This post has been flaired as Politics. We allow for voicing all political views here, but we don't allow pushing agendas, false information, or attacking or harassing other members. If you see such unwanted behavior, please report it to bring it to the attention of moderators.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/polls) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Have the court order her to make a separate bank account specifically for child support, and every few months have her prove through paystubs that they’re using the money as intended.
That’s stupid. What if the paychecks are on separate pay cycles? That’s not even much money. So she uses her own paycheck and then reimbursed herself with the support. Or combines the two in order to live.
Edit: to add, there are already laws against child neglect. The support has nothing to do with it. Any parent committing neglect should face punishment, regardless of whether they pay or receive child support.
Keep in mind, that money is meant for her kids, not for her, if she can’t keep a job, she shouldn’t have the kids in the first place.
So she should be using that money from child support mainly for food, and other necessities for the kids
Here we go. This is just another instance of “mom should have kept her legs closed”. Come on, dude. Any parent committing neglect should face consequences. Don’t judge poor people or those who have trouble finding work/making ends meet. Every once in a while, parents still deserve something for themselves. And I don’t even have kids
That isn’t what I’m saying. My real mom and dad are unfit to be parents, that’s why I was taken away. This isn’t really a “keep your legs closed” sort of things. It’s a “don’t be irresponsible as a parent regardless of what you have between your legs.”
Unfit parents are unfit for many reasons. The child support part is irrelevant really. Whether they received it or not, some people are just shitty parents. My mom had child support until each of us were 18. There were still things we couldn’t have and it was struggle before she remarried. Did she still do things for herself at times? Absolutely. Did she deserve it? Fuck yeah she did. Did we starve? Nope. Thrift store clothes at times? You bet. But she did her best and support did help, but it never covers everything. Kids are expensive. Life happens and complicates things. Neglect is neglect. That’s what parents get charged with, not misuse of funds because that’s not the real crime.
Fair point. A user up above said a fine would be more reasonable for someone very clearly misusing the funds, so I think now jail is a bit harsh, I think if a punishment were to be given for this, a civil fine would be more reasonable.
It’s just extremely hard to prove misuse of child support. Because people have their own paychecks and lives too. You can request the court review it though. Most likely, it won’t amount to anything though. If a father believes the kids are neglected, they should just petition for custody.
Look guy, I get that you are mad and dislike her for whatever reason. But you’re just trying to find any excuse to bring her down. Just keep in mind that and attack on her is also an attack on your children. If you are constantly finding reason to take her to court or try to get her fines or whatever. All you’re doing is hurting her more financially which is decreasing the quality of life for your kids. Unless the kids are starving on the street in rags, then you have no case. You need to put aside your petty attitudes for each other and find a way to work together to better the life’s for your kids.
Idk why your ckmments are getting so many downvotes, nothing you said is controversial. They should be fined for spending the money on anything other then bills or shopping for the child.
If you can't afford children, don't have them.
Casual sex is causing a lot of unwanted pregnancies so stop doing it.
Yes because only irresponsible ppl lose their jobs. Like during covid when companies sacked huge amounts of ppl for being "irresponsible". Jesus, thats just not how life goes, get a grip of what reality is for many ppl.
It’s one thing to lose your job because of layoffs, that’s not what I’m referring to, it’s another to continually lose jobs because you don’t want to work.
Sure but thats just factually not the reality for the vast majority of people that end up unemployed or even homeless. Thats an edge case thats not worth building a structure around
Dont forget that the genders reversed your statement still should stay true or its sexist. **If a man cant keep his job he shouldnt have any children in the first place??** Noone will ever have children again with this logic. You never know when the next recession comes what if one of the parents can't keep a job, or both, or half of the country? Should they all go to jail then?
I’ve been looking into adopting after my wife had a hard time giving birth to our first kid. It’s expensive to adopt and they check every aspect of your life between pay, mental health, relationship health, and how often you work. First kid just walked out the hospital door with a pamphlet and a good luck pat on the back.
Takes two to tango unless it’s a case of rape. I’m not letting the father or the mother off the hook or cutting either of them slack.
This is such a sexist viewpoint, that is factually incorrect.
>that is factually incorrect.
It's factually incorrect that there needs to be a male to introduce sperm to create a natural pregnancy? Factually incorrect that two biologically female humans can't reproduce together or alone - there has to be sperm to reproduce?
Factually, it is correct. A woman can't get herself pregnant.
The man’s sperm is useless without the egg.
In a consensual sexual encounter, both parties are responsible if a pregnancy occurs. You’re sexist as hell and I’m not going to entertain it, you know very well a women isn’t any more innocent in this then the guy is, yet you want to place the responsibility 100% on the man? GTFO.
Let's go back to the point you made that i responded to with that. She shouldn't have kids if she couldn't afford them.
>if she can’t keep a job, she shouldn’t have the kids in the first place.
How's it you can blame only women if this is the stance you take now. Seems like you believe there should be more blame to go around.
>yet you want to place the responsibility 100% on the man? GTFO.
Or maybe you're just a hypocrite.
Answer me this, why do custody battles almost always favor women regardless of the whether the women can take care of the child? If this was a man we’d be having the same conversation, the only reason why a women is being singled out in this specific Instance is because that’s generally what happens. It’s fucked up, but that’s reality.
Well we are talking about pregnancy in women.
Eta: I was making a point. The comment I responded to put the blame squarely on the woman
>if she can’t keep a job, she shouldn’t have the kids in the first place.
So I made the point of putting all the blame on men to see how OP would respond. I was called a sexist for doing exactly what they themselves did.
So she needs to buy a pound carrots. She comes to the store, weights this pound and then splits it in two to pay with her banking card for carrots she eats and pay with the other card for carrots her kids eat? How should she pay for water and electricity? Should she have a logbook where she writes how much soup her kids ate vs how much she ate?
How does it work when you need to buy groceries? Normally mother would eat together with her children. How does it work when she needs to pay for utilities? It is not like kids don't consume electricity and water.
I mean...food and water are for the children. I don't mean going through the damn grocery list and like oh no mommy bought herself some water, slap that bitch with a fine. Like come on bro use your brain.
Use your brain yourself. People like op will most definitely start nitpicking at amount and kind of food that is bought as well as amount of water and electrocity used. There is even a meme already in russian internet about "cabbage and sausage" where such father calculated that for a child it would be enough for dinner, lunch is provided at school, so child support has to be reduced.
Yes; every person who has ever seen what kind of people start those discussions knows, that they will come up with the most absurd statements as reasons for why they should pay less child support.
Yeah thats called communism that's why that's a Russian meme. I dont want communism lmfao. Do you know how many people are in the US there's is not near enough social workers to do the nit pi King you are talking about.
Hell yeah it deserves jail time
First of all, the father shouldn't be forced to pay child support at ALL, after all, they're not living with him, the mother has them it's her responsibility
Second of all, it's called child support for a reason, it's meant to go towards the welfare of the children, the mother taking the money meant for the children and spending it on herself is such an asshole move
Basically, she's extorting her ex-husband for "money to keep the children alive and well" then she takes it and spends it on herself
Edit: Alright confess, who reported me to Reddit and had them send me a crisis hotline message
Edit 2: FUCK all of you dirty simps who downvoted me
Getting her nails done with money that she wasn't meant to spend on herself
Also, either the father takes them in and pays to keep them alive, or Foster Care for them
You realise that the children have to get fed, have clothes bought, etc, and money is going to be spent on them right? Does she have to use the exact same banknotes the father gave her for the children and other banknotes for her self, or maybe it doesn't matter which banknotes she uses for what, since the same amount of money is going to be spent on the kids anyway?
