Conference quokka::non_custodial_parents

I'm not a lawyer, but I believe he isn't allowed to make ANY deductions
unless he has the judges approval.    I suspect you could take him
to court and the judge would order ALL of these deductions are owed
to you.   Probably a letter from your lawyer to him (maybe with a
threat to have his wages garnished) would get him to send the full amount.

What usually goes on here (and the judge understands this) is your
ex is angry about having to pay YOU.   This file is full of notes by
ex's who at least claim to be willing to support the child but not the
ex.   You can't change this.   If it's worth the bother, you can
probably get the judge to order him to pay.

However, I'm sure you have seen how many groceries a 14year boy can
eat.   If your ex doesn't want to negotiate a fair amount to deduct, you
have lots of legal power on your side.  I think a generous offer would be to
politely tell him that either
	1.) you will accept a flat deduction equal to the change in your
	grocery (etc.) bill while he's there.
or	2.) you will have your lawyer ask the judge to order payment of back
	support, and no deductions.

By the way, in Massachusetts, anytime you want you can ask for a change in
the amount of support, and if you go to court, maybe you want to ask for that
also.

Please let us know how you make out.

    What you're ex is doing is not fair if he took it upon himself
    to deduct expenses without prior consultation with you.  It is 
    also not a very wise move if this action wasn't sanctioned by
    a court order - then he is in contempt.  
    
    In my opinion child support should always be forthcoming
    notwithstanding extreme extenuating circumstances (ie, unemployment).
    Any modifications should be communicated in advance and agreed
    to by both parties.
    
    How would you feel if he paid you the full support as agreed to 
    then sent you a bill (with receipts) for your son's expenses.
    This sounds more reasonable.  I've spent thousands of $$ on my
    2 sons during weekend visits and vacations over and above child support.
    Because I've opted for wage garnishment, I don't have the option 
    of making ad-hoc modifications to my support payments.
    
    If you could work it out with him without going to court it would
    probably be alot easier for you both in the long run.   Do what 
    you think is fair for you both.  If you disagree with the amount
    he's deducting explain your position and give him a chance to 
    respond.  If you can't resolve this amicably with him, then it's
    time to go to court, which I think puts you at an advantage although
    it will make things tense in the long run.
    
    good luck,
    Sam
    
                                               

    Sam, 
    
    It is not a means of what is fair. For it is not fair for the NCP to
    pay both ways. And not to have the visitation secuals that a NCP does
    not have. But, this sounds like a set up string to bait many.
    
    .0
    
    Legally, he, has no leg to stand upon. But I would check the state
    statues and your final decree in case there was a clause installed.
    

I have a 17 year old son who comes up to visit a few weeks throughout the
year. I just absorb the food, laundry, etc. costs. Even an occasional
haircut. No complaints about that.

On a couple occasions however, I had to make a point (this was probably
illegal, but I don't care, frankly). I pay $270 a week in child support.
In the last year, no more than $100 had been spent on clothes for my son,
so I bought him a few things and deducted it from the check. I agree
with others who say I should have tried to negotiate it first -- but
my anger with the situation had gone beyond that point.

My -ex also refused to give my son any spending money for food or movies
out of that amount, so I now send him $15 directly and deduct it. Illegal,
probably, but as I said, don't really care.... I think my -ex would
be the loser, in my son's eyes, for her to go to court over $15 that is
now going into his hands rather than hers.

In my personal situation, the child support system clearly does not work in
the interests of the child.

    In many cases child support is an additional income for the personal
    disposal of the CP. And seldom does it filter to the hands of the
    child. And I recieved child support and do make it work for my
    daughter. I have seen where a woman got child support, alimoney, and
    the child was set up with over $60,000 for college. And all was
    squandered on good times. 
    
    

    ADLER ON-LINE had a 15 minute segment on last night about "DEAD-BEAT
    DADS". D.A.D.S.'s representative Paul (something) was on with some
    woman from a Child Support Advocacy group (a CP org). It was sad to see
    how in-articulate the issue was framed and the tactics against fathers
    rights. Every time Paul spoke and the CP rep was to rebut she copped
    out by saying "his response doesn't deserve comment". This is what we
    as NCP's are up against. It's a guerilla war folks! Make no mistake
    about it! My personal view is I do not have a problem with child
    support, it's how child support is being defined and administered.
    It's gonna take major constant pressure on the media to turn the
    perception of fathers as irresponsible incompetent lazy jerks into the
    true "human" image that's needed to change the laws on the books. I was
    talking to a lawyer friend the other night. He put it plain and simple,
    "keep the elderly, the enviromentalist and the woman happy and you can
    stay in public office forever!" It's proven political strategy and it's
    gonna take a concerted effort to break the strangle hold the radical
    feminists have on the political power structure. If more of us start
    kicking and screaming instead of saying "well,I can't change it" we've
    gotta a shot to change it.
    						Dan D 

    re: .3
    
    I agree that it is not fair for the NCP to pay both ways.  However,
    taking action without the sanction of a court order could prove to
    be disasterous.  My appeal is for the CP to be fair and reasonable
    about things.  Let's face it, the ball is in her court.  
    
