You are here

Classic bm statement.

purpledaisies's picture

Submitted by purpledaisies on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 1:51am

Forums: 
General Discussion

We have a new girl at work. Me and another woman was talking about her situation with her sdd16. We were talking about CS and why her dh doesn't pay anything b/c for some odd reason the court ruled that her dh has no rights to her. In this situation this poor guy had no idea he had a dd til she was 13 and he did everything he was supposed to do. He went to court and was trying to get visitation but the court ruled that b/c the child said she didn't want to see him that he has no rights to his dd. Now he proved that he didn't know and proved that the mother kept it from him on purpose.

So as a result they don't pay CS however the girl changed her mind and his now an active part of their lives. So they pay extra things like prom and gas and ins. and her cell things like that.

So anyway I told her that we don't pay for those things b/c dh pays CS and that bm is such a witch about their extra stuff and refuse to include dh so he told her that he would pay when bm includes him and she said "that will not happen'.

So while we were talking the new girl came up and said "no one better tell me how to spend my CS and I WILL get my nails done and my hair done b/c I can! And it is MY money!" WOW Is that not a classic bm line!? Me and the other woman just looked at her for a few seconds then the other woman said "we were talking about that, and explained what we were talking about. But then she told me later that the new girl must be feeling guilty! Dirol

Jsmom's picture

Submitted by Jsmom on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 8:32am

The problem is there is no way to differentiate her money that she earns and the CS. Just like the SSI that I collect for my son since his father died. I have always used it to pay the mortgage. Who is to say otherwise. Am I not entitled to get a manicure because I collect SSI? I have a job and have income. I just don't understand how we are supposed tell someone that just because they collect CS they can't have the extras.

Now if they are collecting all sorts of aid and CS and don't work, that is a different thing. They shouldn't be getting manicures and extravagant vacations. If the kid is in rags and their shoes have holes in them, sure. But, if they have a job and the kids are fine then no one can tell them what they should be using the CS for.

newsm2011's picture

Submitted by newsm2011 on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:06am

The problem is not telling someone that because they get cs they can't have extras...the problem I have is when you get cs and its just that CHILD SUPPORT...not MOMMY SUPPORT...and we get calls everyday about things like socks, shoes, clothes, school pictures, the lights are off, they have no food for lunch. That money is suppose to be spent on the CHILD for the things they need (living expenses). If you use it for your mortgage so be it, but don't call us when you get a $1,000 check a month for two children and ask for more. We have a family and children to support as well and in addition to the 3 days a week and every weekend the children are with us. How can you justify bankrupting one parent so the other can live well...This is for those women who don't use the CS appropriately. It's not fair!!!

Totalybogus's picture

Submitted by Totalybogus on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 11:19am

Before the divorce, dad contributed money to the household which enabled both working parents to provide a standard of living for the child. After the divorce, mom is still contributing all of her money to the household and dad's contribution is now cut to approximately 25% per child. As long as the child is still benefiting from the standard of living he/she is accustomed to, I don't think mom's financial decision are anyone's business.

purpledaisies's picture

Submitted by purpledaisies on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 11:53am

totaly I get what you are saying however I am of the belief that a divorce is a CHANGE in circumstances and with that comes a change in everything and everyone has to adjust. It is still not fair to bankrupt one parent just so the other can live well. They BOTH SHOULD be working to suppose themselves and their children and not expect the other to support the the other JUST b/c they are the mom or they are CP. That is not fair!

What I mean is that it should be common knowledge that IF there is a divorce that that means that the standard of living may not still be the same and it may not even be possible. Such as if the mom didn't work (by both parents choosing or just one like in my case the bm said she will not work even after repeatedly being asked to work to help out) then she NEEDS to work and not expect to have the ex support her as well as the kids. Just not fair.

secondplace's picture

Submitted by secondplace on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 12:06pm

Dad's contribution may be cut to approximately 25% per child for their living expenses AT THEIR MOTHERS, but keep in mind many fathers have their kids close to half the time and still have to pay child support, as well as maintain their own household, which includes utilities, groceries, toiletries, activities etc.

I don't understand people who think that it costs the father nothing extra when he has "visitation".

Auteur's picture

Submitted by Auteur on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 3:02pm

Depends on if you have materialistic, money grubbing "i want this; i want that" pack of wild skids and a guilty daddy who spends his last penny on his spawn b/c he can't say "no" or not.

purpledaisies's picture

Submitted by purpledaisies on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 12:22pm

Second I totally get what you are saying however it is pointless to argue when other simply will not get it. I am a bm and i support my kids all on my own, never had CS and I get it.

newsm2011's picture

Submitted by newsm2011 on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 12:47pm

As a child of divorced parents and a father that spent all the time with us he could and a mother that really did use the money my father gave her for us, I totally believe it is both parent's responsiblity in caring for in financial and emotinal way. I am disturbed in my situation with someone that brags about how much she makes..."I have a good job and make a good living"...These are her words exactly so why do you leave your children with us monthly becasue your lights are off or you have no water, or you leave them 4-5 extra days because you have no food in the house. That is a problem becasue you are not using that money for living expenses of your children. In addition my husband was left with all of the bills and debt that they accumulated togeter then was ordered to pay $1300 a month for support when they make the exact same amount of money. I know many womaen do not want to admit, but there is a double standard and it simply isn't fair. So me being the second wife I am forced to do things with y family or not do things becasue my husband pays for insurance, cs, and all other additional fees....and what do our children togethe get...nothing?????? In the meantime she gets to remarry and have our income and her new husbands and hers...not fair and nothig you can say can justiy what many of the courts do....Just simply not right.

purpledaisies's picture

Submitted by purpledaisies on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:13am

I was not saying that I think anyone has the right to tell anyone how to spend their money. I was just saying what someone said about CS!

However I should give a little back ground on this woman. After being there for a couple of weeks she was having a melt down b/c she got a call from her baby daddy saying he was going for full custody since he has had their dd for the last 6 months and he is still paying CS. So she doesn't have her child and is still getting CS.
Plus she lives with her BF's family and she has no expenses but her car.

But anyway personally I could care less how she spends her money it was just that she had to jump into a conversation that she was not in and defend her spending of her money to strangers. Even though we were not even talking about how we think the mom's should spend their CS, we were talking about paying extra on top of CS or not and the other woman's situation with her sdd.
That is why I feel she is feeling guilty about something.

marissamae88's picture

Submitted by marissamae88 on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 12:47pm

I see where both are coming from but again child support in the big picture is meant for the child. If you work and support your children great and if the child support helps you with those obligations great. If you get your nails done I think its fine if its from your income. If you use cs to pay your mortgage I mean thats a expense for the children isnt it? If it was just you buy yourself your mortgage probably wouldnt be very high. CS is meant for the child. Child care, clothes, expenses in general but what you do with your money is yours but isnt the child support the childs money for what they need and want? I am not saying everybody needs to do this way but when my dad paid if he did my mom gave me the money when I was 15 so I could pay my car payment and insurance. That money is being paid for me not my moms nails or hair.

Whateva's picture

Submitted by Whateva on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 8:28am

I am living this and it is a classic BM statement and mindset.

The court system absolutely suck! regarding CS; men; and the poor poor bitter ex wives! The court has antiquated rules pertaining to this topic and they need to be revised across the US. No consideration is given to an able bodied woman who can work and who should work, having a child was a choice not a requirement so the woman should be equally obligated to said child even if it mean she has to scale down her way of living...the men should not be the only entitiy that is wounded financially in these divorce scenarios.