Child Support

I have 2 children, joint custody and my ex is the custodial parent. I pay 28% of my salary in child support. I also pay 1/2 medical insurance and now my "ex" lawyer has agreed on my behalf, without my knowledge or consent, to pay back payments of child care ($154 month) and future child care services (apprx $400-$500 mth). Attny stated if I didn't pay I would have been in non-compliance of marital agreement. This was/is not true. Since the beginning of my divorce and custody agreement my ex-wife has gone against everything we agreed upon. She doesn't consult me on any decisions she makes for the kids (she is the custodial parent). She has the kids in counseling (for their summer break and no other activities) because "she cannot relate to them", "she is a shut-in and doesn't like to interact with other people" hence she has my kids doing the same. This is what she told the counselor with me sitting there. Basically the counselor gives her advice (which I am already doing) on how to interract with the kids. Ex refuses to look for any alternative babysitting, even FREE babysitting by people I know. With what I have to pay for child support, her insurance, babysitting, daycare and my attorney fees (which they have dropped me because they are done with my case) I can no longer make rent let alone any other living expenses. I cannot afford a lawyer and my kids are suffering mentally, emotionally and socially. There's much more but this is the jist of it. What if anything can I do?

Without the ability to see and view the marital agreement, it is difficult for someone on a message board to assist. However, there are several different issues in your posting, some legal, some psychological, and some simply differences of opinion.

How did your attorney agree to these demands without your knowing? Was there a hearing that you missed? Was this attorney still acting on your behalf at the time this decision was made, or had the attorney/client relationship been terminated?

Bottom line---if you state he is your attorney, paid to act on your behalf, and he is telling you that had he failed to do this particular action, you would have been noncompliant with a court order, he acted in your best interest. Would you rather he not do what he did and then let you go to jail for being in non-compliance ( You don't state specifically the relationship between the action the attorney took and how it relates to your marital agreement).

Also, a mother going to counseling because she is having parenting trouble isn't necessarily a bad thing. Going to counseling means apparently she is making an effort and trying to learn how to be a better parent. The fact that the mother isn't a "people person" and doesn't let people baby sit isn't abuse---it is a difference of opinion regarding parenting styles. I have seven children and they have never had a babysitter in their whole lives, and they are home schooled. Neither of those are illegal----a lot of people may disagree with my choices, but they are just that---choices.

Regarding your comments about your wife--if she is in non-compliance, report it to the court. If you wanted to be consulted on decisions she, as the custodial parent, makes, perhaps staying married or staying together would have allowed you to do that-----of course, I have no idea why you aren't together----but what you are describing ( the non custodial parent feeling left out ) is a byproduct of broken families-----and unfortunately, unless it is a legal violation, does not fall within the jurisdiction of a court. If you feel you are being asked to pay an unreasonable amount, or if your financial circumstances change, notify the court and ask for the order to be amended.

Divorce, fighting parents is never easy for children. And, obviously, she has faults like you do, and like I do. Of course your children are unhappy ---their parent's dislike each other and they feel torn between both of you. Your one sentence was very telling---"Basically the counselor gives her advice (which I am already doing) on how to interract with the kids." Something tells me an EX telling her what to do, how to feel, or how to act really isn't high on her list of things to do. Perhaps therein lies part of the problem.

Unfortunately, children of broken families are, just about without fail, suffering socially, mentally and emotionally. This is, sadly, something no court of law can fix.

She was still my attny at the time and I knew of the hearing but my attny never informed me of what it was about. I understand about being noncompliant and partially agree, but the reason (not that I never wanted to) for not paying was because my ex is the one that was noncompliant by not giving me or my lawyer the proper documents for payment from the time the kids started daycare until about a few weeks of the court date (approx 8 months). My lawyer sent a letter to the ex and her lawyer a couple of times stating that my ex is not cooperating with the agreement and is asking for payment without "proof of receipt of payment" and if she refuses to show these documents then we would file for noncompliant of marital agreement.