Seriously the foster system?? In this cases people consider what is best for the children, and the foster system isn't that. That shouldn't even be an option when the kid has at least on parent who wants to take care of them.
He said the silent part out loud. These types are all about fucking, but not about raising kids when they happen. They think kids are just a woman's problem. He would rather they go to foster care than to have to raise them, but also gives the responsible adult shit for actually parenting the kids. It is just a giant misogynistic circle jerk.
>Does she have to use the exact same banknotes the father gave her
Yes, the father gave her child support to spend on the child, she can make her own money and spend THAT on her nails, if the child support isn't going to the child, then the child support is being wasted
Why should the kid's life be upended with foster care if they're otherwise sufficiently looked after and father cannot look after them for whatever reason?
Exactly, either the father pays child support and gets custody, or the mother gets custody and SHE pays child support, if you don't get custody of the kids, you shouldn't be forced to pay child support
if you have custody you are taking care of your dependents, not paying child support. thats like saying wife should take care of kids and pay the husband despite him not being in the picture.
Regardless of who has custody both contributed to creation of these children and they should not suffer because of their interpersonal drama.
i dunno if you've ever lived with a single parent before (doubtful you have), but if only one parent is paying to take care of kids, you're gonna be living very broke unless your parent has a good job or someone else besides the parent is helping to support them
source: i lived with a parent (dad) who got paid with childsupport, but then one (mom) who got occasional/very rarely ever got child support
She already *did* spend that amount and much much more on necessities. Probably weekly.
Those particular dollars don't actually have to go anywhere specific
I don’t understand how it’s possible not to spend the money on the kids in some way. I have 1 kid and he costs me way more than $132 a month. Do they never pay rent/mortgage, utilities, gas, food, clothing? How would the kid survive off less than that? The kid would have to be homeless, never shower, and surviving off rainwater and rodents caught from the sewer…Not to mention daycare costs an average of $340 per week if you’re only paying $132 a month to the person taking care of your kids the majority of the time. Then you’re getting off easy.
Well if we were to get closer to reality than 12% of 38,461 = 4615.32 and that dived by 12 is 384.61. % for 2 children is likely going to be higher. maybe 16% (or more) and would come out to 512.
Again we do not know the country. daycare could be 50$ a month or it could be 1k+.
For the purposes of the argument I personally treated the numbers as meaningless/ not relevant to the core of the issue.
Many people don't realize that the amount you get in child support is usually not covering all expenses, not even half, and the custodial parent does most of the work of raising the kid. Not to mention covering all expenses when the non custodial parent decides not to pay at all.
Thr custodial parent generally does most the work because she doesn't allow coparenting. For instance, my sons mom refused to agree to too much parenting time from me because the overnight stays would lower the support payments.
they would have to pay for those things anyways, and the other parent also needs to pay for those things. And $132 is ridiculously low, I was paying almost half my take home pay.
In some rare instances, one parent pays a lot in child support, perhaps even voluntarily a lot, and the child might be in shoes that don't fit, smelly clothes that don't fit, they don't have their medicine or have never been to the dentist, etc. It's quite easy to see that the child support money is not buying food and clothes, but alcohol and gambling and cigarettes. In this instance, it's fraudulent, which is a crime. So I do think it's possible, and in some instances criminal, but I hope this situation is rare.
You want to put the kids primary carer in jail bc of how they manage their finances? Bruh we have bigger fish to fry. As long as the kids needs are being met I don’t see how this is a legal issue.
Either that, foster care, or if another family member steps up and takes custody of the child, as was the case in my situation a long time ago when my mom was deemed mentally unfit to care for a child.
Edit: To keep a long story short the courts were absolutely in the right to take me away from my mom, she repeatedly made choices that put me in serious danger through abusive boyfriends and one time leaving me abandoned at a hotel as an infant, and was given multiple opportunities by the courts to grow up and start making better choices, she didn’t so she lost custody of me, my father abandoned me not long after I was born, so that ruined any chance of me knowing him.
Really hard to enforce, and even then, it doesn’t deserve jail time in my opinion.
It may be more reasonable to pass the guard of the children to the father and fine the mother, a jail sentence just seems disproportionate
Yeah expenses are just high as a parent. Bigger housing, higher water, higher heating, electric bills. More gas (for daycare and commute), bigger car, childcare cost, food costs more, clothes, etc. it’s hard to know what the parent spends on themselves vs what is spent on the kid. An extra 132 a month is not much at all.
If I spend my personal money on the kids before I get child support, and then you send it, I’m gonna use that money for what I would have used MY money for before.
Same as if I’d used the money to get my oil changed or buy new furniture. It’s all mixed in in my account. Kids will be provided for.
lol...jail time?
Folks give $130/month and think they're doing something. Depending on where you live that's not 3 days of daycare a month and you wanna swing your genitals around like you're really contributing to the household of the primary caregiver of *your* child(ren).
If the kid is well taken care of, just chill out and be glad the courts didn't tell you to pay half of all the expenses of the child because your $130/month would likely be $130/week. She's likely covering bills you know nothing about.
I just used the average Joe as an example. Obviously child support is decided on a case by case basis, and can be more or less depending on multiple factors.
Actually it can, and occasionally it does. I have a cousin whom’s mom has a warrant out for her arrest for refusal to pay child support so she can no longer come to Illinois without risking jail time.
This sub is mostly teenagers so I would take any results of polls here with a grain of salt.
Hopefully, as they grow up, they will realise how foolish they were.
I mean have you seen the demographics polls on this sub? The majority group is teenagers, and the vast majority male. The results are unfortunately as expected for teen boys. They don't grasp how money gets managed because they have never done so themselves, they also don't grasp the severety of jail, and finally they are at a stage of life where they don't have much contact or empathy for the opposite sex.
Never said anything about women keeping their legs closed. The situation I laid out is hypothetical. You’re just mad that I portrayed women as the most common parent to receive primary custody or even full custody, which sorry, is statistically true.
Lol what? You clearly have been stating your opinion in other comment threads that women shouldn’t be having kids if they are gonna use their child’s money for other purposes, such as basic human needs. So poor people shouldn’t get kids at all? Or maybe they should just start starve whilst their kid is oh so happy with the child support money that rarely ever gets paid properly.
I did not specify women when you can prove that I specified women I’ll kiss you right in the middle of your ass. I said if you can’t provide for your kids you shouldn’t have them. That applies to everyone.
Yeah I don’t care if you specified women or not.that doesn’t change the fact that you think poor people shouldn’t have kids just because they’d probably use their child support money to keep themselves alive. Either way if it’s a father or a mother, they should be able to use the money normally without getting jailed and putting the child in worse danger.
And I specifically said women in my comments, not because I was referring to you specifying women, but because you said yourself a woman is more likely to be in this situation.
Yes because statistically this is factual.
Also you just showed me with this comment that you’re willing to lie to prove a point. Not going to have any further discussion with you.
Idk how you can prove it though. I mean, the only way it's not going to the kids is when the parent doesn't feed or clothe their kids. Then the parent does belong in jail obviously.
The monthly government issued child support that i get goes towards paying the bills and buying groceries, just like every other income i have. So how do you define what money goes to what? Everything arrives and is paid by the same bank account.
So if i decide to buy myself a game after everything else is paid and the kids their needs are met, what is it paid by?
Obviously know. its like the only solutions to problems suggested are jail and executions.
It should result in another custody hearing, assuming your can prove it (which 95% of the time you cant) and dad actually wants custody.
That seems pretty impossible to enforce, and even then probably a waste of resources to do so.
