and she agreed that she couldn't get along with him.  She has
been threatening to put him into a mental hospital.  I told her I'd take him. 
There is nothing wrong with him except that he hates living with her.  She
agreed to not fight for custody and even agreed to pay child support.

One week later, she tells me that I can have him in May, but that she won't pay
child support.  She is behind on her bills and is always struggling to make the
house payment.  She says she needs time to get on her feet and that she'd
pay support in the fall when she recovers.  If I agree to this, she says I can
have him.  If I don't agree, then she says I'll have to fight to get him and
that I'll lose.  I asked her if she'd be paying for all the months that she'd be
missing at a later date.  She quickly replied, "No!"

Six years ago, she didn't care what my finances were.  I was told my FIRST
obligation and the FIRST check that I'd write each month would be for child
support.  Why do some wymin think they are above paying support?  Why do some
wymin put themselves first?   I am remarried and am buying a house.  She said
that with my wife's income, that I didn't need the support right now.

I can imagine what would have happened if I had said that I'd pay when I got my
bills under control, or what she'd say if I had asked for even a 30 day period
of not paying!  I can imagine what her and her other wymin friends would be
calling me.

She had finally decided that the house she's in is far more than she can
afford and that she'll try to sell it.  But she even bragged that she could
live in it for several months, perhaps a year, before they could make her move
out of it!  She said another wymin she knew had done that.

She's WILLING to give up my son, BUT she's using him as a bargaining chip.  I
have mixed emotions about what to do.  I'm going to talk to a lawyer.  I hate
to let her get away with this type of 'control' but I want what's best for my
12 year old son too.  And getting him out of there is for the best.

Perhaps I should give in and play her game just to get him away from her.  I
can still remember being told 6 years ago that the child comes first, that
support must be taken care of before anything else.  The scary thing is, it
would not surprise me that she'd win in court, although her and my son have a
track record of getting along quite poorly.  It'll break my son's heart if he
doesn't move in come May when we move into the house.  He has already started
packing.  My "X" said that it would be "my fault" if he didn't move in.

Has anyone else had an experience like this?

    Dwight
    
    Get the kid.  Worry about support later.
    
    fred( who paid every dime but is yet to collect a penny );

    I would imagine that she doesn't feel she should pay child support for
    the same reason many men feel that it isn't their duty either.  in
    fact, what you say she is saying sounds exactly like my ex when he is
    excusing himself for not having paid suupor on our daughter for 8
    years.
    
    However, this has nothing to do with your son, unless you feel that
    principals are more important than his welfare.  I would suggest
    getting your son out of a bad environment and worry about that money
    later, possibly much later.  (I gave up tyrying to collect, it wasn't
    worth the grief it was causing me or my daughter)  This gets him out of
    the middle and gives him a chance at recovery from a bad situation if
    these two truly can't get along.
    
    Meg 

    Dwight - I agree with Fred.  Get custody of your son first (full and
    complete custody with your X's agreement.)
    
    Then you can worry about getting support (via the courts.)  If you
    don't get the child support, it would be terribly unfair (and I
    wouldn't blame you for being furious about it) - but you'd still
    have your son!
    
    Best luck with whatever you decide to do.

Ditto from me.  Get custody now.  The safety of your child is more important
than money.  You may decide that you don't want to ask for support from your
ex, as that would be an additional aggravation in the life of you and your
son, if you can possibly get by without it.

				Steve

    Dwight,
    
    I agree with the others.  Get your son now.  He needs to be in a safe
    place.  The rest will follow.
    
    Karen

    re.22
    
    I echo the others here who've said, "Get your son the hell out of that
    environment!"  That she's using her son as a bargaining chip speaks
    volumes.
    
    I also agree with Meg, that the non-payers come in both sexes.  My
    ex-brother-in-law hasn't paid a red cent in court ordered support in 5
    years.  He's even gone as far as to not be employed to avoid garnishment
    of wages ... [yes, this means that the tax payers of North Carolina are
    paying my sister child-support; maybe I should give his name out to a
    few of them]
    
    If she's stating that she'll begin paying come September/October, get
    it in writing.  Get it in the custody decree effective the start date
    she specified. 
    

