|
|
 |
| |
| |
| Child
support list -- beginning -- draft |
| |
| DRAFT
DRAFT DRAFT Please comment
and add to it. |
| |
| Child support
is a form of social engineering that
has gone awry. |
| |
It is flawed. Its goal is not
to change the standard of living of
the children following a family breakup.
The standard is impossible to obtain
when two instead of one household is
being supported by the same income.
The REALITY is that a family breakup
must inevitably harm everyone.
The question is -- to what degree, and
more importantly,
WHAT CAN THE STATE DO TO MINIMIZE THE
HARM TO THE CHILDREN IN THE FIRST INSTANCE?
and secondly, what can the state do
to HELP minimize the DURATION of this
harm?
The guiding principle should be to ENCOURAGE
both households to INCREASE their income,
the sooner the better.
The Guideline does EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE:
It encourages BOTH parties to minimize
their income.
|
| |
With that said,
In each case, the parents must
establish the PRE-DIVORCE and
MID-DIVORCE cost of maintenance
per child per year.
Each parent is responsible for
child support equally.
That amount must be increased
or decreased in proportion to
parenting time with child(ren).
There must be ACCOUNTABILITY of
how the child support is used
to support the child(ren).
Custodial Wife remarries, no problem.
Her spouse benefits by having
THIRD income in household.
The NEW HUSBAND’S QUALITY OF LIFE
IS ENHANCED, AS ARE POSSIBLY HIS
ASSETS.
Husband to remarry. Bride-to-be
fearful that she will be obligated
to use her money to contribute
to child-support payments to ex-wife.
PERQUISITE INCOME.
The NEW WIFE’S QUALITY OF LIFE
IS DIMINISHED, AS ARE POSSIBLY
HER ASSETS.
The Custodial Wife’s assets are
increased by half of the equity
in her new marital home ... even
if it is standing in the name
of her New Husband.
Arguably, if W were to divorce
N-H, that home would be considered
marital assets and W would likely
get at least half.
This new asset must be listed
on her Financial Statement when
Former Husband seeks modification
for substantially changed circumstances.
(Substantially changed circumstances
= 20 percent change up or down
in income.)
H lives with parents rent-free.
The amount of free rent is PERQUISITE
INCOME.
Wife with custody
Expense of child(ren) = X (hypothetically
$100 per week)
H = 14 percent
H = 150,000
H = 60,000 H
= 20,000 H =
unemployed H
= disability
W = 150,000
W = 60,000 W
= 20,000 W =
unemployed W
= disability
H = 150,000 = ˝ X
= 50 or
.14(100) to pay =
14.00
W = 150,000 = ˝ X
= 50 or
.86(50) to pay =
86.00
Wife with custody of one child
Husband with custody of other
child
Should be no child support in
either direction.
OR H’s child support payments
should be offset money he is to
receive from W.
OR vice versa.
True Anecdote
H = 3300 per month gross disability
-- court treated it as “income”
W = 228,000 gross annual income,
or 19,000 per month.
Court ordered him to pay 1700.
W ended up with 20,700 gross monthly
income
H ended up with 1600 a month income.
One child went to live with him
(no court order to do so.
He continued to pay child support.
W did not pay him child support
for the one child living with
Hubby.
|
|
| |
And when does this all end: EMANCIPATION?
Arbitrary by court.
Cases say c-s while child in college
full time.
Recently case said child just needs
to be living at home.
Guidelines should speak.
(Actually legislature should but probably
will not. In actual fact, child
support is not
one of the factors in section 34 of
the divorce statute. C-S is a
federal govt invention . . . via CAPTA
laws.)
The entire scheme is unconstitutional.
No Mass. legislature has spoken.
C-S guidelines written by committee
(likely exec committee) and new rules
are added by judicial fiat.
And when the family ends up residing
in two States.
Court uses JURISDICTION as reason to
say PAY UNTIL EMANCIPATED.
Uniform
Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement
Act
Mass Child Custody Jurisdiction
Act
Within 6 months of moving to new
State, W gets emergency restraining
order out of New State.
After 6 months, goes in for modification
of c-s -- she does not have new job
or ex-H has new job --
relitigate child support.
Mass c-s order obsolete, other applies.
None of this is set out in guidelines,
causing MORE expense.
Who pays for MORE LITIGATION?
The W who moves or the H, who already
paid her atty's fees?
Barbara
C. Johnson, Advocate of Court Reform
and Attorney at Law
6 Appletree Lane
Andover, MA 01810-4102
978-474-0833
email:
barbaracjohnson@worldnet.att.net
False Allegations:
http://www.falseallegations.com
Participating Attorney:
http://www.lawguru.com/cgi/bbs2/user/browse.shtml
Campaign 2002:
http://www.barbforgovernor.com
-----
The judicial system is very broken.
It must be fixed.
There are four people who can do
the job:
Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and
Nobody.
Everybody thinks Somebody will surely
do it.
It is a job Anybody can do. But
Nobody is doing it.
At least I'm trying. What are you
doing?
"Women are not men's life partners,
but rivals favored by law."
Paul Craig Roberts, in "The
Wars We Can't Afford to Lose,"
citing Professor Richard T. Hise,
The War Against Men
|
| |
|
|
|
|