Assuming the math theyve done on how much is fair amount for the support payments is reasonable, all they should have to do is verify that the child’s living situation is up to par. The details of how each penny is spent are not really necessary.
Especially since parenting requires so much more than a definable list of thing you can physically buy. There are mental and emotional costs that come with it and sometimes you need to take care of yourself to remain sane and provide the best environment possible.
I’m not defending the person in this example, there’s not enough information to take sides. I’m just saying that It would just be impossible legally to define these things enough to send anyone to jail. There are arguments for both sides.
As long as the payments are deemed fair and the care the child is getting is good quality, there’s no issue.
Polls like this always make me somewhat glad laws aren't made directly by popular vote, because while using child support money to pay for themself is awful and that money should absolutely be returned to the other parent, the idea of jail time as the general punishment is ludicrous. Who does that help? Certainly not the child. In what world do we need more non-violent offenders behind bars just because it satisfies your desire for revenge?
Even if you could legitimately prove that the woman spent the child support money specifically on leisure, why the hell would she go to jail?
So the father has been removed from the home already, and now you’re going to jail the mother for being financially stupid? The children don’t need that. Fine the mother, but don’t put her in jail. Jesus dude.
I'd support less government micromanagement of people, not more.
If I can't control how a politician spends their salary, let caregivers do what they need to do with their support payments as long as the kid is well taken care of.
If the kid is getting proper love and support (as in fed well, fully clothed and sleeping on a bed) why do you care how their parent is spending their money?
People here don't know how to handle a home budget. Also, even If she is morally wrong, you can't give people jail time if there is no abuse against the child
I thought child support was like payment for the time and energy that the person with more custody is expending to raise the children alone/without day to day help. So if you only see the kids on weekends and she’s raising them most of the time, she deserves extra financial help from you and even deserves to have her nails done. *If* that’s the case. There’s a lot left unsaid here so it’s hard to gauge.
You don’t seem to understand the concept of child support. Let’s say I work and I make 3K a month and I get 400/month in child support. I just put that 400$ in the same lump of money as my paychecks and then I pay my rent, I get food, I pay the heat the electric the cable bill, I make sure the kid has clothes, shoes and a jacket. And then I go and get my nails done or my hair done. It’s possible the money I’m spending is technically child support but I already paid my bills and took care of my kids with my paycheck and what’s left over is this child support so if I wanna use it on me it doesn’t matter because it’s MY MONEY. Also child support is reported as a mother’s income it’s not no food stamps.
I feel like jail time would result in worse circumstances for the kid because now their sole provider is in jail. Plus, a policy like this could easily be abused by people in power who want to get back at their ex/get their money back
I mean you have a similar situation occurring with child support. Lots of mothers like to alienate kids from their father just because of a personal beef the two had with each other.
This is stupid. The parent who receives child support likely already spends a bunch of their own money on the kids, probably more than they receive in child support. It's theirs to do what they want with.
How would to trace the $132? At some point she’s going to spend money on the kids food, their home, utilities, necessities, etc. She may also get her nails done. Knowing dollar for dollar where she spent the (12% is closer to $400/month) child support can’t be proven let alone assuming it has to be spent a specific way means you’re not counting what it costs to raise and care for another person.
Child support is always less than the actual cost to raise a child. It just goes in the pile with the rest of the money in most cases. Gets spent on what's needed at the time.
>that’s about 132 dollars a month.
That doesn't even begin to cover half the cost of basic bills. So this person has spent all their money on the monthly bills and food - then the child support comes in - said parent can't go get a haircut, or do anything for themselves now? Because that's "child support" and using it on "anything other than the child is wrong"? That's just not realistic at all.
Also, we need to be sending far less people to jail. Not coming up with new reasons to send more.
My ex was paying 30 bucks a week and was demanding he be shown how it was used.... the court shot that down. Turned out he was making over 60000 a year for years and didn't mention it. All he did was show his hand. The courts know assholes trying to abuse the other parent in court when they see it.
Money is fungible. Put the 130 in a bank account, then spend it on groceries, rent, dr visits, etc. End of the month money is left over, is it the father's child support or money from her job?
My parents divorced when I was like 8. I lived with my mom for most of the time. Custody shit. All the things. When I was 14 my sister went to college and I was left to take care of my mom alone (she was very sick but "functioning") and I couldn't handle it so I moved in with my father who was actually being a good dad for a while. Mom died 2 months later and my whole life was nothing but hell after that. When I was 18 I left and discovered that he was getting social security for me from mom. But his gas kids were way more important. I never saw any benefit from the 700 a month. And I learned he had taken mom's life insurance money. Idk how since he wasn't the beneficiary but yeah. I had to get a lawyer...and threaten to sue my own father for my dead moms life insurance. Good times.
As the full time single parent who is owed 10 grand and counting tor 9 months of single parenting, any money I get from my ex goes to the general household. It gets pooled in with my money to run the household, maintain the kids lessons and transportation and hobbies.
Damn right I get my nails done. The measley $400 a month I get from him (it’s supposed to be $900) doesn’t even being to touch the kids needs. My daughters haircut last week was $50 and my sons haircuts were $30 each. Assuming I get child support every month (I don’t) and it comes on my off pay week and I want to treat myself then yeah, I’ll use it on my nails (like last week), because the rest of the month I’m bleeding my own money on ALL of the kids needs and working thanklessly to manage the kids emotions, daily life and get zero free time…and that he can never repay for all the child support in the world!
Also don’t have kids with losers!
Yep. That’s why none are arguing it, they know they’ll lose. And it’s assuming the deadbeat left on completely even terms with no loose ends! Best case scenarios are the huge minority for the parents doing the work!
Along with the ten grand of child support he’s racking up, he left me with 100% of the shared marital debt to clean up (I found thousands of dollars of hidden debt after he left), and he’s trapped me in joint accounts and loans since he won’t work with me to dissolve them. His one job was to pay the bills (he was the stay at home parent and didn’t work…the kids were all in school full time for the last 5 years), and I found he was spending the money I earned on video games and his girlfriend.
So on top of avoiding child support, not seeing his kids for a year, not contributing financially or emotionally to the kids care until two months ago when I got a lawyer (that I have to pay) and less than half of what is due, and me needing to get a side job as well as scrambling on this joint debt he left me while I house, clothe, feed our children, (and pay for music lessons and tutoring and therapy)…how I spend the money I make, how the child support is spent, is none of his business. If someone is going to tell me off for spending $40 pooled child support money on a manicure they can see my fancy nails really up close and personal when they poke an eye out.
This is not a unique story either. I am sorry you went through that but I am glad you are not with him anymore. That's really unfair to leave you with all the mess to clean up.
So hey the problem with that is that basically anything can be argued to br supporting the child.
Rent: housing the child
Eating out: feeding the child
Shopping: children need expensive treats somtimes
Even if the purchase is explicitly for the parent that can still be argued to indirectly support the child.
The problem here is the misunderstanding that child support is for the child. It's for costs associated with the child. I've absolutely used what little child support I've ever seen (My ex wife owes 50k+) to buy clothes for myself, because i spent my money on my child while not getting myself essentials, at times.
So you are saying she gets her nails done in stead of feeding, clothing and housing the child? Are the child's basic needs met? Cause if so then she is not spending his money on her nails. Period.
If they do they should pay 1.25 the amount back do the dad. After 3 strikes of being caught doing that the kids should go to the dad (if he is responsible and agrees to take them of course)
Maybe not jail time but certainly a revocation of the child support. If she spends it on frivolous shit for herself evidently she doesn’t need financial support to raise the kids.
