Conference quokka::non_custodial_parents

    Michele,
    
    I'd recommend runnning a quick calculation and see what the guidelines
    say he should be paying, then make a decision as to whether or not he
    should go in for a modification.  To do that, he'll need an idea of how
    much the mother is making and how much she's paying for child care.  If
    you want a copy of the worksheet used by the court to figure support
    under the guidlelines, send me a note.  
                                                             
    Polly

    In Ohio, that kind of thing is pre-defined based on combined income.
    So getting an adjustment is straightforward unless one party wants
    to make it hard; then it gets drawn out over a long period of time.
    
    Her living with her folks wouldn't make any difference.  You need
    to find out the specifics for your state.
    
    This may sound strange, but would it be possible for the 2 of them
    to discuss the matter, reach a tentative agrement based on the
    circumstances, *then* get a lawyer to settle it?  You only need
    a lawer to handle the details of the court system.  This way some
    $'s can be saved and both parties protected.
    
    I'm thinking about a career change that would drop my income a lot
    in a few years and if I do so, plan to handle the matter, if possible,
    per the above.
    
    			   John

    
    According to my attorney in NH at least, the courts are only
    interested in what you do between you if one party or the other
    does not agree or is not satisfied.  In other words, if your
    SO goes to his ex and makes a proposal that she is willing to 
    go along with, then no one else needs to be involved or even to 
    know about it.  They simply decide between them what changes to
    make and then do it and that is that.  The problem comes about
    if she isn't willing to talk.  For that, he may need the court.
    
    Steve
    

    
    
    re -1
    
    Steve,
    
    That is one of the big problems.  She refuses to talk to him
    on this issue.  She threatened him last week that she would
    not bring the kid up for Father's day which is in the agreement
    because her tires are bald.  She complained to him because
    he is behind on the support and therefore she has not had
    the money to pay for new tires. To which he replied that 
    child support is not supposed to buy her new tires.  But
    she apparantly doesnt think that is true.  Bizzare!!!
    
    
    That's life.
    Mi

    re. 4
    
    I agree that child support is NOT meant to pay for tires, however,
    if the money which would have paid for the tires has to go to feed,
    clothe and house the child because the child support isn't coming in,
    then there is a legitimate connection between the two.
    
    

    Witholding visitation is NOT a valid retaliation for failure to
    pay child support the same as witholding child support is not
    a valid retaliation for witholding visitation.  WITHOLDING 
    VISITATION IS A VIOLATION OF THE CHILD'S RIGHTS AS WELL AS THE
    FATHER'S.
    
    fred();

    
    re 5
    
    
    Polly,
    
    This woman and her child both live with her parents.  From what
    we are being told by her she is not paying to house or feed her
    child.  And she is always sent in the same clothes when she
    visits Dad.  It is not as though this woman is not working.
    He is not, she is and is making much more than they both
    were when they first figured the amount out.  The only bill
    that this woman has to pay for his her car payment which is
    quite low and daycare which is abnormally high due to the
    school she chose.  
    
    Neither one of us are denying the fact that he does have to
    give her suppport.  But due to his circumstances it is nearly
    impossible for him to be sending her 80/week when he is making
    0/week.  
    
    And as Fred said, witholding visitation has absolutely nothing
    to do with not receiving support though the courts allow it
    to happen.  
    
    
    Mi

    I'm not advocating withholding visitation due to his being late with
    the support.  As I recall the issue (which might have might have been a
    smoke screen) was that she was supposed to drive the child to visit and
    said she couldn't because her tires were not safe.  And she claimed that
    she hadn't been able to afford new tires because she hadn't been
    receiving the child support.  Perhaps, the answer should have been to
    call her bluff and suggest that they work out an alternative form of
    transportation.
    
    I was only responding to the statement that "child support isn't
    supposed to be used to buy tires".  And my point was, child support
    becomes a part of the custodial parent's budget that they depend on.  
    I know very few custodial parents who don't need the money. And, when 
    they don't receive it, money which was planned for something else has to 
    be used for basic expenses.   
    
    Now, I'm obviously not in a position to judge the situation you describe.
    And I'm making no judgement about why your boyfriend is behind in his
    support. I just wanted to point out that, in general, non-support for
    whatever reason, impacts things that may not appear to be directly
    connected with the child.
                                       

    
    
    re -1
    
    Polly,
    
    The point was well taken.  
    
    Michele