The action was simply that my lawyer agreed on my behalf to take payments out of my check (which I did not know) for back daycare payments. The marital agreement states that I would pay 1/2 daycare costs. It also states that both parties would agree to decisions regarding daycare, etc. which I am never involved in any decision making. This has nothing to do with feeling left out, it has everything to do with my ex not agreeing with the custody agreement to where we both are to make major decisions regarding the children. The counseling situation is the second time she has taken the kids to see a therapist without my consent or knowledge.

I agree about going to counseling to make an effort on better parenting - but my ex states this is not for her but for the kids and yet it turns out that the ex is the one getting the counselign. Even still, this is not the issue because my ex does not practice any of the suggestions that is given to her and walks out of the counselors office with no intentions on doing so. You mis-read my statement..."This is what she told the counselor with me sitting there. Basically the counselor gives her advice (which I am already doing) on how to interract with the kids.". I do not give ex advice; I meant that the advice the counselor is giving my ex are the actions that I have been doing all along.

I would like to report these issues which I asked my lawyer to do previously but they never went that extra mile for me and now I am financially strapped and cannot afford an attorney to do so.

I am not feeling left out or a byproduct of a broken family. I have a fiance and baby daughter whom my 2 children love deeply and vice-versa. I feel as my children do, that they need to be with me in a more stable environment. One where I would not keep them from their own mother whatsoever or throw them in counseling to keep from taking them to school functions or outside activities.

I do not interfere with my ex or tell her how to raise the kids. I do say that they do need outside interaction besides just playing video games and watching tv - but never do I give her advice (she wouldn't take it anyways) on the kids. She does that plenty enough for the both of us -- but yet she is the one in counseling with the kids. It is a sticky situation but one where I want nothing more than to be at a happy medium with my ex and my kids happy as well.

This situation is confusing---and when the information changes from posting to posting, even more so. Your first posting indicates your attorney acted without your approval or knowledge, yet now you state you knew about it but didn't go to court because you 'didn't know what it was about'? My question is--does it matter what it is about? I have several attorney's for those things I do not handle on my own and if one of them calls me and says he is going to court with ANYTHING that involves me, I AM THERE. You cannot fail to avail yourself of your opportunity to be present then complain about what action was taken while you were not there.

Your first posting says you were in counseling "sitting right beside her", now your posting says "yet she is the one in counseling with the kids." Another discrepancy.

Then you state you disagree with the idea of your being in noncompliance, now you say you partially agree. Moving right along......
You say the reason YOU were not compliant is because SHE is/was not compliant. The judge orders you to pay, and you are waiting for paperwork from your ex before you pay? I have never heard of a court that operates that way. Specifically, what paper did she have that you needed before you could comply with the court order? Be specific. Because as your posting reads now, you state you did not pay because SHE did not provide PROOF OF RECEIPT OF PAYMENT. HUH? she cannot provide receipt of proof of receipt of payment BEFORE payment is made.

I may not be good at SoDuKu, but I'm really good at filling in the blanks. What you mean (but aren't saying) is YOU STOPPED paying when you did not receive "proof of receipt of payment" and when you went back to court, the judge had to ORDER you to resume payments (including back payments) regardless of the "proof of receipt of payment" part ( or else he ordered HER to provide you with receipts)----in any regard, you were paying, you stopped paying and you are complaining because in order to keep you from a contempt charge, your attorney who went to court for you when you didn't appear, and agreed to the terms you are objecting to now. <<<<helpless look>>>> SHE CANNOT PROVIDE PROOF OF RECEIPT OF PAYMENT BEFORE PAYMENT IS MADE .
The balance of your posting is, basically, that YOU think your children would be better off with you, because YOU are, more or less, a better parent and a better human being. That very well may be the case---I don't know. But, I had to chuckle at part of your posting----and wonder if you realize how poorly it reflects upon you. The NON custodial parent very often DOES feel left out when the custodial parent makes important decisions, some on the spur of the moment, without dialing the other party up first. This is a common emotion-----but no, you are quick to decry the idea and say it doesn't bother you at all (QUOTE) "This has nothing to do with feeling left out, "---then the casual reader wonders, "Ok, if that isn't it, then what IS the problem? If he doesn't feel left out--what IS wrong?" THEN you helpfully add, "...it has everything to do with my ex not agreeing with the custody agreement to where we both are to make major decisions regarding the children. The counseling situation is the second time she has taken the kids to see a therapist without my consent or knowledge."