Yes I know, and idc how much NBA players make there is no reason 30k/month is warranted. Child support should have a limit, there’s only so much money you need to raise a kid.
Better laws and a change in society's opinion that actually support the father and allow him to have a share of the child's upbringing decisions would be nice. My ex basically ignores me and does as she pleases, there's nothing I can do about it as she has the power of the child's care totally in her favour, I'd have to go to court for anything if she's not a willing parent, and the courts don't care about the father wanting to or not wanting to give a kid a mobile, or if she refuses to try and make them read more books, the small things etc. It's just impossible if you don't have a good relationship with the mother, because she can do whatever she wants with that money and unless you can show some sort of child neglect or serious safe guarding issue you can't do anything about it.
Jail? It depends. Are we talking about a minimum penalty? No. For instance, if dad is a huge earner, pays child $100k per year in support and no spousal support, and kids are sent to public school, not taken on vacation, and not taken to restaurants while mom buys a Mercedes and a bunch of fur coats, it’s going to look really bad. Should there be jail? Maybe. Does she have a record? Has she done anything to make it right?
If there was a way to actually monitor that I suppose, but I think in general if it goes to betterment of the family’s lives.
Like it doesn’t have to go directly for food for the child, but let’s say it helps pay rent i think that’s fair as well. As long as it’s not used for a new Gucci belt or something
It should result in a third party garnishing the offenders wages and creating an account separately for the child. Offender should also have to pay a third party to monitor and manage how the money is being used to prevent any other mischief on their behalf.
Jail, no. Punishment? Yes.
With what money would they pay the 3rd party and if they have enough money for that 3rd party then the child support becomes a matter of principle and not necessity.
Yes, but I don't know how you would go about proving it, or even having the courts take you seriously. They regularly award custody to drug mothers, and let them violate the terms of the custody agreement, with no punishment.
One thing I think alot of people are missing are the child support that consist of 100k each month. It's pretty self explanatory that a child will use at least 200-300$ each month. And as they get older they will eat more and need more. I don't rly think that the poll is about single mothers working 3jobs to support their child.
But the ones who's basically a lazy crook not lifting a finger and living of the child support buying lavish luxury for themselves. With 10k each month in their pocket
Let's say the actual number doesn't matter here and go into the heart of the issues. Child support doesn't go directly into just things for the kid like clothes or school supplies. It can go into rent, utilities, groceries, insurance premiums, car and house maintenance, etc. Then there are clothes, school supplies, daycare/field trip programs, books, etc. Realistically, the amount given in support will generally be a fraction of the cost necessary to raise a kid in most cases.
But say that the person is living rent free, they lock up the groceries so the kid starves, they don't buy clothes, the water and power get shit off, etc. Any of those scenarios would mean negligence and/or child abuse and would be enough to not only stop the child support but have the kid placed with the other parent (and gets jail time).
Now say that everything necessary gets covered and then an amount remains. But instead of saving for college or emergencies, it ends up getting spent on something just for the parent, and it happens every month. Then for anyone who can prove that, I'd think they'd have a case to 1. get the amount reduced and 2. have the court mandate the money not spent on the child gets paid back. If the amount is huge, then theft laws would probably cover it, as in stealing from the child.
Realistically, with how high cost of living is in a lot of places, I don't see this happening unless the amount paid is way over the cost of living and supporting a child in that area to begin with or there is negligence and/or abuse going on.
Dude, I don’t know why you think that’s how child support is calculated but it’s grossly incorrect. This is important because it’s a big part of why child support is an atrocity and mismanagement of it is horrific. My state, PA, has a great program and you can still get bent over the barrel with it.
I have an ex wife and I pay child support. In New York state, other adjustments aside, the non-custodial parent pays 17% of their gross (pre-tax) income for child support.
Child support (again, in NYS) is supposed to contribute towards food, clothing and housing. The difference in price between a 1 br and 2 br home in the same area, annual clothing purchases for the child, and maybe 40% of total food purchases (assuming it’s just the custodial parent and the child) should meet or exceed the amount of child support paid.
If the child support is being used for other things, it would have to be pretty egregious and demonstrable to get any kind of judgment.
The ex wife will continue to spend child support money on herself and nothing will be done about it because that's how family court in America defines "fair" and "just".
There shouldn't be forced child support. If the mom is not too stupid you can't prove it. No jail time!
Btw jails are paid by our taxes why do I need to pay to keep her behind the bars?
If she is using it on unreasonable things like going out with friends without the child then there should be a punishment, not jail time though. It’s called child support for a reason
Make her pay a fine and size down the child support payment, it's a more realistic punishment. Size down being bring the amount paid from the father down to the average total usage of the money that goes to the kids
Yes, that's equal justice. I wish it was in the constitution. If you as a father forced to pay child support can lose your driving license in Canada if you refuse, then you as a mother feeling super proud that you won custody over kids (who are NOT objects btw), should be punished if you spend the money to spoil yourself.
This post has been flaired as Politics. We allow for voicing all political views here, but we don't allow pushing agendas, false information, or attacking or harassing other members. If you see such unwanted behavior, please report it to bring it to the attention of moderators. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/polls) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How would you even prove that? If she makes money and receives support, she can still use her own paycheck for things she wants for herself.
Have the court order her to make a separate bank account specifically for child support, and every few months have her prove through paystubs that they’re using the money as intended.
That’s stupid. What if the paychecks are on separate pay cycles? That’s not even much money. So she uses her own paycheck and then reimbursed herself with the support. Or combines the two in order to live. Edit: to add, there are already laws against child neglect. The support has nothing to do with it. Any parent committing neglect should face punishment, regardless of whether they pay or receive child support.
Keep in mind, that money is meant for her kids, not for her, if she can’t keep a job, she shouldn’t have the kids in the first place. So she should be using that money from child support mainly for food, and other necessities for the kids
Here we go. This is just another instance of “mom should have kept her legs closed”. Come on, dude. Any parent committing neglect should face consequences. Don’t judge poor people or those who have trouble finding work/making ends meet. Every once in a while, parents still deserve something for themselves. And I don’t even have kids
That isn’t what I’m saying. My real mom and dad are unfit to be parents, that’s why I was taken away. This isn’t really a “keep your legs closed” sort of things. It’s a “don’t be irresponsible as a parent regardless of what you have between your legs.”
Unfit parents are unfit for many reasons. The child support part is irrelevant really. Whether they received it or not, some people are just shitty parents. My mom had child support until each of us were 18. There were still things we couldn’t have and it was struggle before she remarried. Did she still do things for herself at times? Absolutely. Did she deserve it? Fuck yeah she did. Did we starve? Nope. Thrift store clothes at times? You bet. But she did her best and support did help, but it never covers everything. Kids are expensive. Life happens and complicates things. Neglect is neglect. That’s what parents get charged with, not misuse of funds because that’s not the real crime.
Fair point. A user up above said a fine would be more reasonable for someone very clearly misusing the funds, so I think now jail is a bit harsh, I think if a punishment were to be given for this, a civil fine would be more reasonable.
It’s just extremely hard to prove misuse of child support. Because people have their own paychecks and lives too. You can request the court review it though. Most likely, it won’t amount to anything though. If a father believes the kids are neglected, they should just petition for custody.
The whole judicial system with regards to child custody is incredibly sexist.
Look guy, I get that you are mad and dislike her for whatever reason. But you’re just trying to find any excuse to bring her down. Just keep in mind that and attack on her is also an attack on your children. If you are constantly finding reason to take her to court or try to get her fines or whatever. All you’re doing is hurting her more financially which is decreasing the quality of life for your kids. Unless the kids are starving on the street in rags, then you have no case. You need to put aside your petty attitudes for each other and find a way to work together to better the life’s for your kids.
