|
Home > Archive > Abuse recovery > August 2004 > Need help
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Deanshafer 2004-08-25, 7:07 pm |
| I am desperate and don't know what to do. I am disabled and confined to home.
I have Post-Polio Syndrome and Cancer. I'm confined to a wheelchair. A court
order has attached my Social Security Disability. They took $510 of $920.
In 1976 I was divorced. I was paying support, then my ex-wife took the kids
and skipped town. To this day, I don't know their whereabouts. I was given
what turned out to be some bad advice. I was advised, since she skipped town
with my kids, just don't pay your support. That advice came from a case worker
at social services.
Now, 30 years later, they have decided to come after me for the back support.
What they have taken from me leaves us destitute. My wife is 63 years old and
works in retail. Her income is no where close to a livable income.
When we pay our bills for rent and utilities we have no money left for food or
medications. I'm on 17 different medications. Those medications cost us over
$400 a month, and that is just the CO-pay. We can't get help from the drug
companies because my wife has insurance.
I have no money for an attorney. Legal Aide will not help. I have written to
the court and got no reply. I have contacted my Congressman and Senators.
I've got no help there. I've been told by Social Security that I have no right
to appeal.
If you could help us with a gift of any size we would be grateful. As little
as one dollar would be gratefully received. Write to me by email, do not post
to this new group. Remove "no Spam" from my email address and I will send you
my snail mail address.
Sincerely,
Dean Shafer
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-25, 7:07 pm |
| Deanshafer <deanshafer@aol.comnospam> wrote:
> I am desperate and don't know what to do. I am disabled and confined to
> home. I have Post-Polio Syndrome and Cancer. I'm confined to a
> wheelchair. A court order has attached my Social Security Disability.
> They took $510 of $920.
I didn't think SS, pension, or disability payments were attachable for
civil debts.
> Now, 30 years later, they have decided to come after me for the back
> support.
Child support being one notable exception. Like unpaid federal taxes, it
can't be discharged by bankruptcy, it lasts forever, and anything can be
seized to pay it.
Another thing we can thank the radical feminists for.
Of course, nothing makes the wife actually spend it on the child, instead
of on plastic hot pants and a mink coat, so she can act like a whore.
> What they have taken from me leaves us destitute. My wife is 63 years
> old and works in retail. Her income is no where close to a livable income.
> When we pay our bills for rent and utilities we have no money left for
> food or medications. I'm on 17 different medications. Those
> medications cost us over $400 a month, and that is just the CO-pay. We
> can't get help from the drug companies because my wife has insurance.
Ain't laissez faire capitalism grand?
> I have no money for an attorney. Legal Aide will not help. I have
> written to the court and got no reply. I have contacted my Congressman
> and Senators. I've got no help there. I've been told by Social Security
> that I have no right to appeal.
This is called "being XXXXed." Any questions?
> If you could help us with a gift of any size we would be grateful. As
> little as one dollar would be gratefully received. Write to me by
> email, do not post to this new group. Remove "no Spam" from my email
> address and I will sBend you my snail mail address.
Unfortunately, I don't send money to people on the Internet, but I have
checked you out with various search engines, and you appear to be a real
person with a long Internet history, and until recently with the cancer, a
productive and happy life in spite of Post Polio Syndrome.
I think it sucks that you have to spend what little time you have left
being treated like this, and I hope your Internet donations thing works
out.
Perhaps if John Kerry is elected, he will make everything better.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412ce426$0$448$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
<snip>
>
> Of course, nothing makes the wife actually spend it on the child, instead
> of on plastic hot pants and a mink coat, so she can act like a whore.
those goddamn single mothers and their plastic hot pants and mink coats and red
painted whore nails walking around shaking their dirty dirty pillows for
everyone to see...
Jean
| |
|
| "Luna" <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2p48e5FgbngkU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
> news:412ce426$0$448$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> <snip>
>
> those goddamn single mothers and their plastic hot pants and mink coats
> and red painted whore nails walking around shaking their dirty dirty
> pillows for everyone to see...
<gnung>
| |
|
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412cef6d$0$450$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
red[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I'm so offended. I think we need to pass a law or something.
Just press reset, get rid of 'em all. Anarchy - that'd be fun. Everybody gets
a gun and total "freedom".
Jean
>
> --
> Eric Michael Cordian 0+
> O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
> "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
|
"cal" <cal1360@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2p4d4jFge4b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
> "Luna" <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2p48e5FgbngkU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> <gnung>
You may call me Jezebel if you wish.
Jean
>
>
| |
| lovetap 2004-08-25, 10:06 pm |
| "Luna" <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2p48e5FgbngkU1@uni-berlin.de>...
> "Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
> news:412ce426$0$448$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> <snip>
>
>
> those goddamn single mothers and their plastic hot pants and mink coats and red
> painted whore nails walking around shaking their dirty dirty pillows for
> everyone to see...