HUH? Lets REASON this out: If you AREN'T feeling left out, then you simply want her to go through the motions of reporting to you ---for what reason? Not so you don't feel left out--that isn't the reason according to you--what IS the reason you want her to report/consult with you then? If it isn't so you don't feel left out ( the opposite of which is so you will be INCLUDED) why DO you want her to pick up the phone before she takes them to the doctor?

Kind of ironic, a father who complains because he says his ex has "issues" ( not enough "issues" to keep him from marrying her and making babies) but "issues" nonetheless, and instead of having to complain she does nothing about her "issues", he says she is trying to get help FOR herself and her kids----and Dad is happy. Right? WRONG. Dad isn't happy mom is getting help--Dad is UNhappy MOM didn't ASK before getting HERSELF and the children help. (Ummm, 'kay). I get the distinct feeling this is one of this "darned if I do, darned if I don't" situation.

The PRACTICALITY of being exactly 50/50 in decision making is subjective. Which decisions do you want to be a part of? What about what the kid wears to school on Tuesdays---should she call you in the morning, and check first? How about if the child has a runny nose and needs an antibiotic---is it ok for her to take the kid to the doctor on her lunch hour, or must she clear it with you first? Practically, what you are expecting isn't REASONABLE. Where do you draw the line ( rhetorical question---you don't need to explain to me where you think the line should be drawn--you have made it very clear from your postings who you think should be in control). If you wanted that type of control, you should have stayed MARRIED or living together so you could decide who wears what to school, what time the doctors appts. are, if they take soccer or piano, etc.

Which brings me to the bottom line: Your entire premise--that she is flawed and you are a model parent? Well--that very well may be true, but apparently the judge didn't see it like that or he would have given YOU the children. Judges act in the best interest of the children ( or try to ). Why did this terrible woman, who seeks counseling for herself and her children get custody of these children in the first place? Obviously, not everyone in the court room that day saw things as did you.

Also, I didn't say YOU were the byproduct of a broken family---how would I know anything about your parents? I said your CHILDREN and the stress, emotional heartache and grief they are experiencing has everything to do with THEIR being from a broken home. You think daddy being daddy to someone else's kids doesn't affect them significantly? I suspect being flocked with new girlfriends kids and your being daddy to them all would be psychologically damaging (jealousy) to these poor kids more than mommy not inviting enough people over to the house for them to visit with. While it's great you are playing a fatherly role to someone else's daddy less kids, it is an obvious indicator of hard feelings for the children who were, in their mind, and for whatever reason "left behind" while daddy found a "mommy" and "kids" he liked better. Note---obviously, that isn't what people think when they shack up with another girlfriend or boyfriend and their kids, but that is how the children left behind FEEL. Their perception is their reality.

I saw a real life example of this recently after my husband of twenty years died in a work accident, leaving me with our seven kids to parent. My son was talking to his friend about how he missed his daddy and his friend said wistfully, "My daddy didn't HAVE to leave like yours did. Mine left because he didn't like MOMMY". I honestly think losing a parent to death pales in comparison to what a child suffers when he or she loves two adult parents who fight, leave each other, start new families, have "new kids", all the while bickering over things like doctors appointments being made without asking PERMISSION. The only way for a non-custodial parent to exert that kind of control and have that kind of input in their life is to BE there 24/7 like the custodial parent is.

I would suggest counseling, but you are already doing that and you don't approve of her efforts there, either. So, either hire an attorney to rigorously promote YOU as the model parent who should have custody, or figure out a way to put the children first----declaring yourself the better parent does nothing for hurting children.

Legally, without money to hire an attorney to go back to court and somehow assert your superiority, I don't know what else you can do about your situation from a legal standpoint.

I'm sorry but you are misconstruing everything I am saying. You are not filling in the blanks you are turning everything around.

1. I didn't know that I would or could have been in contempt because my attny informed me that the child care payments wouldn't be an issue since my ex hadn't provided any bills.

2. My ex did have proof of reciepts because she did pay, had receipts, and bills that had been paid; she had excuses that she didn't have a chance to fax them. We didn't see any of this until the court hearing. How can I pay if I do not know what to pay. I never stopped payments because I never began payments because I never knew what to pay.