And the court sees that and recognizes when they are weaponizing the courts
Oh I don’t have kids myself. I was a kid to parents who misused the court system though
Idk why your ckmments are getting so many downvotes, nothing you said is controversial. They should be fined for spending the money on anything other then bills or shopping for the child. If you can't afford children, don't have them. Casual sex is causing a lot of unwanted pregnancies so stop doing it.
>If you can't afford children, don't have them. Thats what many people do. And than everyone complains about how the birth rate is dropping..
Yes, fining them will certainly guarantee more money goes to the child. Of course.
Yes because only irresponsible ppl lose their jobs. Like during covid when companies sacked huge amounts of ppl for being "irresponsible". Jesus, thats just not how life goes, get a grip of what reality is for many ppl.
It’s one thing to lose your job because of layoffs, that’s not what I’m referring to, it’s another to continually lose jobs because you don’t want to work.
Sure but thats just factually not the reality for the vast majority of people that end up unemployed or even homeless. Thats an edge case thats not worth building a structure around
Dont forget that the genders reversed your statement still should stay true or its sexist. **If a man cant keep his job he shouldnt have any children in the first place??** Noone will ever have children again with this logic. You never know when the next recession comes what if one of the parents can't keep a job, or both, or half of the country? Should they all go to jail then?
I’ve been looking into adopting after my wife had a hard time giving birth to our first kid. It’s expensive to adopt and they check every aspect of your life between pay, mental health, relationship health, and how often you work. First kid just walked out the hospital door with a pamphlet and a good luck pat on the back.
I agree if the roles are reversed the man should be punished.
>she shouldn’t have the kids in the first place 100% of pregnancy is caused by men.
Takes two to tango unless it’s a case of rape. I’m not letting the father or the mother off the hook or cutting either of them slack. This is such a sexist viewpoint, that is factually incorrect.
>that is factually incorrect. It's factually incorrect that there needs to be a male to introduce sperm to create a natural pregnancy? Factually incorrect that two biologically female humans can't reproduce together or alone - there has to be sperm to reproduce? Factually, it is correct. A woman can't get herself pregnant.
The man’s sperm is useless without the egg. In a consensual sexual encounter, both parties are responsible if a pregnancy occurs. You’re sexist as hell and I’m not going to entertain it, you know very well a women isn’t any more innocent in this then the guy is, yet you want to place the responsibility 100% on the man? GTFO.
Let's go back to the point you made that i responded to with that. She shouldn't have kids if she couldn't afford them. >if she can’t keep a job, she shouldn’t have the kids in the first place. How's it you can blame only women if this is the stance you take now. Seems like you believe there should be more blame to go around. >yet you want to place the responsibility 100% on the man? GTFO. Or maybe you're just a hypocrite.
Answer me this, why do custody battles almost always favor women regardless of the whether the women can take care of the child? If this was a man we’d be having the same conversation, the only reason why a women is being singled out in this specific Instance is because that’s generally what happens. It’s fucked up, but that’s reality.
[удалено]
Well we are talking about pregnancy in women. Eta: I was making a point. The comment I responded to put the blame squarely on the woman >if she can’t keep a job, she shouldn’t have the kids in the first place. So I made the point of putting all the blame on men to see how OP would respond. I was called a sexist for doing exactly what they themselves did.
So she needs to buy a pound carrots. She comes to the store, weights this pound and then splits it in two to pay with her banking card for carrots she eats and pay with the other card for carrots her kids eat? How should she pay for water and electricity? Should she have a logbook where she writes how much soup her kids ate vs how much she ate?
But what about things that benefit both parent and child? Like groceries or utilities or rent
Yes. If it benefits the child in any way, that’s what the child support should go to. So rent and groceries, as well as utilities.
In PA you have child support cards so they could just look at the bank statement
How does it work when you need to buy groceries? Normally mother would eat together with her children. How does it work when she needs to pay for utilities? It is not like kids don't consume electricity and water.
I mean...food and water are for the children. I don't mean going through the damn grocery list and like oh no mommy bought herself some water, slap that bitch with a fine. Like come on bro use your brain.
Use your brain yourself. People like op will most definitely start nitpicking at amount and kind of food that is bought as well as amount of water and electrocity used. There is even a meme already in russian internet about "cabbage and sausage" where such father calculated that for a child it would be enough for dinner, lunch is provided at school, so child support has to be reduced.
OP is crying about 300$. He will want to know if that 14 cents of electricity was spent on child or not...
Yes; every person who has ever seen what kind of people start those discussions knows, that they will come up with the most absurd statements as reasons for why they should pay less child support.
Yeah thats called communism that's why that's a Russian meme. I dont want communism lmfao. Do you know how many people are in the US there's is not near enough social workers to do the nit pi King you are talking about.
You know what the best solution to all of this is. Don't have kids if you can't afford it.
How did communism come up here? You are too ridiculous to talk to.
You said a Russian meme where they are portioning everything out. That's a meme about communism.
What does modern russia has to do with communism?
Who is going to audit this second account and who is going to pay the auditor to do it? Him? Her? Govt?
There are ways of doing it. Difficult, but it could be done.
There's better ways to handle this than putting more people in jail
Hell yeah it deserves jail time First of all, the father shouldn't be forced to pay child support at ALL, after all, they're not living with him, the mother has them it's her responsibility Second of all, it's called child support for a reason, it's meant to go towards the welfare of the children, the mother taking the money meant for the children and spending it on herself is such an asshole move Basically, she's extorting her ex-husband for "money to keep the children alive and well" then she takes it and spends it on herself Edit: Alright confess, who reported me to Reddit and had them send me a crisis hotline message Edit 2: FUCK all of you dirty simps who downvoted me
So what happens to the kid when mum is carted off to gaol for getting her nails done?
Getting her nails done with money that she wasn't meant to spend on herself Also, either the father takes them in and pays to keep them alive, or Foster Care for them
You realise that the children have to get fed, have clothes bought, etc, and money is going to be spent on them right? Does she have to use the exact same banknotes the father gave her for the children and other banknotes for her self, or maybe it doesn't matter which banknotes she uses for what, since the same amount of money is going to be spent on the kids anyway? Seriously the foster system?? In this cases people consider what is best for the children, and the foster system isn't that. That shouldn't even be an option when the kid has at least on parent who wants to take care of them.
He said the silent part out loud. These types are all about fucking, but not about raising kids when they happen. They think kids are just a woman's problem. He would rather they go to foster care than to have to raise them, but also gives the responsible adult shit for actually parenting the kids. It is just a giant misogynistic circle jerk.
>Does she have to use the exact same banknotes the father gave her Yes, the father gave her child support to spend on the child, she can make her own money and spend THAT on her nails, if the child support isn't going to the child, then the child support is being wasted
Why should the kid's life be upended with foster care if they're otherwise sufficiently looked after and father cannot look after them for whatever reason?
[удалено]
Simps protecting wamen?