>
> Jean
ROFL! i like to call them "stay-in-bed" moms... 
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-25, 10:06 pm |
| Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Just press reset, get rid of 'em all. Anarchy - that'd be fun.
> Everybody gets a gun and total "freedom".
Seriously though, we have a real disabled person, with an apparently
genuine problem, reduced to begging on Usenet while dying of cancer by a
30 year old child support debt.
I trust no one here thinks he is getting what he deserves.
What resources are available to help such a person better his situation?
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
| Panther 2004-08-26, 2:06 am |
| Pssssst, Eric, he's a troll.
Panther
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412d518e$0$450$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Seriously though, we have a real disabled person, with an apparently
> genuine problem, reduced to begging on Usenet while dying of cancer by a
> 30 year old child support debt.
>
> I trust no one here thinks he is getting what he deserves.
>
> What resources are available to help such a person better his situation?
>
> --
> Eric Michael Cordian 0+
> O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
> "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-26, 2:06 am |
| Panther <panther@asarian-intl.org> wrote:
> Pssssst, Eric, he's a troll.
Actually, most of the people who ask for money on Usenet are real people
who actually have the problems they describe.
The early ones made quite a bit of money years ago, but now that everyone
is doing it, the chances of generous donations is greatly diluted.
I tend to assume trolls are real people until proven otherwise, by the
way. It's part of my kind and gentle nature.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
| On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, Eric Cordian wrote:
>
>Child support being one notable exception. Like unpaid federal taxes, it
>can't be discharged by bankruptcy, it lasts forever, and anything can be
>seized to pay it.
>
>Another thing we can thank the radical feminists for.
so it's radical feminism to insist that if he can't keep his pants zipped
and makes a child that he should be responsible for paying for part of said
progeny's upkeep? walking away from his family doesn't mean he gets to walk
away from his responsibility.
>This is called "being XXXXed." Any questions?
no, it's called "having XXXXed and paying the consequential upkeep." i
notice you didn't ask him why he didn't pay the child support in the first
place.
>I think it sucks that you have to spend what little time you have left
>being treated like this
i think it's due to how he neglected to treat his responsibility earlier in
life. i don't have compassion for him in this. he could have foreseen it,
but he was hoping he wouldn't get caught. oh well.
-- astri
| |
|
| On Wed, 26 Aug 2004, Eric Cordian wrote:
>Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Seriously though, we have a real disabled person, with an apparently
>genuine problem, reduced to begging on Usenet while dying of cancer by a
>30 year old child support debt.
>
>I trust no one here thinks he is getting what he deserves.
he wasn't dying 30 years ago.
>What resources are available to help such a person better his situation?
i'd suggest a bit of a conscience, but it's probably too late for him for
that.
-- astri
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-26, 2:06 am |
| astri <astri@lava.net> wrote:
> so it's radical feminism to insist that if he can't keep his pants
> zipped and makes a child that he should be responsible for paying for
> part of said progeny's upkeep? walking away from his family doesn't
> mean he gets to walk away from his responsibility.
No, it's radical feminism to consider child support differently than any
other civil liability, and go to extrordinary measures like taking tax
refunds, social security checks, and refusing to renew driver's licenses,
or jailing people who do not have the resources to pay.
Also, if I correctly read the gentleman's story, his wife split with the
kids and he hasn't seen them since. Not exactly him that walked away.
> no, it's called "having XXXXed and paying the consequential upkeep." i
> notice you didn't ask him why he didn't pay the child support in the first
> place.
His ex-wife has two arms. She can work. Alimony and child support are
holdovers from the days when women only performed the "barefoot and
pregnant" function. If you want to be a custodial parent, you can support
the little fetus yourself.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-26, 2:06 am |
| astri <astri@lava.net> wrote:
> i'd suggest a bit of a conscience, but it's probably too late for him for
> that.
Right. Wife runs off with the kids and he never sees them again, but he's
required to send a check every month, or be hounded to the ends of the
earth like a Nazi war criminal.
I don't think so. Let the his ex-wife strap a mattress to her back, and
stand by the highway.
"Hey babe, I got your child support Riiiiight here."
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
| "Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412d8919$0$451$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> astri <astri@lava.net> wrote:
>
>
> Right. Wife runs off with the kids and he never sees them again, but he's
> required to send a check every month, or be hounded to the ends of the
> earth like a Nazi war criminal.
i saw nothing about his wife running off with the kids, but then i didn't
see the original post either. i don't think it appeared here. i just saw
the parts you quoted, which don't say how they separated.
a wife who takes off with the kids isn't automatically awarded child
support, but may be for various reasons. sometimes fairly, sometimes not,
but you invite us to form a judgement here with nothing but your unsupported
(perhaps vicarious?) suppositions to base it on.
there does seem to be this small matter of him skipping out on the payments
for 30 years. whether the order against him was just or not, this falls
under the heading of "Really Dumb Mistake", where it joins the
indiscretions of a certain hooters manager you so ably defended here a
couple of days ago.
too bad the consequences of some mistakes are so harsh, but there it is.
they're not a secret. it behooves one to know them beforehand and "govern
oneself accordingly", as the lawyers like to say.
cal
| |
|
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412d518e$0$450$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Seriously though, we have a real disabled person, with an apparently
> genuine problem, reduced to begging on Usenet while dying of cancer by a
> 30 year old child support debt.
