From: sbishop@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men
Subject: Re: Itemized accounting of child support
Date: 4 Jan 93 06:57:57 EST
Organization:  Wright State University 

In article <1993Jan4.012311.17983@zooid.guild.org>, Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
> This time, I decided that I'm just not going to let this one slide...
> 
> sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes...
>>{_In article <1h0k4aINN32a@gap.caltech.edu>, peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah
>>eri) writes:
>>> This would not allow the CP to save any of the chilld support for college!
>>> Actually, depending on how you define "immediately", it may disallow the
>>> CP from salting away money for child-related emergencies, or Christmas
>>> presents, or a bicycle, etc.
>>>
>>Ah, but Michal, both Alan and Bob consider anything except money paid for
>>immediate basic minimal needs as luxury!  So, salting money away for a
>>bicycle (an HUGE luxury item in their eyes), or *gasp* college is a waste
>>of THEIR precious funds.
> 
> So, what is so WRONG with this, Susan?  After all, child support was only
> INTENDED for "support" with respect to basic necessities, not bicycles,
> ponies, and indeed, not even *college*.  These *are* all considered
> privileges and luxuries, and I have no problem with Don or Alan believing
> this way.  The fact that they DO feel this way, does NOT indicate any
> resentment of women, and I rather take some umbrage at your attempt to
> label these men in such a fashion.
> 

Sorry, but you really blew this one.  The MAIN reason for child support is
to try to approximate that the child does not suffer a huge change (for the
worse) in lifestyle due to the divorce.  THis means if the child was 
provided a certain standard of living before the divorce, it should not
then be dumped into total poverty after the divorce.  Evidently you really
don't understand the logic behind child-support payments.
Perhaps you should read about the recent court case where the millionaire
father was forced to pay the court ordered HUGE amounts of child support,
even though the mother had a very nice income, because the court said that
the money had been provided the child before the divorce, it must still be
provided after the divorce.
Please note: I do think the child was living a totally ridiculous lifestyle..


> If you want your daughter to have a pony or a bicycle, or to go to college,
> what is so wrong with putting your nose to the grindstone and doing it
> yourself?  My mother managed to do it herself, without support, so what's
> stopping other women from not relying on child support for things other
> than necessities?
> 

Well, some women don't have the skills or the training to do so.  And, why
are you so dead set against the father contributing his fair share?

> ---
> Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
> ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
> (416) 322-7876
> 
> "Gravity: It's more than just a fragrance.  It's the LAW!"
>    - Will Steeves, President, GOiDS "R" We, Inc.
> 
>  * SLMR 2.1a * You teach Unix?  That's GREAT!  What do you teach them?

Sue
Xref: sparky alt.dads-rights:3274 alt.child-support:4323 soc.men:22498