    /sam       

    .7 Sam,
    
    I agree, and have stated that.:) Best is to have the CP take him back
    to the court and have his hand whacked for that.:) I am very certian
    that he will be beaten about the head and shoulders with his bills that
    he has presented to the CP.:) 
    
    Back to work.:)
    
    

    re .6
    I whole-heartedly agree with you!  I pay over $200 in support every
    week without fail. (Although yearly I'm accused by the DOR for 
    failure to pay support due to THEIR mistakes....)  My problem is
    that I believe a portion of this should go into a college fund
    for my sons. 
    
    I would support legislation which gave the NCP the right to decide 
    how x percent of support payments would be allocated.  I know she's 
    using much of it for her own purposes....I still find it necessary 
    to buy my sons clothes, groceries, toys etc.  Which I don't mind - 
    it's just that with the disposable income I have left I simply can't
    affort to put away some for college, pay my own bills, and weekend
    visits with my boys. 
    
    The problem is that many NCPs are too busy working second jobs to
    make ends meet that there's no time left in the day to get politically
    involved.  It's a real catch 22!
    

    No time in the day. After working two or more jobs. That is the plan!
    That is what they org wants you to do.:) To shut-up, and work.
    
    

    Just make regular phone calls to your state sen. and state rep. and
    don't let them (the aids) put you off. A lot of times you get put on
    hold and left there. Keep calling until you are satisfied they're
    listening and taking what you have to say seriously. Letters are also
    good. Just make sure they're hand written because they see this as a
    personal message instead of a globally-distributed form letter. Don't
    be afraid to bring the subject up in your daily contacts with friends,
    co-workers etc. It's amazing how ill-informed people are about the
    realities of being an NCP. Ignorance of our plight is a major
    impediment to our cause (which I feel is equal rights in court and sensible
    financial obligations linked to the childs needs, and much more!).
    
    These are just a few of the ideas I have that don't take a lot of time
    but require a little time on a regular basis. There's just not enough
    being done and we need to turn up the heat!
    
    					Dan D (concerned as hell!)
    Just some ideas that
    

    Some more info for you folks.
    
    there are presently two bills in the house (HR 1508 and 1509 I think!)
pertaining to our plight.
    
    One bill proposes to change the presumtive judgement from sole physical
    custody to joint physical custody. This would begin to solve a
    tremendous amout of the problems we parents face in regard to custody,
    visitation etc. There would have to be compelling evidence to not have
    joint physical custody instead of the present default to sole physical
    custody.
    
    The other bill makes a restraining order just as easy to get,but...
    If it is shown that the original justification for the restraining
    order was not properly justified, then the filer of the request would
    be held to penalties insted of getting a slap on the wrist and tying up
    all the courts time and resources.
    
    Get on the horn and find out where your sen. and rep. stands on these
    issues. The phone calls alone will make them aware that these issues
    are on their constituents minds. Find out how they'd vote. Just asking
    the question will get their attention!
    
    					Dan D
     

    I am a NCP of two boys. I see my children for five weeks during their 
    summer vacation months.  I negotiated to pay less to my former spouse
    during these summer weeks when the two boys are with me.
    This is a fair arrangement for both of us. 
    I don't think the NCP should pay any child support when he/she is
    ** supporting **  the children during the summer months.
    I also have bills to pay just my former spouse. Child support is just
    what it says it says **child support**  not ex spouse support!! 
    If the children are very young the NCP has to pay child care to the 
    Day Care and child support to the ex spouse; A very unreasonable 
    burdon for anyone. 
    To address the issue raised by the basenoter; Your ex should have 
    talked to you first before deducting the money from the child
    support.  Maybe you should address this in court as some have 
    suggested. If I were you I would try to negotiate first and
    if no success go to court.       Good luck.   
                                                  Bill
       

    Maybe the basenoter could share her views on what her idea of "fair and
    equitable" child support is? If anyone takes the time and studies the
    wording of the full text of the MA CS guidlines you will be able to see
    that:
    	- The original calculations of "the percentages" include all costs
    of an intact family unit (this included accomodations for day care)
    
    	- The CP is allowed to deduct child care expenses from available
    income and also gets a $15K exclusion of income 
    
    	- If the NCP has to carry health insurance only 1/2 of the cost is
    taken into account when establishing the NCP's financial obligation
    
    	- There is no mechanism (unless the cp and ncp have a stipulation,
    which bye the way, must be approved by the judge) to adequately take
    into account an NCP's need to provide a home not only for themself but
    an acceptable enviroment to parent his/her children when there is
    extended visitation (weekends, vacations etc).
    
    Seems to me the NCP is summarily financially sacrificed in the hope
    the money allocated for the kids actually gets there! 
    
    It's in the best interest of "everyone" to keep both parents
    financially viable insted of making one parent economically expendable.
    Two parents are better than one, and two economically healthy parents
    are even better! It's in "the best interest of the child".
    					Dan
     

    Didn't expect an answer.