3. I do not need to know everything that goes on or be informed of everythign but I do need to be involved when making a decision regarding taking my children to counseling. Not the day before the session.

4. I was in counseling because I have no choice but to be there to make sure my children aren't being forced to say or do things they do not want to do. The counseling sessions/meetings always turn to my ex and suggestions on how to deal with the kids; but yet these sessions are supposed to be only for the kids where the counselor talks to them and trys to help them out if the counselor feels they need it. Plus my ex goes to see this counselor on her own on the weekends that I have the kids - yet the counselor keeps telling me that it's just for the kids; why then does my ex need to go by herself? because she needs counseling for herself (which is fine) but she is using the excuse that the kids need counseling so that she can be in couseling. She has been in therapy since she was 16 years old - this is all she knows.

And again, you jumped to conclusions and insinuations. After the divorce was finalized, I found someone whom I am engaged to and had a child with her. I have 3 children. 2 with my ex and one with my fiance. My children love both of them very much, no jealousy, nothing. This is beyond insult. I did not go on this to be insulted and taken completely wrong and misinterrpreted. Your next paragraph is completely out of place and completely wrong. I am not playing daddy to any other children other than my own and I do not appreciate the insuations of "other girlfriends or other children."

"Also, I didn't say YOU were the byproduct of a broken family---how would I know anything about your parents? I said your CHILDREN and the stress, emotional heartache and grief they are experiencing has everything to do with THEIR being from a broken home. You think daddy being daddy to someone else's kids doesn't affect them significantly? I suspect being flocked with new girlfriends kids and your being daddy to them all would be psychologically damaging (jealousy) to these poor kids more than mommy not inviting enough people over to the house for them to visit with. While it's great you are playing a fatherly role to someone else's daddy less kids, it is an obvious indicator of hard feelings for the children who were, in their mind, and for whatever reason "left behind" while daddy found a "mommy" and "kids" he liked better. Note---obviously, that isn't what people think when they shack up with another girlfriend or boyfriend and their kids, but that is how the children left behind FEEL. Their perception is their reality. "

I'm sorry your husband left you - I'm sorry, died, but this has nothing to do with what I initially was trying to say. Please do not respond to this anymore as I do not feel like continuing this conversation. I didn't want to get too personal and tried to just stick to details. I'm sorry you misread me or I mislead.

I really don't think you should be giving advice because you do not give advice, you give your impression or point of view.

Sorry, Cupcake. I am not your wife--- so, I will feel free to reply in spite of your instruction for me not to---surprise-----no one here has to obey you or follow your orders. Don't like what you read? Click ignore and move on.

You want advice, yet you change the information you provide, then get upset when you don't get an answer you like because relevant information is being left out--how cute of you to commiserate with another poster on a thread from months ago--only to have it edited by the ADMINISTRATION of this site. Oopsie.

Your posting is a mess of contradictions ----in one posting, you are in counseling ( note--I did NOT criticize you for being in counseling) the next, you are sitting WITH them in counseling---I merely pointed out the discrepancy in your posting. I think counseling is a wonderful thing on ANY level, together OR apart. You missed the point. The point is, you are changing your story or adding details that change what you originally said, and when the discrepancies are pointed out, you become nasty.

Also, this gem was touching: ( break it down and read it line by line---)

2. My ex did have proof of reciepts because she did pay, had receipts, and bills that had been paid; she had excuses that she didn't have a chance to fax them. You just repeated yourself, talking about RECEIPTS, yet the next line says you didn't pay because you didn't know what to pay? YOU need HER receipts to pay? You are paying receipts? Ummm, 'kay. We didn't see any of this until the court hearing. You didn't know you hadn't received any receipts until you got to court? How can I pay if I do not know what to pay. I never stopped payments because I never began payments because I never knew what to pay. You know what to pay because the judge TELLS you in the court order what is yours to pay. There is NO way a judge said to your ex, " Hunny, pay whatever you want, send the receipts and the unpaid bills to ex hubby and whatever you DONT pay, HE will pay."

Right.

