HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mgsail@prefect.cc.bellcore.com (goldstein,marvin)
Subject: Re: College is not a "right".
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 13:12:20 GMT

In article <FP5ywB1w165w@oneb2.almanac.bc.ca> lisa@oneb2.almanac.bc.ca writes:
>> In article <C0EID4.2uB@vcd.hp.com> johne@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (Joh
>> >goldstein,marvin (mgsail@prefect.cc.bellcore.com) wrote:
>> >: 
>> I have another quirk of the law, at least in New Jersey:  The courts just
>> refused to reduce my alimony to my former wife who now makes $60,000 plus per
>> year.  Trust me, I don't make a whole lot more and we do not have any minor
>> children (kids are 25 and 22). 
>> 
>WHAT???  I hope you're actively rallying that such laws be changed ASAP!
>An outrage, indeed!
>
>Lisa
---------------------
That's why I posted this.  I would like to start an organization which
would support the abolishment of clearly unfair laws that make anyone
a victim of divorce.  To do this takes money.  We need an organization
with a legal defense fund and a name lawyer.  What I see on the net are 
individuals trying to fight on their own and they get burnt out quickly
and/or the funds dry up.  If anyone is interested in helping organize 
a mutual legal aid group, please get in touch with me.

Marv

Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:3260 alt.child-support:4305
From: sbishop@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support
Subject: Custody
Date: 9 Jan 93 14:22:07 EST
Organization:  Wright State University 


One problem in determining who gets custody is that traditionally women
have been the one who stays home and raises the child, at least for the
first few months/years.  The person who gets custody of a small child
should be which ever parent has been the primary care-giver.  In my 
case, if my husband and I had divorced when our children were small, 
at that time I was the primary caregiver.  Later on, joint custody would
have been more appropriate, since we both were more equally involved in
the care of the children.  
However, when they were little it would have been ridiculous to give him
primary custody, after all, he wasn't equiped to feed them.  
After the child reaches an age to be able to decide, then the court 
should take their wishes into consideration, also should assess whether
the potential custodian is really a fit parent and isn't just using
rank bribery to get the child to come with them.  


sue
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:3223 alt.child-support:4249 soc.men:22383
From: marks@mgse.UUCP (Mark Seiffert)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,lou.general,neworleans.general
Subject: Need Attorney in New Orleans LA.
Date: 6 Jan 93 15:28:49 GMT
Followup-To: alt.dads-rights
Distribution: usa
Organization: mgse


The Louisiana Free AC does not respond to E-Mail and I am trying to find
an attorney in the New Orleans area that specializes in fathers rights. 

Can anyone refer me to someone in this area?

I think I heard of an American Bar Association (ABA) referal service
that is nationwide, but I don't know the number. Does anyone know
if there is a referal service operated by the ABA and if so, what
the number is?


For anyone maintaining lists of attornies, i have found a referal 
service in the New Orleans area that may be of help.

The Lawyer Referal Service of the New Orleans Bar Association is an
agency that provides free referals to lawyers in the Greater New
Orleans area. It is operated by the New Orleans Bar Association. 
They can only provide referals in general areas, in the case of 
family rights, they refer an attorney who has indicated they 
practice Family Law. The number is (504) 561-8828. They will take
your name and number for their records, but that information will
not be given to anyone and it is up to you to contact the lawyer
they refer you to. You may call as many times as you like.

Regards,
	Mark Seiffert



-- 
Mark Seiffert,  Metairie, LA.
uucp:           rex.cs.tulane.edu!mgse!marks or rex!mgse!marks
bitnet:         marks%mgse@REX.CS.TULANE.EDU
internet:       marks%mgse@rex.cs.tulane.edu or marks@mgse.UUCP
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
From: PLANCHAJ@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu (Tony Planchart)
Subject: child support: FAQ (?)
Organization: Vanderbilt University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:36:16 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

I apologize if this is a FAQ; however, I haven't seen it asked in the few weeks 
I've been reading the group, so here goes:

My ex-wife and her new husband are moving out of state.  She is the CP and is
under a court order not to leave the state without first obtaining the judge's
permission.  I doubt that she will have any trouble doing so.  Therefore, we
will have to come to some agreement over visitation during summer, etc.  My
question is this, if I have my son during the summer for from six to eight
weeks, should I have to continue payment of child support for those apprx. two
months, or should I be given an exemption?  It seems to me fair that I should
not pay her for the two months that I have our son.  Furthermore, to be wholly
fair, shouldn't she pay me child support during this time?  All fairness aside
(and there seems to be very little fairness in our present family court
systems), I would be satisfied with not having to pay her for the right to keep
my son during the summer.  Any comments fro past experience, hearsay or
otherwise would be greatly appreciated.

Tony
From: dmcmilla@djm.cs.gmr.com (Don McMillan CS 50)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
Subject: joint custody - req for opinions
Date: 5 Jan 93 19:23:02 GMT
Reply-To: dmcmilla@djm.cs.gmr.com (Don McMillan CS 50)
Distribution: usa

I'm considering entering the arena to begin the lengthy battle of fighting 
for joint physical custody.

I would very much appreciate your opinions as to the benefits (why it
would be in my and/or the children's best interests) and perhaps even
opinions on the negative aspects (are there any?).  Your comments would
be a most welcome and needed to support.

 \_\_\_\_      \_\_\_\_\_   \_      \_           Don McMillan       __  .   .  
 \_      \_         \_       \_\_  \_\_          GM Research Labs  /  ` |\ /|  
  \_       \_        \_       \_ \_\_ \_         (313) 986-1436    | ,_ | | |  
   \_       \_        \_       \_  \_  \_                          \__/ |   |  
    \_       \_        \_       \_      \_                                     
     \_      \_   \_   \_        \_      \_      CSNet: mcmillan@gmr.com
      \_\_\_\_      \_\_          \_      \_     I-net: dmcmilla@djm.cs.gmr.com
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
From: mgsail@prefect.cc.bellcore.com (goldstein,marvin)
Subject: Re: College is not a "right".
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 13:13:49 GMT

In article <24742@galaxy.ucr.edu> starbuck@galaxy.ucr.edu (starbuck) writes:
>Is there a chance that your situation could become a test case for the High
>Courts?  I would think that alimony should be a thing of the past and that
>women today should be able to ( or made to ) take care of themselves.  If
>your ex-wife makes 60,000 dollars a year that sounds to me like she has 
>found the gravy train not to mention a weak character.  r
>
>It is quite obvious that the courts in N.J. are very biased.  

I would love to take this all the way to the top but as I said before,
what stops these are burn out and no funds.  In my case, I will run out
of funds.  The first ruling cost me $3000.  An appeal will run some 
$4000 to $6000 more.  That's why we need an organization to fight this
because if the laws can be made fair, we all will benefit.
Marv


Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men
From: ci542@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scott L. Underwood)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
Subject: child support over-payments
Date: 8 Jan 1993 01:46:33 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


For the past year and a half or so I've been making overpayments to
on the monthly child support I owe. I started doing this for a number
of reasons -- the most general one is simply my desire to stay out
of court. 
     The overpayments I've made are not large, but they've added up
quite nicely over the months.                
     My question is two-fold: has anyone else (non-custodial parent,
male or female) out there been doing this? and, are there any dis-
advantages or legal problems that I might run into in the future
if I continue to make overpayments? 

    (The mechanics are quite simple: I pay the disrict court,
     they send the full amount to the mother of my children, 
     and the clerk gives me credit on the next month's payment)

           ...tnx, scott (UCPL040@UNLVM) underwood
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men
From: mgsail@prefect.cc.bellcore.com (goldstein,marvin)
Subject: Re: College is not a "right".
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 15:48:08 GMT