>
> I trust no one here thinks he is getting what he deserves.
>
> What resources are available to help such a person better his situation?
A time machine and a bit of retro common sense.
Listen Eric, if you don't live up to your responsibilities (whether you think
they're fair or not) there's always a chance that it'll come back and bite you.
Just because he's handicapped or got cancer (while it's sad but we all go at
some point) doesn't mean that he's entitled to shirk. Look at it this way - the
guy had 30 years of avoiding his child support payments, that must've taken some
effort on his part. If he'd made his court ordered child support payments he
wouldn't be in this mess now, would he?
Of course, if you feel this strongly you can always dig in to your own pockets.
Money and mouth would then reside in the same place!
Jean
>
> --
> Eric Michael Cordian 0+
> O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
> "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412d8919$0$451$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> astri <astri@lava.net> wrote:
>
>
> Right. Wife runs off with the kids and he never sees them again, but he's
> required to send a check every month, or be hounded to the ends of the
> earth like a Nazi war criminal.
>
> I don't think so. Let the his ex-wife strap a mattress to her back, and
> stand by the highway.
>
> "Hey babe, I got your child support Riiiiight here."
Hey, you should check out soc.men.
Jean
>
> --
> Eric Michael Cordian 0+
> O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
> "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
|
"lovetap" <lovetap@doctor.com> wrote in message
news:419408e1.0408251856.7709056f@posting.google.com...
> "Luna" <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<2p48e5FgbngkU1@uni-berlin.de>...
red[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> ROFL! i like to call them "stay-in-bed" moms...
It would be uncomfortable to sleep in plastic hot pants! (Hot pants? Is this
the 70's??)
Jean
| |
| Alan B. Mac Farlane 2004-08-26, 11:06 am |
| Dear Dean ...
Sorry you abandoned your children from a previous marriage with financial
support in you being the sperm donor and the cash cow ... you were not a
husband and never were as your wife treated you like a XXXX - a shag. Since
she lived in fear seeing herself as a XXXX and living a life that way making
babies ... you got caught into your disease and made it worse.
Now you have to pay for your children ... or repay what your wife did by
herself to take care of the children you fathered and bailed out on ...
which is what a devoted father never does ... same for a devoted mother.
I will never give up on my daughter dispite not seeing her since she was 12
in my divorce (second) and at age 18 and one month she yelled down the
hallway with her mom holding the phone "Get the XXXX out of my life you
XXXXing XXXXXXX" ... which is why daughter said to me after being raised in
a chaotic emotionally dysfunctional homelife where she has to survive.
She is about 25 or so now ... perhaps has finished college and is working on
her life now ... dunno.
I wish her well and I will never adandon her, will never give up on her,
will never throw her away ... like you have so far.
Sorry your life is so difficult with being aged and infirmed and having to
pay for you past deeds ... but c'est la vie.
Good luck in making money come into your life when you get some recovery.
sumbuddie who cares
in article 20040825144258.04424.00001435@mb-m24.aol.com, Deanshafer at
deanshafer@aol.comnospam wrote on 8/25/04 11:42 AM:
> I am desperate and don't know what to do. I am disabled and confined to home.
> I have Post-Polio Syndrome and Cancer. I'm confined to a wheelchair. A court
> order has attached my Social Security Disability. They took $510 of $920.
>
> In 1976 I was divorced. I was paying support, then my ex-wife took the kids
> and skipped town. To this day, I don't know their whereabouts. I was given
> what turned out to be some bad advice. I was advised, since she skipped town
> with my kids, just don't pay your support. That advice came from a case
> worker
> at social services.
>
> Now, 30 years later, they have decided to come after me for the back support.
> What they have taken from me leaves us destitute. My wife is 63 years old and
> works in retail. Her income is no where close to a livable income.
>
> When we pay our bills for rent and utilities we have no money left for food or
> medications. I'm on 17 different medications. Those medications cost us over
> $400 a month, and that is just the CO-pay. We can't get help from the drug
> companies because my wife has insurance.
>
> I have no money for an attorney. Legal Aide will not help. I have written to
> the court and got no reply. I have contacted my Congressman and Senators.
> I've got no help there. I've been told by Social Security that I have no
> right
> to appeal.