Regarding your counseling comments----do you see how you are, once again, putting yourself in a superior position over both your wife AND a licensed ( I presume ) counselor? To imply that a legitimate licensed counselor would be unethical without your omniscient presence there reflects your arrogance (that old control thing again) Thank goodness YOU are there to make sure the COUNSELOR/Psychiatrist/Psychologist does her job!! Why, if you weren't there, then she may be remiss in doing her job and she might be so unethical as to coax the kids into saying something they don't mean. <<oh BROTHER>> I suspect the truth is you are there to make sure the children DON'T tell her what is REALLY happening in their private horror. See, Skipper? Two sides to EVERY story. I won't even mention how shocking it is to to read that YOU think you must be there to make sure the kids don't say something they don't mean---YOU dictate their feelings, thoughts, and words?---or for that matter, you can PREDICT them and if they express one that doesn't agree with yours, you can quickly jump in to tell them they are wrong, that ISNT how they feel?

Shocking. Sad. Tragic. Travesty.

I always find the criticisms of the 'ex' interesting---she has been in counseling to no avail ( according to you ) since she was 16 and you thought she would be a good candidate to marry and have KIDS with? Good move.

Also, the bottom line in broken families is the same throughout time---ANY children internalize, feel like it is their fault, feel guilt, anger, and resentment---ANY child. My statements about how children feel applies to virtually every child that is a product of a broken family. There are literally THOUSANDS of books written about divorce and blended families ---don't take my word for it. Look at a library shelf---and you will find more than you could possibly believe. Why? Because the situation is NOT ideal---and it IS impossible to project broken/blended families as being superior to or even equal to original intact families. Again, don't take my word for it. Pick up a book and read the words of experts in the field---wait, that's right. How could you possibly believe an expert? The very counselor needs you there to make sure she doesn't coax the kids into saying something they "should not". (eye roll)

I will admit, I do not know anything about broken families by experience, only by education. My parents have been married for nearly fifty years, I was married for twenty, my husbands parents married for almost sixty years. All sets of our grandparents were married for their entire lives to one another respectively, so no, I was spared the tragedy of broken families. I do not have anyone in my immediate family who has adversely effected innocent children by shuttling kids around every other day, and two weekends a month, asking courts to referee between them and the other person they thought was absolutely wonderful at one point in their lives. It is all a mystery to me from a personal standpoint.

My apology for expecting parallel reasoning to be within scope of your mental ability-- and for referencing my husbands death in correlation with a broken family. The parallel was very clear. (copied and pasted from previous posting) "I honestly think losing a parent to death pales in comparison to what a child suffers when he or she loves two adult parents who fight, leave each other, start new families, have "new kids", all the while bickering over things like doctors appointments being made without asking PERMISSION. The only way for a non-custodial parent to exert that kind of control and have that kind of input in their life is to BE there 24/7 like the custodial parent is. "


It all boils down to the reality that what you want is called FULL TIME PARENTING. If you wanted to be that kind of father to your child ( which is a noble and excellent goal) one of two things should have happened. 1.You should have stayed married to their mother or 2. You should have gotten custody. I am not saying EITHER was a suitable course of action for you----simply saying those are the only two that would allow you to retain this degree of control. You cannot have it both ways--it is a law of nature. A broken home means that BOTH parents lose some of their "say" by surrendering it to a third party ( a court ) who referees between the two of you. Forgive me for laying the responsibility for that loss squarely at your feet.


Your first posting asked no specific legal questions, just basically complained about this situation you and she have created. You asked "What can I do"---sounds like you are asking for ADVICE. You aren't asking for case law, you aren't asking for precedent, you aren't asking for procedural steps. You are asking for advice---advice is subjective, meaning it is based on the point of view of the person responding. Who else's point of view would I have? (rhetorical, no need to answer)---ah, that's right, you are finished with the discussion. That works for me.

This posting brought to you by those of us who didn't add "just kidding" after the 'till death do us part" phrase of our wedding vows.

Cupcake??? How inappropriate and rude of you. Once again, I did not get on this to be insulted or for my fiance and children to be insulted. You are more than welcome to respond as much as you like, I am asking you not to respond to my postings.