In article <C0EID4.2uB@vcd.hp.com> johne@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (John Eaton) writes:
>goldstein,marvin (mgsail@prefect.cc.bellcore.com) wrote:
>: 
>: I would like to point out that, at least in NJ, if the parents of child can
>: afford to send their child to Rutgers (it forms a cost cap), and the child
>: has the grades for college, the child can SUE the parents to go to college.
>: Thus, courts in this land can make them pay.
>: 
>: Marv
>-------------------------------
>Has anyone successfully done this? It seems like all you would have to do
>is move to the next State over and the case would be thrown out of court.
>What happens if a kid is awarded enough money to go to school but then
>decides to spend it on fast cars and drugs instead of an education?
>
>John Eaton
----------------
According to my attorney, it has been successfully done in relation to graduate
school as well as undergraduate.  WRT fast cars, the money never goes directly
to the individual (notice I did not say "child") but to the school.

I have another quirk of the law, at least in New Jersey:  The courts just
refused to reduce my alimony to my former wife who now makes $60,000 plus per
year.  Trust me, I don't make a whole lot more and we do not have any minor
children (kids are 25 and 22). 

Marv
>!hp-vcd!johne
>
>


Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:3178 alt.child-support:4177 soc.men:22258
From: sbishop@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men
Subject: Re: Itemized accounting of child support
Date: 6 Jan 93 12:23:54 EST
Organization:  Wright State University 

In article <1993Jan6.140757.27574@linus.mitre.org>, cgates@mitre.org (Curt Gates) writes:
> In article <1993Jan6.003820.9181@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> 
> smile1@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (gray,david l) writes:
>> What you really want is your child raised right. 
> Right.
>> If you can determine
>> quality, the winter coat will come on it's own.
> True enough.
>> Accounting is not the real 
>> problem, it is bad parenting.
> Yes, indeed. And I am suggesting that accounting is not the *problem*, but 
> an attempted *solution* to the problem of bad parenting -- and a rather 
> ineffective and desperate solution at that. We are really talking about 
> equal treatment under the law here.  The daddy making the payments is held 
> to strict accountability to *pay* the support, but mommy can then spend 
> that money with no accountability to anyone.  Why is it you never read 
> about the deadbeat moms who blow the support money on luxuries for 
> themselves to the negelect of the kid?  Either way, the kids are the ones 
> that suffer.  Itemized accounting is an attempt to make sure the kids get 
> what the law intended that they get.

I would have no problem with doing itemized accounting
for my foster son, it would certainly be worthwhile if it would make his
father shut up.  Hmmmm, how much am I supposed to allot a mile for 
transportation?  I routinely put about 100+ miles a week during the
summer, just taking Mike to and fro to softball practice and games.  

Do I just average in his share of the food or put down cost per meal?  

As for laundry, do I charge by the item or by the load?  How about wear
and tear on the house?  

As you can see, this can get silly very quickly.

>>Smile,
> If I do that, people will think I am joking.
> 

A sincere smile is one thing, putting the word at the end of a really
nasty post is totally another.

Sue
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:3185 alt.child-support:4188 soc.men:22274
From: sbishop@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men
Subject: Re: Itemized accounting of child support
Date: 6 Jan 93 15:23:15 EST
Organization:  Wright State University 

In article <C0FxJ8.5JM@cs.psu.edu>, beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
> <1993Jan6.093642.6439@desire.wright.edu> sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes:
>><1993Jan5.174701.17496@linus.mitre.org>, cgates@mitre.org (Curt Gates) writes:
>>>article <1993Jan4.152935.6417@desire.wright.edu> 
>>> sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes:
>>>> Besides, the point that was
>>>> actually under discussion was whether child support should provide more
>>>> than a minimal amount of support.
> 
> [inflammatory summary deleted; available on demand (satisfied, Sue?)]
> 
>>THEN the Beav had the *nerve* to say *I* was the one who brought up the
>>Florida vacation.  I wasn't.
> 
> 
> "Plus out of the $300 we provide
>  him an allowance, transportation to all his sporting events, food, shelter,
>  entertainment, a really nice vacation every year....... (this Christmas
>  we will spend a week at a condo in the Florida Keys)....  And his dad 
>  accuses us of 'profiting!'."
>     Sue Bishop, 10/3/92, <1992Oct3.204455.4515@desire.wright.edu>
> 
> "I mentioned Florida because Sue and I had a debate about whether
>  taking a condo in the Florida Keys for a week is a luxury or a
>  billable necessity."
>     Don Beaver, 12/3/92, <ByosH2.B1D@cs.psu.edu>

NO, Beav,*YOU* brought this up as a part of the discussion about Lisa's
problem.  That is what I am saying, you kept trying to cloud the discussion
of Lisa's ex who refused to pay child support by bringing in this.