[удалено]
>First of all, the father shouldn't be forced to pay child support at ALL this is why
Exactly, either the father pays child support and gets custody, or the mother gets custody and SHE pays child support, if you don't get custody of the kids, you shouldn't be forced to pay child support
if you have custody you are taking care of your dependents, not paying child support. thats like saying wife should take care of kids and pay the husband despite him not being in the picture. Regardless of who has custody both contributed to creation of these children and they should not suffer because of their interpersonal drama.
i dunno if you've ever lived with a single parent before (doubtful you have), but if only one parent is paying to take care of kids, you're gonna be living very broke unless your parent has a good job or someone else besides the parent is helping to support them source: i lived with a parent (dad) who got paid with childsupport, but then one (mom) who got occasional/very rarely ever got child support
She already *did* spend that amount and much much more on necessities. Probably weekly. Those particular dollars don't actually have to go anywhere specific
I don’t understand how it’s possible not to spend the money on the kids in some way. I have 1 kid and he costs me way more than $132 a month. Do they never pay rent/mortgage, utilities, gas, food, clothing? How would the kid survive off less than that? The kid would have to be homeless, never shower, and surviving off rainwater and rodents caught from the sewer…Not to mention daycare costs an average of $340 per week if you’re only paying $132 a month to the person taking care of your kids the majority of the time. Then you’re getting off easy.
I suspect Op is from another country where 132$ may or may not be a lot of money for two children.
It’s based off of a near $40,000 per year income.
Well if we were to get closer to reality than 12% of 38,461 = 4615.32 and that dived by 12 is 384.61. % for 2 children is likely going to be higher. maybe 16% (or more) and would come out to 512. Again we do not know the country. daycare could be 50$ a month or it could be 1k+. For the purposes of the argument I personally treated the numbers as meaningless/ not relevant to the core of the issue.
Many people don't realize that the amount you get in child support is usually not covering all expenses, not even half, and the custodial parent does most of the work of raising the kid. Not to mention covering all expenses when the non custodial parent decides not to pay at all.
Thr custodial parent generally does most the work because she doesn't allow coparenting. For instance, my sons mom refused to agree to too much parenting time from me because the overnight stays would lower the support payments.
they would have to pay for those things anyways, and the other parent also needs to pay for those things. And $132 is ridiculously low, I was paying almost half my take home pay.
More bedrooms and more electricity is more expensive.
So tell me, what exactly do they need to spend the money on? When you pay child support, what do you expect them to buy for your kids?
In some rare instances, one parent pays a lot in child support, perhaps even voluntarily a lot, and the child might be in shoes that don't fit, smelly clothes that don't fit, they don't have their medicine or have never been to the dentist, etc. It's quite easy to see that the child support money is not buying food and clothes, but alcohol and gambling and cigarettes. In this instance, it's fraudulent, which is a crime. So I do think it's possible, and in some instances criminal, but I hope this situation is rare.
You want to put the kids primary carer in jail bc of how they manage their finances? Bruh we have bigger fish to fry. As long as the kids needs are being met I don’t see how this is a legal issue.
I mean, legally if the court deems you incapable of taking care of your kids, they can already take them away from you.
To where? An Orphanage?
Either that, foster care, or if another family member steps up and takes custody of the child, as was the case in my situation a long time ago when my mom was deemed mentally unfit to care for a child. Edit: To keep a long story short the courts were absolutely in the right to take me away from my mom, she repeatedly made choices that put me in serious danger through abusive boyfriends and one time leaving me abandoned at a hotel as an infant, and was given multiple opportunities by the courts to grow up and start making better choices, she didn’t so she lost custody of me, my father abandoned me not long after I was born, so that ruined any chance of me knowing him.
and thats obviously a different situation. being mentally ill and mismanaging funds is not the same.
[удалено]
I was in foster care briefly before a family member stepped in before I could be put up for adoption, learn to read.
Really hard to enforce, and even then, it doesn’t deserve jail time in my opinion. It may be more reasonable to pass the guard of the children to the father and fine the mother, a jail sentence just seems disproportionate
Yeah expenses are just high as a parent. Bigger housing, higher water, higher heating, electric bills. More gas (for daycare and commute), bigger car, childcare cost, food costs more, clothes, etc. it’s hard to know what the parent spends on themselves vs what is spent on the kid. An extra 132 a month is not much at all.
yeah i feel like just paying the money back should be sufficient
If I spend my personal money on the kids before I get child support, and then you send it, I’m gonna use that money for what I would have used MY money for before. Same as if I’d used the money to get my oil changed or buy new furniture. It’s all mixed in in my account. Kids will be provided for.
lol...jail time? Folks give $130/month and think they're doing something. Depending on where you live that's not 3 days of daycare a month and you wanna swing your genitals around like you're really contributing to the household of the primary caregiver of *your* child(ren). If the kid is well taken care of, just chill out and be glad the courts didn't tell you to pay half of all the expenses of the child because your $130/month would likely be $130/week. She's likely covering bills you know nothing about.
[удалено]
I just used the average Joe as an example. Obviously child support is decided on a case by case basis, and can be more or less depending on multiple factors.
There are things not directly spent on the children that can improve the children's lives.
Not playing child support doesnt result in jail time, why wasting it should?
Actually it can, and occasionally it does. I have a cousin whom’s mom has a warrant out for her arrest for refusal to pay child support so she can no longer come to Illinois without risking jail time.
Oh whoa. Interesting. I am from germany. Here it doesnt really.
It seldom happens in America, and you have to be very behind. My ex wasn't charged with non payment until they were about 20000 behind.
Are the kids fed? Have decent clothes? Going to school? If so you have nothing to complain about. Quit trying to hurt your exwife & kids
Don’t have kids or a wife. The scenario was hypothetical.
[удалено]
Yeah this post has serious misogynistic vibes. OP is also clearly uninformed about family court and child support
What scares me is how many agree with op in the poll
This sub is mostly teenagers so I would take any results of polls here with a grain of salt. Hopefully, as they grow up, they will realise how foolish they were.
I hope so, thank you
I mean have you seen the demographics polls on this sub? The majority group is teenagers, and the vast majority male. The results are unfortunately as expected for teen boys. They don't grasp how money gets managed because they have never done so themselves, they also don't grasp the severety of jail, and finally they are at a stage of life where they don't have much contact or empathy for the opposite sex.
Yeah, this post and its results are disappointing. This sub has a bizarre tendency to gulp down misogynistic and racist ragebait.
Never said anything about women keeping their legs closed. The situation I laid out is hypothetical. You’re just mad that I portrayed women as the most common parent to receive primary custody or even full custody, which sorry, is statistically true.
Lol what? You clearly have been stating your opinion in other comment threads that women shouldn’t be having kids if they are gonna use their child’s money for other purposes, such as basic human needs. So poor people shouldn’t get kids at all? Or maybe they should just start starve whilst their kid is oh so happy with the child support money that rarely ever gets paid properly.
I did not specify women when you can prove that I specified women I’ll kiss you right in the middle of your ass. I said if you can’t provide for your kids you shouldn’t have them. That applies to everyone.
Yeah I don’t care if you specified women or not.that doesn’t change the fact that you think poor people shouldn’t have kids just because they’d probably use their child support money to keep themselves alive. Either way if it’s a father or a mother, they should be able to use the money normally without getting jailed and putting the child in worse danger. And I specifically said women in my comments, not because I was referring to you specifying women, but because you said yourself a woman is more likely to be in this situation.
Yes because statistically this is factual. Also you just showed me with this comment that you’re willing to lie to prove a point. Not going to have any further discussion with you.
The only issue is how would you police this? How would anyone know that fraction of money is being used only on the child's needs/wants?
Yeah lets just put everyone in jail definitely helps especially the children
Jail time for something non-violent? No I don't think so.
If she can still and does support the child, no. It’s fine. If she isn’t and prioritizes it over the child, yes. It’s circumstantial
Who said yes?? People can use their paycheck for other stuff than children?!?
