Hello Danny.

03 Sep 08 03:18, you wrote to me:

 DC> -> On 01 Sep 08  14:32:32, Jeff Smith got back to Danny Ceppa
 DC> -> Re: More info on my cousin

 JS>> Back when the amount of the support was being determined it
 JS>> amazed me how it was arrived at. I know there is a formula that
 JS>> is used and I can understand that. What I couldn't understand is
 JS>> where they got

 DC> Personally, I think they throw the figure into the air and let it
 DC> ride.

     I tried to ask them where they got their figures. I remember the
hearing officer stating that they were given a set of income figures
but couldn't disclose the source. I provided proof of income for the
previous two years. They were not interested in anything I had to say.
I remember noticing by their demeanor that they had made up their minds
of the outcome prior to entering the room and were somewhat annoyed that
I chose to question them or dipute their figures.

    The person that really deserves the support often times doesn't
see much of any of it. I don't mean to suggest that all or most
custodial parents are this way. The flaw is in the system. I just
happened to of met someone once years ago that was good at exploiting
the system and people. She by the way gets child support from two other
sources.

    The thing that gets hard to deal with sometimes is the children. I
love my children very much and can not fathom the using of children as
a source of income. One result has been that I am not nearly as trusting
as I was years ago. I am a father and am responsible for my chidren. In
my mind my child deserves nothing less.


 JS>> I know it sounds like I am simply whining and complaining. Maybe
 JS>> to some degree that is true. But it seems that the process is
 JS>> flawed.

 DC> It's horrendously flawed. The system is heavily slanted in favor of
 DC> the custodial parent.  It doesn't even matter if the situation is
 DC>  supposed to be joint custody.


 JS>> obvious flaws. The goal of child support should IMHO be to
 JS>> support and provide for the child. Is that not it's purpose?
 JS>> Instead it is used as a gift to the custodial parent to spend as
 JS>> they see fit. Whether the child actually benefits from the child
 JS>> support is optional and purely at the discression of the person
 JS>> receiving the support.

 DC> All to often, what is called child support ends up being a
 DC> windfall for the custodial parent.

    I guess my primary complaint isn't with the average custodial
parent. I would imagine that most use the support to offset the
money they would have otherwise used to feed and clothe the child.
My main complaint is based on the way the system is setup and those
parents that knowingly exploit the system for their own purposes.

   Sorry everyone.... Didn't mean to rant away quite so much. 


 DC> ... Dads need the same rights in the family as Women in the workplace.
 DC> --- OMX/Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

Jeff

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503