    Thanks for the comments.  Helps me think that this is indeed what I
    need to do.  I have an appointment with the lawyer tomorrow.
    
    Personally, I think she may change her mind on giving him to me before
    long.  She is already telling him that me and my wife won't take care
    of him and that he'll be sorry for wanting to go.
    

    I just wonder if you're son isn't old enough at 12, to legally decide to
    live with you, regardless of what his mother wants.  Unless she could
    prove that you were unfit or had coerced him into wishing to live with
    you.

    Also, I believe that at age 18, any child may file for unreceived
    support payments.  Of course, getting that money may be hard, but they
    can file.

RE:  Note 577.30  YOSMTE::SCARBERRY_CI                                  

>    I just wonder if you're son isn't old enough at 12, to legally decide to
>    live with you, regardless of what his mother wants.

There is no legal age in Colorado, but when a child gets to this age, his voice
is certainly heard.  My son is just 3 months from turning 13.

I feel pretty good about my meeting with the lawyer yesterday.  Unless my "X"
totally flip flops on giving up custody, he is certain that I'll have him in
our home by May.  As for support, we are not even mentioning that. My objective
is to get my son out of a nasty situation.  I just hope my "X" doesn't go back
on her word.  He is so excited about moving out of there.  It would crush him
and break his heart for her to stand in his way now.  This was the first
meeting with a lawyer that I really felt 'good' about.

    Having custody of your son is more important than the support IMO.
    Especially since she is slapping him around.  That must STOP and if
    it takes getting him away from her to stop it... then get him away
    from her ASAP.
    I think she would win in a custody fight since courts are prejudiced
    against fathers.... even if you have a clean record and she doesn't.
    If the boy WANTS to live with you what more do you need to tell you
    which way to go?
    
    SHE MAY CHANGE HER MIND LATER ABOUT CUSTODY.  You must watch out for
    you having 'custody' of the boy via verbal agreement with her while
    you pay the bills.   Later, she may change her mind, want the boy back
    after she has had months or years to gather herself financially at 
    your expense, then take you to court if you refuse to give him back and 
    YOU COULD LOOSE THE COURT BATTLE.
    
    I suggest moving the kid into your place, hiring a lawyer and getting
    your custody legally settled in writing with the help of the lawyer. 
    
    (I am not a lawyer and the comments above represent a laymans opinion)
    
    Jeff

    Hi Jeff,

    It's being done.  So far, no arguments.  My "X"'s only concern to date
    is paying the support.  Mine is getting my son.  The paperwork is in
    the processing stage now.  We've done our part in drawing it up and
    submitting it to them.  I should know something by the end of this week.
    I'm not worried about collecting support and have made that clear to
    her.  I've waited over 6 years for this to happen!

    It will be a legal court order, signed by a judge.  My lawyer says that
    she'd have a BIG problem ever getting custody again.  Why?  First,
    she'd have to prove that there are conditions in my home that are
    harmful to my son's living there.  Second, we'd bring out that she gave
    up custody to me as they were at the point of someone getting hurt due
    to hostile battles in her home, physical abuse, verbal abuse, and
    finally him running away from home and phoning me for help!

    Get this.  Her recent problem was with visitation.  I submitted a plan
    where she'd be picking him up at my home.  She tried to talk my son
    into him riding his bus to her home on the days that she'd have him, so
    she would not have to make two trips to my home... then she'd drop him
    off.  He gets home at 3pm.  She get home between 5:30 and 6pm!  His
    answer?  He told her, "No."  He told her that visitation was a time in
    which "she" was suppose to spend quality time with "him" and NOT for
    him to come home to an empty house and wait for her to come home.  She
    replied, "But you could play with the dogs."  He stuck to his guns. 
    She finally said, "Okay."

    Man, I can't believe this woman!!!  Talk about being selfish!  She is
    trying to weasel out of two trips and we'll only be living about 5
    minutes from each other!