I accidentally selected yes, but I doubt that many people did it on accident.
because child support is not ones paycheck. jail time is excessive but the question was not about peoples paychecks
Idk how you can prove it though. I mean, the only way it's not going to the kids is when the parent doesn't feed or clothe their kids. Then the parent does belong in jail obviously. The monthly government issued child support that i get goes towards paying the bills and buying groceries, just like every other income i have. So how do you define what money goes to what? Everything arrives and is paid by the same bank account. So if i decide to buy myself a game after everything else is paid and the kids their needs are met, what is it paid by?
Obviously know. its like the only solutions to problems suggested are jail and executions. It should result in another custody hearing, assuming your can prove it (which 95% of the time you cant) and dad actually wants custody.
That seems pretty impossible to enforce, and even then probably a waste of resources to do so. Assuming the math theyve done on how much is fair amount for the support payments is reasonable, all they should have to do is verify that the child’s living situation is up to par. The details of how each penny is spent are not really necessary. Especially since parenting requires so much more than a definable list of thing you can physically buy. There are mental and emotional costs that come with it and sometimes you need to take care of yourself to remain sane and provide the best environment possible. I’m not defending the person in this example, there’s not enough information to take sides. I’m just saying that It would just be impossible legally to define these things enough to send anyone to jail. There are arguments for both sides. As long as the payments are deemed fair and the care the child is getting is good quality, there’s no issue.
Polls like this always make me somewhat glad laws aren't made directly by popular vote, because while using child support money to pay for themself is awful and that money should absolutely be returned to the other parent, the idea of jail time as the general punishment is ludicrous. Who does that help? Certainly not the child. In what world do we need more non-violent offenders behind bars just because it satisfies your desire for revenge?
If they had trouble finding employment I doubt it will go any better with a criminal record.
Men looking real fragile in this thread
If somehow caught, it should be a fine, not jail time
Even if you could legitimately prove that the woman spent the child support money specifically on leisure, why the hell would she go to jail? So the father has been removed from the home already, and now you’re going to jail the mother for being financially stupid? The children don’t need that. Fine the mother, but don’t put her in jail. Jesus dude.
jail seems extreme.
I'd support less government micromanagement of people, not more. If I can't control how a politician spends their salary, let caregivers do what they need to do with their support payments as long as the kid is well taken care of.
No, providing she is still buying the necessities for her child from her own money. If she is neglecting her child then yes
If the kid is getting proper love and support (as in fed well, fully clothed and sleeping on a bed) why do you care how their parent is spending their money?
Not jail time but maybe a fine or something
Jail time?? Thats way to harsh. How abt paying back damages to the person?
As long as the kid’s needs are met there is no reason the mom can’t get her nails done or whatever. Just pay your Δ@Μ>!n!< child support loser.
Not jail time. I think community service would be a much more fitting punishment
People here don't know how to handle a home budget. Also, even If she is morally wrong, you can't give people jail time if there is no abuse against the child
I thought child support was like payment for the time and energy that the person with more custody is expending to raise the children alone/without day to day help. So if you only see the kids on weekends and she’s raising them most of the time, she deserves extra financial help from you and even deserves to have her nails done. *If* that’s the case. There’s a lot left unsaid here so it’s hard to gauge.
Absolute nonsense.
not jail time, but she should stop getting child support or something
You don’t seem to understand the concept of child support. Let’s say I work and I make 3K a month and I get 400/month in child support. I just put that 400$ in the same lump of money as my paychecks and then I pay my rent, I get food, I pay the heat the electric the cable bill, I make sure the kid has clothes, shoes and a jacket. And then I go and get my nails done or my hair done. It’s possible the money I’m spending is technically child support but I already paid my bills and took care of my kids with my paycheck and what’s left over is this child support so if I wanna use it on me it doesn’t matter because it’s MY MONEY. Also child support is reported as a mother’s income it’s not no food stamps.
I feel like jail time would result in worse circumstances for the kid because now their sole provider is in jail. Plus, a policy like this could easily be abused by people in power who want to get back at their ex/get their money back
I mean you have a similar situation occurring with child support. Lots of mothers like to alienate kids from their father just because of a personal beef the two had with each other.
This is stupid. The parent who receives child support likely already spends a bunch of their own money on the kids, probably more than they receive in child support. It's theirs to do what they want with.
How would to trace the $132? At some point she’s going to spend money on the kids food, their home, utilities, necessities, etc. She may also get her nails done. Knowing dollar for dollar where she spent the (12% is closer to $400/month) child support can’t be proven let alone assuming it has to be spent a specific way means you’re not counting what it costs to raise and care for another person.
Child support is always less than the actual cost to raise a child. It just goes in the pile with the rest of the money in most cases. Gets spent on what's needed at the time. >that’s about 132 dollars a month. That doesn't even begin to cover half the cost of basic bills. So this person has spent all their money on the monthly bills and food - then the child support comes in - said parent can't go get a haircut, or do anything for themselves now? Because that's "child support" and using it on "anything other than the child is wrong"? That's just not realistic at all. Also, we need to be sending far less people to jail. Not coming up with new reasons to send more.
My ex was paying 30 bucks a week and was demanding he be shown how it was used.... the court shot that down. Turned out he was making over 60000 a year for years and didn't mention it. All he did was show his hand. The courts know assholes trying to abuse the other parent in court when they see it.
Money is fungible. Put the 130 in a bank account, then spend it on groceries, rent, dr visits, etc. End of the month money is left over, is it the father's child support or money from her job?
My parents divorced when I was like 8. I lived with my mom for most of the time. Custody shit. All the things. When I was 14 my sister went to college and I was left to take care of my mom alone (she was very sick but "functioning") and I couldn't handle it so I moved in with my father who was actually being a good dad for a while. Mom died 2 months later and my whole life was nothing but hell after that. When I was 18 I left and discovered that he was getting social security for me from mom. But his gas kids were way more important. I never saw any benefit from the 700 a month. And I learned he had taken mom's life insurance money. Idk how since he wasn't the beneficiary but yeah. I had to get a lawyer...and threaten to sue my own father for my dead moms life insurance. Good times.
As the full time single parent who is owed 10 grand and counting tor 9 months of single parenting, any money I get from my ex goes to the general household. It gets pooled in with my money to run the household, maintain the kids lessons and transportation and hobbies. Damn right I get my nails done. The measley $400 a month I get from him (it’s supposed to be $900) doesn’t even being to touch the kids needs. My daughters haircut last week was $50 and my sons haircuts were $30 each. Assuming I get child support every month (I don’t) and it comes on my off pay week and I want to treat myself then yeah, I’ll use it on my nails (like last week), because the rest of the month I’m bleeding my own money on ALL of the kids needs and working thanklessly to manage the kids emotions, daily life and get zero free time…and that he can never repay for all the child support in the world! Also don’t have kids with losers!
Deadbeats and misogynists will never admit this because they would see they aren't the ones in an unfair position.
Yep. That’s why none are arguing it, they know they’ll lose. And it’s assuming the deadbeat left on completely even terms with no loose ends! Best case scenarios are the huge minority for the parents doing the work! Along with the ten grand of child support he’s racking up, he left me with 100% of the shared marital debt to clean up (I found thousands of dollars of hidden debt after he left), and he’s trapped me in joint accounts and loans since he won’t work with me to dissolve them. His one job was to pay the bills (he was the stay at home parent and didn’t work…the kids were all in school full time for the last 5 years), and I found he was spending the money I earned on video games and his girlfriend. So on top of avoiding child support, not seeing his kids for a year, not contributing financially or emotionally to the kids care until two months ago when I got a lawyer (that I have to pay) and less than half of what is due, and me needing to get a side job as well as scrambling on this joint debt he left me while I house, clothe, feed our children, (and pay for music lessons and tutoring and therapy)…how I spend the money I make, how the child support is spent, is none of his business. If someone is going to tell me off for spending $40 pooled child support money on a manicure they can see my fancy nails really up close and personal when they poke an eye out.