This has been pointed out to you repeatedly.

> 
> Just for the record, Sue.  This followed your tirade about
> "jerks" and "bastards," including calling your foster son's 
> father a jerk after he complained about paying.
> 
> Don
> -- 
> beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged

Ah, yes.  And you consider the payments outrageous.  Funny, I guess you
think the father shouldn't pay any support at all. 

Again, for the record, I called him a jerk because he had abandoned his son,
refused custody when it was offered, told the County that he didn't want his
son and to either keep him in the Home or else put him in a foster home.
Then when they did take him to court for child support, he was suddenly the
injured person and they had stolen his son and were impoverishing him by
garnishing his wages.

Once again, Don resorts to creative editing.

Sue
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:3253 alt.child-support:4281 soc.men:22435
From: bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us (Bob Kirkpatrick)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men
Subject: Re: Itemized accounting of child support
Date: 9 Jan 93 01:13:45 GMT
Organization: Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA

rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) writes:

>    Comment #2: I've been offered work, but I cannot accept it since my
>                lawyer told me I must be unemployed when we go to court if
>                I want to maximize the award I get.

One of my cheerful moments during the holidays happened at Fred Meyer, a
multifaceted variety store. I was in line behind two women who were talking
about their divorce cases. One made almost the exact comment you show here.

She started to write a check to the store, and I made an exaggerated gesture
to look at the check she was writing. She gave me a severe look, and asked
me what I was doing. I produced my ID (which shows me to be an officer of
Superior Court) and said that "Purposely deceiving the court is a felony,
and I wanted to make sure I had your name spelled correctly." I also asked
her who her attorney was, because I was sure that the Bar Association would
like to know about lawyers who give advice like that.

She literally got white as a sheet, said "Oh my God!" and RAN out of the
store in tears.

It felt good.

---
Bob Kirkpatrick <bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us>
Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men
From: smile1@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (gray,david l)
Subject: Re: Itemized accounting of child support
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 23:51:23 GMT

In article <C0Jo7D.8Ly@vcd.hp.com> johne@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (John Eaton) writes:
>sbishop@desire.wright.edu wrote:
>: 
>: Ohio's support seems quite reasonable to me.  It's based on both parents'
>: income, does not exceed 20% of the total of both.  So if each is 50% of
>: the entire total, each only contribute 10%.
>: 
>: Sue
>-----------------------

This seems to be the best I have heard.  It sounds as though each parent
should have enough money left over to do what they want.  Do you think that
it helps NCPs be more involved in making decisions when coming up with money
is an issue.

Smile,

Dave
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:3186 alt.child-support:4189 soc.men:22275
From: sbishop@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men
Subject: Re: College is not a "right".
Date: 6 Jan 93 15:25:19 EST
Organization:  Wright State University 

In article <1993Jan6.154808.8381@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, mgsail@prefect.cc.bellcore.com (goldstein,marvin) writes:
> In article <C0EID4.2uB@vcd.hp.com> johne@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (John Eaton) writes:
>>goldstein,marvin (mgsail@prefect.cc.bellcore.com) wrote:
>>: 
>>: I would like to point out that, at least in NJ, if the parents of child can
>>: afford to send their child to Rutgers (it forms a cost cap), and the child
>>: has the grades for college, the child can SUE the parents to go to college.
>>: Thus, courts in this land can make them pay.
>>: 
>>: Marv
>>-------------------------------
>>Has anyone successfully done this? It seems like all you would have to do
>>is move to the next State over and the case would be thrown out of court.
>>What happens if a kid is awarded enough money to go to school but then
>>decides to spend it on fast cars and drugs instead of an education?
>>
>>John Eaton
> ----------------
> According to my attorney, it has been successfully done in relation to graduate
> school as well as undergraduate.  WRT fast cars, the money never goes directly
> to the individual (notice I did not say "child") but to the school.
> 
> I have another quirk of the law, at least in New Jersey:  The courts just
> refused to reduce my alimony to my former wife who now makes $60,000 plus per
> year.  Trust me, I don't make a whole lot more and we do not have any minor
> children (kids are 25 and 22). 
> 
> Marv
>>!hp-vcd!johne