>
> If you could help us with a gift of any size we would be grateful. As little
> as one dollar would be gratefully received. Write to me by email, do not post
> to this new group. Remove "no Spam" from my email address and I will send you
> my snail mail address.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dean Shafer
| |
| Alan B. Mac Farlane 2004-08-26, 11:06 am |
| in article 2p48e5FgbngkU1@uni-berlin.de, Luna at jean_collins@hotmail.com
wrote on 8/25/04 12:43 PM:
>
> "Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
> news:412ce426$0$448$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> <snip>
>
>
> those goddamn single mothers and their plastic hot pants and mink coats and
> red
> painted whore nails walking around shaking their dirty dirty pillows for
> everyone to see...
>
> Jean
>
>
ya, eric is a real Bro Jack gem - shining brightly in his intelligence
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-26, 11:06 am |
| Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hey, you should check out soc.men.
Perhaps I should crosspost to both groups, for educational purposes, and a
more balanced response on Men's Issues.
I'm sorry people here support the standard model of divorce, where the
wife always gets the kids and the house, and the guy always gets his bank
account emptied.
Now that men and woman are "equal," it's time for some adjustment in that
paradigm, and as far as I'm concerned, women who choose to raise kids
alone can work and support them.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-26, 7:06 pm |
| cal <cal1360@hotmail.com> wrote:
> i saw nothing about his wife running off with the kids, but then i
> didn't see the original post either. i don't think it appeared here.
> i just saw the parts you quoted, which don't say how they separated.
"In 1976 I was divorced. I was paying support, then my ex-wife took the
kids and skipped town. To this day, I don't know their whereabouts. I
was given what turned out to be some bad advice. I was advised, since
she skipped town with my kids, just don't pay your support. That
advice came from a case worker at social services."
> there does seem to be this small matter of him skipping out on the
> payments for 30 years. whether the order against him was just or not,
> this falls under the heading of "Really Dumb Mistake", where it joins
> the indiscretions of a certain hooters manager you so ably defended
> here a couple of days ago.
Let's assume that the amount his wife was awarded was, by some magical
coincidence, exactly half what she spent raising the kids, and that it is
reasonable for that amount to be considered a debt of his.
That's a leap, because as I pointed out earlier, such awards are
arbitrary, and there is absolutely no accounting whatsoever as to what the
real expenses are, or how the money is spent.
Now why should the remedies available to collect this debt be any
different than the remedies available to collect any other debt? Why, for
instance, should we have "debtor's prison" for this debt, when debtor's
prison is unconstitutional for all other debts, or go to extrordinary
measures to XXXX with someone's normally unattachable benefits, and
government services like driver's license renewal?
I don't think owing ten bucks to your fetus should be any different from a
legal perspective than owing ten bucks to American Express, even if child
support were fairly awarded and accounted for, which of course it is not.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-26, 7:06 pm |
| Alan B. Mac Farlane <alanb@sonic.net> wrote:
> I will never give up on my daughter dispite not seeing her since she was 12
> in my divorce (second) and at age 18 and one month she yelled down the
> hallway with her mom holding the phone "Get the XXXX out of my life you
> XXXXing XXXXXXX" ... which is why daughter said to me after being raised in
> a chaotic emotionally dysfunctional homelife where she has to survive.
It must have been because she was raised in a bad environment, because it couldn't
possibly have been because you are annoying.
Yuk yuk.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
| On Wed, 26 Aug 2004, Eric Cordian wrote:
>astri <astri@lava.net> wrote:
>
>
>Right. Wife runs off with the kids and he never sees them again, but he's
>required to send a check every month, or be hounded to the ends of the
>earth like a Nazi war criminal.
that's his story. maybe it's accurate. maybe it's not. maybe she was the
guilty party. maybe he was. it's pretty rare for a parent to be denied all
access to the kids by the courts if he fights for it, unless he is such a
sleaze that the court denies the access. did he bother to fight for it? or
did he just wash his hands and say "good riddance" to both the wife and the
kids?
i still say he has a responsibility toward his children, whether or not his
wife is a XXXXX.
-- astri
| |
|
| On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Eric Cordian wrote:
>I don't think owing ten bucks to your fetus should be any different from a
>legal perspective than owing ten bucks to American Express, even if child
>support were fairly awarded and accounted for, which of course it is not.
you and i and the rest of the taxpayers will probably pay for the raising of
his children through welfare if he shirks his responsibility. incredible
numbers of men had avoided paying incredible amounts of child support for
quite a while, and we the people were supporting large numbers of children
because of it. somebody put those facts together and created the current
system.
-- astri
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-26, 7:06 pm |
| astri <astri@lava.net> wrote:
> you and i and the rest of the taxpayers will probably pay for the
> raising of his children through welfare if he shirks his
> responsibility.
