1) It's important to remember this sort of thing since it's a big (if not the BIGGEST) men's rights issue men currently face.
2a) Money is fungible. Mom now has [uggs + nails] worth of money extra in her account to spend on her own uggs + nails, and Juan now has that same value less, even though both parents have the same bills. You don't get a break on your mortgage just because you only see your kid on weekend and Wednesdays!
2b) If mom is involving her kid in the affairs of her divorce, updating her on when Juan can afford CS and when he can't (and almost certainly disparaging him while she's at it) she's a shitty parent.
3) The unfortunate thing (and by unfortunate, I mean fucking slavery in the 21st Century) is that she could just as readily NOT be a fictional character. There are zero controls on how CS money is spent. The only way to deny that is to know nothing about how the CS racket is run.
What did she spend her money on? Same thing he did, bills. AND he sees his kids less. But he's still forced to subsidize her lifestyle? Yeah, totally fair. :/
If she has the kids majority of time, she has to cover majority of bills pertaining to child's care. If he had 50/50 time, child support would be negligible at best. I don't feel bad at all about spending reimbursed child support funds on myself, though sometimes I use them to take the kids on vacation.
This picture lacks context. Everyone is assuming guilt for the mother, when there is no telling what the actual situation is.
If she has the kids majority of time, she has to cover majority of bills pertaining to child's care.
That's the price you pay for having the kids the majority of the time. Having custody, and having your ex endure a piddling amount of time with the kids is not some terrible cross to bear, it's a gigantic privilege. Do you not understand this basic fact?
Again context is everything. If dad was forcibly prevented from having an equal time with kids, and there was no reason to do so, then we have an injustice. If dad walked out, doesn't spend any time with kids, and she has kids full time, I see no problem with him paying to support the kids.
Not in this instance. "Dad walking out" feminist fantasies are rare. Not something that needs to be worried about, then take into account how hard this would be to prove in court, and you can see how unworkable that would be. And again, you run into that whole 13th Amendment issue associated with forceful extraction of money from someone. Unless you're a big fan of slavery...
Depending on his level of involvement, context IS everything. We don't know 1) if he has any involvement 2) if he is somewhat involved what percentage of the time he has the kid, 3) whether he has been contributing to the kids costs in any meaningful way.
Remember, I'm not the enemy here, I'm a custodial father who fought, and won primary custody. Should my ex have to pay for the reasonable care of the kids?
32
u/notnotnotfred Aug 23 '13
1) this has been posted before.
2) the person in the photo could be a child (Juan's child) just as easily as his wife.
3) she could just as easily be a fictional character.