You are very ignorant and you are not on this to help others out you are on this to critize and insult people who do not live the life that you think is proper. I've read other postings with your remarks and you do not give advice you simply give your nosey attitude opinion.

I feel sorry for people who are seeking advice and help and you interject with insults. You should be reported. I didn't insult you in any way and now you are going off on a rant about how you do not agree with my life style. You are only on this site so that you can simply read about people's lives and then feel you have the right to answer and ask detail questions that are not pertinent to what we are asking or looking for.

Here's another thing to throw out that I'm sure you will feel you have to comment on and I'm sure you will. This is not actually the male typing this out, this is a female (think what you want) and I was looking for help for a friend. So from a woman to a woman..... You are an idiot and please for the sake of other people seeking help.... leave everyone alone if you have nothing intelligent to say.

One more thing. This is a site for people seeking help and advice from anything from finances to marriage and divorce and many other topics, from other people who have hopefully been in the same situation or someone who can actually help.

If you feel that people who are divorced is a sin and in your opinion just plain wrong then again, please do not respond to these people.

This person knows what it means to take vows and mean them.... He didn't ask for the divorce, SHE did, but once again you assumed that it was "he" doing all the wrong stuff here because apparently you must not like men very much - I feel sorry for your husband when he was alive. Shame on you for being so closed minded and idiotic only to get a point across that means absolutley nothing and doesn't make any sence whatsoever.

Here's another thing to throw out at you. The ex (female) is the one that comes from broken, divorced families - her parents were divorced; as a matter of fact her own father cheated on her mother many times. My friend and his fiance both come from families who's parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles even cousins who have not been divorced. So now what - I'm sure you will have plenty to say though because people like you only like to hear themselves talk and feel superior to others when they do so.

I'm sorry but now you got me going.

"2. My ex did have proof of reciepts because she did pay, had receipts, and bills that had been paid; she had excuses that she didn't have a chance to fax them. You just repeated yourself, talking about RECEIPTS, yet the next line says you didn't pay because you didn't know what to pay? YOU need HER receipts to pay? Yes he needs receipts or proof of payments to pay, how else would he know what to pay -- do you understand this point?You are paying receipts? No, he is paying her but he can't pay her because SHE IS NOT TELLING HIM WHAT TO PAY - do you understand this?Ummm, 'kay. We didn't see any of this until the court hearing. You didn't know you hadn't received any receipts until you got to court? The attny and ex-husband knew there were receipts or proof of payments which they asked for (I explained that to you but you ignored that part). The ex-wife kept putting it off and putting it off until a court hearing where miraculously she provided all kinds of payments made -- she didn't provide any proof of payment until the court date and then it was continued again for another hearing to determine how much the ex-husband had to actually pay once they figured out what was paid and what would be his share. So at that last court date an amount was determined based on what was already paid and the court decided to take it directly out of his check (this is the part that he didn't know about) - do you understand this? How can I pay if I do not know what to pay. I never stopped payments because I never began payments because I never knew what to pay. You know what to pay because the judge TELLS you in the court order what is yours to pay.There was no previous amount set PRIOR to the court date except it reading 1/2 of the bill, the ex NEVER told him what to pay or what the bill was, the judge then ordered a set amount to pay once they figured out the amount - AFTER THE COURT HEARING - do you understand this There is NO way a judge said to your ex, " Hunny, pay whatever you want, send the receipts and the unpaid bills to ex hubby and whatever you DONT pay, HE will pay." I actually agree with you on this but in the divorce agreement it states "RESPONDENT (EX-HUSBAND) AGREES TO PAY 1/2 OF CHILD CARE SERVICES ONLY AFTER PETITIONER (EX-WIFE) PROVIDES PROOF OF RECEIPT OF PAYMENT" Meaning, the ex-husband will pay for child care services once it has been paid and proven that it has been paid, otherwise the ex-wife can simply say to give her money just for the sake of giving her money -- I think they call that extortion.
Right????

Now, I am perfectly willing to continue an intelligent conversation and one where you might be able to help out, but if you simply feel like insulting and insinuating then I believe this conversation is over. We are both adults and I hope intelligent adults. If you cannot help then please end this and go on to your next victim, sorry - candidate.