Previously, that may have been the case. But now, through the miracle of
"welfare reform", which limits people to just two years while they
transition to full time work, and no more than five years in a lifetime,
that taxpayer burden has been seriously reduced.
The days when women could just burp babies out of their vaginas, and get
the multi-thousand dollar monthly AFDC check, are history.
Which is too bad, because I don't believe there should be limits on
welfare for the needy, and I think all children should come with a
government check attached.
Win some. Lose some.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
| "Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e067f$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> I'm sorry people here support the standard model of divorce, where the
> wife always gets the kids and the house, and the guy always gets his bank
> account emptied.
there are many joint custody arrangements, and arrangements where the dad
has the kids and the mom pays support. i support those models too, where
the circumstances fit. it's a case by case thing.
now that i've read the whole post, i see the wife did in fact move away with
the kids and what i have to say about that is: if she denied him agreed-on
visiting or co-custody rights by moving away, it went against the terms of
the settlement and he should have gone to court a long time ago to get them
back or at least renegotiate the whole support deal. the case worker who
told him to "just stop paying" was a fool, and he was a fool to listen.
otoh if no visiting or co-custody terms were arranged, the wife was
completely within her rights to move anywhere she pleased with the kids and
expect her support payments continue.
> Now that men and woman are "equal," it's time for some adjustment in that
> paradigm, and as far as I'm concerned, women who choose to raise kids
> alone can work and support them.
oh they do, in great numbers. by choice and at least as often not.
cal
| |
|
| "Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e0a79$0$445$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Now why should the remedies available to collect this debt be any
> different than the remedies available to collect any other debt? Why, for
> instance, should we have "debtor's prison" for this debt, when debtor's
> prison is unconstitutional for all other debts, or go to extrordinary
> measures to XXXX with someone's normally unattachable benefits, and
> government services like driver's license renewal?
>
> I don't think owing ten bucks to your fetus should be any different from a
> legal perspective than owing ten bucks to American Express
except you aren't ripping off some big corporation but your kids and your
fellow taxpayers. you aren't a deadbeat to american express, you're a
deadbeat to your family and society. and you know damn well it's
a lot more than ten bucks.
> even if child
> support were fairly awarded and accounted for, which of course it is not.
in this case it's probably not, because the guy chose to completely neglect
the issue. in more healthy arrangements support requirements may be
reviewed and adjustments made up or down as the kids grow and their lives
take shape. it's a negotiated and renegotiated deal, with the court as
arbitrator and final authority.
cal
| |
|
| X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de wPBc0hPjniKCB9AmRkG0hwr6NjJxl/gJ79/s219V0ftRTOKVnX
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Xref: newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com alt.abuse.recovery:232337
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e162f$0$448$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> The days when women could just burp babies out of their vaginas, and get
> the multi-thousand dollar monthly AFDC check, are history.
no baby was ever burped out of a vagina that wasn't sneezed into by a penis.
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-26, 7:06 pm |
| cal <cal1360@hotmail.com> wrote:
> no baby was ever burped out of a vagina that wasn't sneezed into by a penis.
Clearly you are unfamiliar with lesbians and modern turkey baster technology.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
| Baba Yaga 2004-08-26, 7:06 pm |
| "Luna" <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote, in alt.abuse.recovery:
>
>"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
>news:412d8919$0$451$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
>
>Hey, you should check out soc.men.
>
>Jean
Funny you should say that, I was thinking the same.
Baba Yaga
--
/We/ are the veil that veils us from our self.
- R.D. Laing
| |
| Baba Yaga 2004-08-26, 7:06 pm |
| Eric Cordian <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote, in
alt.abuse.recovery:
>Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>Perhaps I should crosspost to both groups, for educational purposes, and a
>more balanced response on Men's Issues.
>
>I'm sorry people here support the standard model of divorce, where the
>wife always gets the kids and the house, and the guy always gets his bank
>account emptied.
That, my dear old thing, is a caricature, and a standard of "argument"
truly worthy of soc.men.
I certainly don't support any such thing. (From what I know of this
group, I ain't alone in that, either.) In fact, I think it's
iniquitous that divorce should result in such arrangements. Equally,
I think that if a parent isn't equally involved in the upbringing of
the children, he (read that as "he or she", please - I'm
old-fashioned) should pay his share none the less. The sex of the
parent shouldn't be at issue; the needs of the child should.
It happens that child support agency in the U.K. has managed to
perpetrate injustices against all parties except the Treasury, and
perhaps especially against men. And if the original poster's account
is to be believed, his debt has caught up with him (as it was bound to
do) at such a time as to generate a degree of hardship which does
little credit to his country.
However, that don't change the principle that *both* parents have an
obligation to put their bit in to the upbringing of the child. It
just demonstrates that the application can be difficult.
>Now that men and woman are "equal," it's time for some adjustment in that
>paradigm, and as far as I'm concerned, women who choose to raise kids
>alone can work and support them.