This sounds entirely unfair to me.  Exactly what did they say to justify this?
Did they give any kind of reason?  

Sue
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men
From: smile1@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (gray,david l)
Subject: Re: Itemized accounting of child support
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 21:54:57 GMT

>If a parent and one child live in a house, it would make sense for the 'cost of
>keeping roof over kid's head' to be half of what rent or mortgage payment or
>whatever.  Same with utility bills and food bills (although food bills may need
>to be adjusted for teenagers :)
>doesn't look under 18....)

I strongly disagree.  Both my ex-wife and I now own houses.  I pay for mine
and she needs to pay for hers.  If my children come to visit or stay with
me in the event of her death my mortgage will not change, the heat will stay
the same, trash collection witll still cost $29.00 a month and I will still
have to vacume the floor.  I will still be cooking dinner every night for
myself and my new wife and all I will really do is cook 2lbs of fish instead
of one pound.  I do not expect to get paid for it either.  

In my own case I would hate to see my ex-wife and I get into a stupid war
over gas money and paying her mortgage.  A lawyer would have a field day
with it.  We would both end up broke and his children getting the money.

My ex-wife and I went through thousands of dollars before we just learned to
get along and count our blessings.  I really think that each parent needs
their own child-support money to get the children the thinks they want.

A perfect example in my case is both my ex-wife and I wanted my youngest
girl to get organ lessons.  We agreed that she would by an organ and I would
pay for the lessons.  It only works because we both had money.  If she had
refused to help I could have just done it on my own.  The problem steps in
when one parent wants something for their child at the others expense.  The
court system approves the latter.  At the start of my divorced years, my
children only got what my ex-wife could afford because I had no money.  Each
parent really needs their own independence and choices.  They also have
other causes that they may need to consentrate on like older parents and
a like.

We should never micro-manage an adults money.

Smile,

Dave


Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:3182 alt.child-support:4185 soc.men:22271
From: mikelle@vaxb.gbus.virginia.edu
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
Subject: Sample Separation agreements
Date: 7 Jan 93 00:20:05 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia

Greetings:

I do not know if this subject is "proper" for this newsgroups, so if
it is not, please point me in the right direction.

Is there a book available that has some sample separation agreements
in it?  I realize that everyone's divorce is different especially
when it involves children, but I would be more comfortable if I
could see a few examples to make sure I'm not leaving out something
obvious.

Thanks for any help!

Eddie
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:3264 alt.child-support:4311
From: bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us (Bob Kirkpatrick)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support
Subject: Re: Custody
Date: 9 Jan 93 22:24:39 GMT
Organization: Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA

sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes:

> 
> However, when they were little it would have been ridiculous to give him
> primary custody, after all, he wasn't equiped to feed them.  

What?

I was the primary care giver in my family, and I had no problem feeding
them at all. My wife pumped, and we also purchased breast milk through
the hospital. All three of my kids are healthy, and I'm pretty sure
love my wife and I equally.

> After the child reaches an age to be able to decide, then the court 
> should take their wishes into consideration, also should assess whether
> the potential custodian is really a fit parent and isn't just using
> rank bribery to get the child to come with them.  

Sigh. Ditching concept of revoking parental standing by virtue of divorce
would have the best effect, and not provide the child with the anguish of
a decision like that. Why it is that people figure it has to be 'one or
the other' mystifies me. Arguing for either maternal or paternal sole cus-
tody is STILL ripping the child off for a parent.

---
Bob Kirkpatrick <bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us>
Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men