Blah blah blah. Thought you were DONE posting on this thread? I am an idiot, yet you continue to talk with me, attempting to engage me further.

Don't be needy. It isn't attractive.

First you tell me to STOP posting, THEN ( three postings later ) you tell me I am allowed to stay and play as long as I be nice. Dear God--are you EVER consistent?

This is a LEGAL FORUM so I will toss some LEGAL information into this thread: A PERSON knows what to pay because they get a COURT ORDER telling them what to pay. Your whole blathering mess of sentences about he can't pay because he doesn't have HER receipts simply isn't the way it works. Do YOU understand that? Also, I won't even point out how scary it is to be expected to believe a 'friend' is QUOTING someone else's DIVORCE DECREE? No one has time for this foolishness. If YOU have a legal question--ASK it. The fact that a 'friend' would be SO intimately involved in someone else's life that they would know their divorce decree word for word or at least have it beside them to QUOTE from, or know what is said in counseling sessions with someone eles's children is bizarre beyond belief. This entire posting is nothing but FICTION. Pure unadulterated BLARNEY.

Another legal tidbit ( since you asked, yanno) Extortion is the obtaining of money (or tangible goods) usually accompanied by the threat of violence. So no, her getting more than half of the child care costs is not legally considered extortion. ( And I'm an idiot?? )

Your are offended by "cupcake", but have no problem with IDIOT and have no problem with nasty comments to a DEAD man? All righty then. Would you prefer Ms. Idiot, or Mr. Idiot, or do you even know? You chose the term, remember?

Your postings are full of inconsistencies, misinformation and NOW you are even saying you aren't certain of your gender. (pretend surprise). You went from being a MAN to being a WOMAN ( his fiance) to being a FRIEND. (eye roll) You provided incomplete advice, and every time you got a reply you didn't like , you changed the information---down to your very GENDER.

Suddenly, we have a THIRD person in the mix asserting that NONE of this was about him, er, her. But, they were asking for a FRIEND---nevermind how a 'friend' would know what happens in counseling sessions with his 'friends' kids". You and your many Internet personas are wasting bandwidth. And for someone who is done posting on this thread, you posted two more times.

While I commented on the generalities of divorce and its effect on children and families, YOU claimed to be insulted, called me idiot, etc. I am sure the irony of being offended someone expounds on the REALITY of broken families offends you, yet at no time did I call you names, OR speak ill of the dead, who aren't here to defend themselves. Calling someone "cupcake" implies my feelings about this discussion and its insipidness, while you calling me an 'idiot' is a character attack. Unfortunately for you, I stopped caring about name calling in the seventh grade---but I promise Ill send ya a memo just the millisecond I start again.

The balance of YOUR posting is attacking me PERSONALLY because YOU don't like someone saying, in black and white, not only does your position have no LEGAL merit ( since you cannot articulate it properly, and you keep changing it---since, in fact, it is all just blathering fiction anyway) your MORAL position is, according to child experts, damaging and hurtful to young impressionable children.

I am also not a fan of the "its all the ex's" fault--she left him yada yada yada." He PICKED her to be his babys momma. Try to explain THAT.

You came into a LEGAL forum, not to ask questions, but to WHINE about your new whatever you call him--ex wife. No wait, your FRIENDS ex wife. Your neighbors ex? Someone you saw on TV? In any regard---You then expect accurate legal responses, yet, you are trying to explain paying receipts ( oookkkkk) and not showing up for court appearances since you didn't have copies of the receipts he didn't pay. Or, YOU didn't pay. Or she didn't pay.

Whatever.

You may not like me, but that doesn't mean I am not right.

If you want me to stop posting, stop answering, Sir. Ma'am. Er, fiance. Uh---ex-wife. Ex-friends neighbors mailman.

Whatever.

I should be REPORTED? roflmao It has been YEARS since someone tattled on me---maybe my mom? My playground monitor? The Government? Bill Gates? Report your heart out, babe. Go for it. You don't like me so there should be some huge nameless faceless governing entity to whom you can report people you don't like. Here is a better idea, my confused misguided friend.

Grow Up.

And try to stop referring to yourself in the third person. It is CREEPY.