You *assume choice, of course. Childish behaviour isn't the domain of
one sex only.
Baba Yaga
--
/We/ are the veil that veils us from our self.
- R.D. Laing
| |
|
| "Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e1be9$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> cal <cal1360@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Clearly you are unfamiliar with lesbians and modern turkey baster
> technology.
i wasn't aware that they formed a significant population of indigent moms.
| |
|
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e067f$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Perhaps I should crosspost to both groups, for educational purposes, and a
> more balanced response on Men's Issues.
If you call the most infamous whackjob serious-mommy-issues population on Usenet
"balanced", you're worse off than even I thought (and that's pretty bad).
>
> I'm sorry people here support the standard model of divorce, where the
> wife always gets the kids and the house, and the guy always gets his bank
> account emptied.
Oh brother. Does this mean I get to stop making my child support payments
because it's all just a fantasy? Whatta relief. I'm in the money!
>
> Now that men and woman are "equal," it's time for some adjustment in that
> paradigm, and as far as I'm concerned, women who choose to raise kids
> alone can work and support them.
At least you didn't call them "fetuses" in this post.
So what'd your mommy ever do to you to piss you off this much? I'm sure it was
pretty bad, and I'm sorry about that.
Jean
>
> --
> Eric Michael Cordian 0+
> O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
> "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e49f0$0$450$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
was[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> What does advocating equality between men and women have to do with my mommy?
I did bother (though God knows why) to construct a reasoned response to this
(and other posts of yours) but abandoned them. I've seen the soc.men whackjobs
enough throughout Usenet to understand that it's completely pointless and since
people like you wouldn't get within a 10 foot pole radius of my own personal
life, it's of no matter. Have fun in the fringe of paranoid weirdosity, you
silly old curmudgeon you - carry on!
Fetusly yours,
Jean
>
> --
> Eric Michael Cordian 0+
> O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
> "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e67f2$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I don't believe I've ever read or posted in soc.men, but I've been on the
> Net so long I'd have to check the Google archives to make sure.
Well then why did you say that soc.men would provide a balanced viewpoint if you
have never read it? Soc.men is pretty infamous for it's psychotic denizens.
>
> Old curmudgeons don't have perfect memories, you know.
>
> Besides, I am sure soc.men can't hold a candle to the various "childfree"
> newsgroups and message boards, where the childfree and fetus-enabled rip
> each other new assholes on a regular basis.
I have to agree with you there. The childfree ng's - well there's only one that
I know of - alt.support.childfree or something, and there's one called
alt.support.childfree-bridge (supposedly to open conversations between MOO's,
DUH's and the childfree - always empty) - are enormously vicious and strange (to
me). I don't know why I have it on my subscribed list but I do - I can't bear to
read them and I'm pretty thick skinned. I admit though, I sometimes skim the
headers. I've got my masochistic traits, I guess that's it.
I don't do web based messageboards, too clumsy.
Jean
>
> --
> Eric Michael Cordian 0+
> O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
> "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
| Eric Cordian 2004-08-26, 7:06 pm |
| Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Well then why did you say that soc.men would provide a balanced
> viewpoint if you have never read it?
I'd never heard of it until you mentioned it, but I got the impression it
represented a counterpoint to your own views on the issues we have been
discussing.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
|
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e6c35$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I'd never heard of it until you mentioned it, but I got the impression it
> represented a counterpoint to your own views on the issues we have been
> discussing.
No, it's a group full of less than literate wolverines. I'm just relieved you
weren't famliiar with it while you were advocating it as a counterbalance.
Well, not relieved - even though I disagree with you almost all the time, I
never pegged you as stupid or (even worse) ignorant.
Jean
>
> --
> Eric Michael Cordian 0+
> O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
> "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
| |
| Dragonlady 2004-08-26, 10:06 pm |
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412d8821$0$451$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> astri <astri@lava.net> wrote:
>
>
> No, it's radical feminism to consider child support differently than any
> other civil liability, and go to extrordinary measures like taking tax
> refunds, social security checks, and refusing to renew driver's licenses,
> or jailing people who do not have the resources to pay.
Right. We should just let kids starve to death instead.
If he doesn't have resources to pay, he needs to go talk to a lawyer and see
what can be done about, instead of whining about it on the net. There are
even lawyers who will work pro bono if his situation is really what he says
it is. I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for children he was to cheap to
pay support when they needed it. As for his medical stuff, maybe he should
go talk to a charity. At least there, his situation can be confirmed.
> Also, if I correctly read the gentleman's story, his wife split with the
> kids and he hasn't seen them since. Not exactly him that walked away.
And we know this because....? Oh, I forgot. You're not as cynical as I am.