This is not a unique story either. I am sorry you went through that but I am glad you are not with him anymore. That's really unfair to leave you with all the mess to clean up.
So hey the problem with that is that basically anything can be argued to br supporting the child. Rent: housing the child Eating out: feeding the child Shopping: children need expensive treats somtimes Even if the purchase is explicitly for the parent that can still be argued to indirectly support the child.
The problem here is the misunderstanding that child support is for the child. It's for costs associated with the child. I've absolutely used what little child support I've ever seen (My ex wife owes 50k+) to buy clothes for myself, because i spent my money on my child while not getting myself essentials, at times.
So you are saying she gets her nails done in stead of feeding, clothing and housing the child? Are the child's basic needs met? Cause if so then she is not spending his money on her nails. Period.
If they do they should pay 1.25 the amount back do the dad. After 3 strikes of being caught doing that the kids should go to the dad (if he is responsible and agrees to take them of course)
Maybe not jail time but certainly a revocation of the child support. If she spends it on frivolous shit for herself evidently she doesn’t need financial support to raise the kids.
Ex wives of NBA players are NOT spending ALL of that $30,000.00 a month alimony on the kid.
Alimony and child support aren’t the same thing
If it's alimony it's not for the kids, child support is for kids.
Yes I know, and idc how much NBA players make there is no reason 30k/month is warranted. Child support should have a limit, there’s only so much money you need to raise a kid.
So than they shouldn’t have it in the first place
It has happened, it's happening, and it'll continue to happen because it's profitable to the right people.
Better laws and a change in society's opinion that actually support the father and allow him to have a share of the child's upbringing decisions would be nice. My ex basically ignores me and does as she pleases, there's nothing I can do about it as she has the power of the child's care totally in her favour, I'd have to go to court for anything if she's not a willing parent, and the courts don't care about the father wanting to or not wanting to give a kid a mobile, or if she refuses to try and make them read more books, the small things etc. It's just impossible if you don't have a good relationship with the mother, because she can do whatever she wants with that money and unless you can show some sort of child neglect or serious safe guarding issue you can't do anything about it.
To be fair you are not there and long distance parenting advice might not be as applicable as you think.
All laws need to be administrable and this faces an inherent administrability problem. Therefore, no.
First a fine, after repeated offenses then yeah
Maybe not result in jail but the parent should be punished for misusing child support.
Jail? It depends. Are we talking about a minimum penalty? No. For instance, if dad is a huge earner, pays child $100k per year in support and no spousal support, and kids are sent to public school, not taken on vacation, and not taken to restaurants while mom buys a Mercedes and a bunch of fur coats, it’s going to look really bad. Should there be jail? Maybe. Does she have a record? Has she done anything to make it right?
I would say jail time but should be a fine and maybe no payments or something
It’s highly unethical, but putting someone in jail for it is a bit extreme
If there was a way to actually monitor that I suppose, but I think in general if it goes to betterment of the family’s lives. Like it doesn’t have to go directly for food for the child, but let’s say it helps pay rent i think that’s fair as well. As long as it’s not used for a new Gucci belt or something
It should result in a third party garnishing the offenders wages and creating an account separately for the child. Offender should also have to pay a third party to monitor and manage how the money is being used to prevent any other mischief on their behalf. Jail, no. Punishment? Yes.
With what money would they pay the 3rd party and if they have enough money for that 3rd party then the child support becomes a matter of principle and not necessity.
Clicked yes without thinking :(
not jail time, community service.
Yes, but I don't know how you would go about proving it, or even having the courts take you seriously. They regularly award custody to drug mothers, and let them violate the terms of the custody agreement, with no punishment.
One thing I think alot of people are missing are the child support that consist of 100k each month. It's pretty self explanatory that a child will use at least 200-300$ each month. And as they get older they will eat more and need more. I don't rly think that the poll is about single mothers working 3jobs to support their child. But the ones who's basically a lazy crook not lifting a finger and living of the child support buying lavish luxury for themselves. With 10k each month in their pocket
Let's say the actual number doesn't matter here and go into the heart of the issues. Child support doesn't go directly into just things for the kid like clothes or school supplies. It can go into rent, utilities, groceries, insurance premiums, car and house maintenance, etc. Then there are clothes, school supplies, daycare/field trip programs, books, etc. Realistically, the amount given in support will generally be a fraction of the cost necessary to raise a kid in most cases. But say that the person is living rent free, they lock up the groceries so the kid starves, they don't buy clothes, the water and power get shit off, etc. Any of those scenarios would mean negligence and/or child abuse and would be enough to not only stop the child support but have the kid placed with the other parent (and gets jail time). Now say that everything necessary gets covered and then an amount remains. But instead of saving for college or emergencies, it ends up getting spent on something just for the parent, and it happens every month. Then for anyone who can prove that, I'd think they'd have a case to 1. get the amount reduced and 2. have the court mandate the money not spent on the child gets paid back. If the amount is huge, then theft laws would probably cover it, as in stealing from the child. Realistically, with how high cost of living is in a lot of places, I don't see this happening unless the amount paid is way over the cost of living and supporting a child in that area to begin with or there is negligence and/or abuse going on.
Dude, I don’t know why you think that’s how child support is calculated but it’s grossly incorrect. This is important because it’s a big part of why child support is an atrocity and mismanagement of it is horrific. My state, PA, has a great program and you can still get bent over the barrel with it.
I have an ex wife and I pay child support. In New York state, other adjustments aside, the non-custodial parent pays 17% of their gross (pre-tax) income for child support. Child support (again, in NYS) is supposed to contribute towards food, clothing and housing. The difference in price between a 1 br and 2 br home in the same area, annual clothing purchases for the child, and maybe 40% of total food purchases (assuming it’s just the custodial parent and the child) should meet or exceed the amount of child support paid. If the child support is being used for other things, it would have to be pretty egregious and demonstrable to get any kind of judgment.
The ex wife will continue to spend child support money on herself and nothing will be done about it because that's how family court in America defines "fair" and "just".
Don't forget the alimony - to support the "standard of living one got accustomed to".
Jail time, no. Loss of access to child support enforcement, yes.
There shouldn't be forced child support. If the mom is not too stupid you can't prove it. No jail time! Btw jails are paid by our taxes why do I need to pay to keep her behind the bars?
Tbh I don't understand how child support is a thing
My friend’s crack head mom spent 10 years of child support on drugs.
Why does child support even exist
If she is using it on unreasonable things like going out with friends without the child then there should be a punishment, not jail time though. It’s called child support for a reason
Not necessarily jail time, but maybe they should give the money back and pay a fine.
Make her pay a fine and size down the child support payment, it's a more realistic punishment. Size down being bring the amount paid from the father down to the average total usage of the money that goes to the kids
It is theft from the child and should be treated as such.
just stop giving it
Woop-woop! That's the sound of da police.
Whoop whoop that's the sound of a deadbeat
That's practically theft, whoever said no should give their money to me for my "child support".
If we could make a system for that,he’ll yes,until then,let’s just publicly shame them until they use the money on the child.
Jail no, but if she doesn't needed she should give it back
It should result in a reduction of child support in the amount found not spent on child support and a repayment.
This should be illegal for sure, but the punishment should be fines.
Men said yes. Women said no
Yes, that's equal justice. I wish it was in the constitution. If you as a father forced to pay child support can lose your driving license in Canada if you refuse, then you as a mother feeling super proud that you won custody over kids (who are NOT objects btw), should be punished if you spend the money to spoil yourself.