Perhaps it stems from growing up without a father.
first[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> His ex-wife has two arms. She can work. Alimony and child support are
> holdovers from the days when women only performed the "barefoot and
> pregnant" function. If you want to be a custodial parent, you can support
> the little fetus yourself.
Right. After all, she created them by herself. Oh wait, no she didn't!
If you don't want to pay the price, don't risk buying the merchandise.
Dragon
| |
| Dragonlady 2004-08-26, 10:06 pm |
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412d8919$0$451$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> astri <astri@lava.net> wrote:
>
for[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Right. Wife runs off with the kids and he never sees them again, but he's
> required to send a check every month, or be hounded to the ends of the
> earth like a Nazi war criminal.
If, and I repeat, IF this is true, he should have seen a lawyer at the time.
Since he didn't, the only conclusion I can draw is that he didn't care about
the kids in the first place. He just didn't think he should have to pay for
his fun.
> I don't think so. Let the his ex-wife strap a mattress to her back, and
> stand by the highway.
Why doesn't he strap a mattress to his back and pay his damn bills? There
*are* male prostitutues, you know.
Of course, a *female* prostitute would have lost custody of her kids, even
if she did nothing to endanger them, and they never knew what she was doing,
but that's beside the point, isn't it?
> "Hey babe, I got your child support Riiiiight here."
You're not just obnoxious, are you.
| |
| Dragonlady 2004-08-26, 10:06 pm |
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e067f$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Perhaps I should crosspost to both groups, for educational purposes, and a
> more balanced response on Men's Issues.
>
> I'm sorry people here support the standard model of divorce, where the
> wife always gets the kids and the house, and the guy always gets his bank
> account emptied.
>
> Now that men and woman are "equal," it's time for some adjustment in that
> paradigm, and as far as I'm concerned, women who choose to raise kids
> alone can work and support them.
Funny. Around here the "standard model" for divorce seems to be shared
custody, unless there is a legitimate reason for it not to be. And since I
live in the back woods of Nebraska, I find it hard to believe the rest of
the country is still doing the "women get the kids, men pay for them" thing.
Seems to me the ones who need to wake up and smell the coffee are the feds,
who will allow only one parent to take the whole deduction, no matter who is
actually supporting the child or who is paying for the child. This includes
not only the dependent deduction, but also child care expenses. Only
whichever parent is designated by the IRS as the "custodial" parent can take
a deduction for child care expenses, and only that parent can use the child
to qualify for other things, like the earned income credit. Child support
is not deductible, it's regarded as a living expense. Alimony, on the other
hand, is deductible to the payer, and taxable as income to the receiver.
I cannot speak to the money arrangements, since I'm not nosy enough to ask
the divorced parents I know what they are, it being none of my business as
it has nothing to do with their taxes.
Dragon
| |
| Dragonlady 2004-08-26, 10:06 pm |
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e0a79$0$445$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> cal <cal1360@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> "In 1976 I was divorced. I was paying support, then my ex-wife took the
> kids and skipped town. To this day, I don't know their whereabouts. I
> was given what turned out to be some bad advice. I was advised, since
> she skipped town with my kids, just don't pay your support. That
> advice came from a case worker at social services."
No offense, but this guy is stupid. If you want to know what the law says,
you bloody well better ask a lawyer, not a social services case worker. I
might add that anybody with half a brain would have known that you don't
just stop paying court ordered *anything*. You go back to court and ask for
changes. And oh my! You might even find out where the kids are!
>
> Let's assume that the amount his wife was awarded was, by some magical
> coincidence, exactly half what she spent raising the kids, and that it is
> reasonable for that amount to be considered a debt of his.
>
> That's a leap, because as I pointed out earlier, such awards are
> arbitrary, and there is absolutely no accounting whatsoever as to what the
> real expenses are, or how the money is spent.
How do you know this?
I ask because I recall one of my friends being asked to do exactly that:
account for the support money she was being paid for her kids. Of course,
this was *during* the divorce, not after it, but it seems to me that the
judge could have determined from that both what the current support was
going for, *and* what the proper amount should be, given the other parent's
income. It's not all that hard.
> Now why should the remedies available to collect this debt be any
> different than the remedies available to collect any other debt? Why, for
> instance, should we have "debtor's prison" for this debt, when debtor's
> prison is unconstitutional for all other debts, or go to extrordinary
> measures to XXXX with someone's normally unattachable benefits, and
> government services like driver's license renewal?
You want to know the real reason? Because if he doesn't pay, it becomes a
government debt, or at least that's the assumption. The mother (who is
still assumed to not make as much money as the father) might have to go on
food stamps or even welfare, in which case the father's debt is paid by the
govenment. And government debt is subject to remedies available to noone
else (something that I think *should* be illegal). It came down to this
because men who had the salaries attached for child support have been known
to quit their jobs. They'd rather be homeless than pay support for the
children they helped create. Some of them job hop on the assumption that
they can avoid this, but I doubt that works for very long, once the
government gets involved. I'm not even sure leaving the state works
anymore.
>
> I don't think owing ten bucks to your fetus should be any different from a
> legal perspective than owing ten bucks to American Express, even if child
> support were fairly awarded and accounted for, which of course it is not.
A child and a fetus are two very different things, Eric, whether you want to
acknowledge it or not. Try talking to a fetus some time, and maybe you'll
get a clue.
| |
| Dragonlady 2004-08-26, 10:06 pm |
| X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de EgWrMasA7wMWAKn5vUylmwMG5cL7AlPGmfS8zUH7jdWR7NgrlZ
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Xref: newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com alt.abuse.recovery:232376
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e162f$0$448$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> astri <astri@lava.net> wrote:
> The days when women could just burp babies out of their vaginas, and get
> the multi-thousand dollar monthly AFDC check, are history.
The day when women could just burp babies out of their vaginas and get
multi-thousand dollar monthly AFDC checks is a myth, and always have been.
I know. I grew up on AFDC.
| |
| Dragonlady 2004-08-26, 10:06 pm |
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e1be9$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> cal <cal1360@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
penis.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Clearly you are unfamiliar with lesbians and modern turkey baster
technology.
Where do you think what's in that turkey baster came from? Especially if
it's fresh enough to actually *work*...
| |
| Dragonlady 2004-08-26, 10:06 pm |
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e49f0$0$450$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
it was[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> What does advocating equality between men and women have to do with my
mommy?
Paying equal amounts to support the children they both helped to create is a
form of equality. I'm not saying there aren't inequities in the system,
there definitely are. But we have no way of knowing if the *amount* of the
child support was inequitable, only that this guy either couldn't or didn't
care enough to track down his kids and wasn't smart enough to go to court
over it.
| |
| Dragonlady 2004-08-26, 10:06 pm |
|
"Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
news:412e67f2$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> Luna <jean_collins@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I don't believe I've ever read or posted in soc.men, but I've been on the
> Net so long I'd have to check the Google archives to make sure.
>
> Old curmudgeons don't have perfect memories, you know.
>
> Besides, I am sure soc.men can't hold a candle to the various "childfree"
> newsgroups and message boards, where the childfree and fetus-enabled rip
> each other new assholes on a regular basis.
I hate to sound dumb, but what's "childfree" and "fetus-enabled" mean?
| |
| windswept 2004-08-27, 7:06 am |
| X-No-Archive: Yes
who the heck knows? But I have to tell you all, I have enjoyed eaves
dropping on this thread and have laughed out loud at times.
proceed......
"Dragonlady" <dragonlady@cableone.net> wrote in message
news:2p7if2Fhmrm2U1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
> news:412e67f2$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
to[vbcol=seagreen]
10[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
"childfree"[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I hate to sound dumb, but what's "childfree" and "fetus-enabled" mean?
>
>
>
--
For more information about this NNTP posting service, contact:
help@asarian-host.net -- for all info about our server.
If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page:
https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi
| |
|
|
"Dragonlady" <dragonlady@cableone.net> wrote in message
news:2p7if2Fhmrm2U1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Eric Cordian" <emc@artifact.psychedelic.net> wrote in message
> news:412e67f2$0$452$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
>
> I hate to sound dumb, but what's "childfree" and "fetus-enabled" mean?
hah! Well, you can take childfree literally - it means choosing not to have
children. Don't bring your children on a plane or to a restaurant if there are
any militant "childfree" types in the vicinity. Don't talk about your children
in the lunchroom either. They call parents "Moo's" and "Duh's" behind their
backs or collectively - "breeders". These people have beady, feral little eyes.
alt.support.childfree is one of the most vicious newsgroups on usenet. I became
acquainted with it through some crossposting shenannigans and I could not
believe what I was reading.
Fetus enabled would be people who can and do produce babies?
Jean
>
>
| |
| Alan B. Mac Farlane 2004-08-27, 11:06 am |
| in article 412e0d07$0$451$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org, Eric Cordian at
emc@artifact.psychedelic.net wrote on 8/26/04 9:17 AM:
> It must have been because she was raised in a bad environment, because it
> couldn't
> possibly have been because you are annoying.
>
> Yuk yuk.
it was that and lot of other stuff ... one of the goals of recovery is to
get better ... and I am better today then what I was years ago. Kaitlyn,
Panther and lots of other folks can attest to that freely ... and I for
them. Kaitlyn healed up on serious fragmentation that in white mans
medicine can be called a multiple personality disorder ... and there are
other people here so gifted that they are working on pushing though the
muddle and be free.
They are soon upon it as well themselves ---
Keep up the good work on your own recovery Eric.
Have a wonderfull day and may the God who don't XXXX around keep you safe.
sumbuddie luvs ya
|
| |
|
|