NCP income

FCCDAD
Fri, 01 Aug 2014 15:31:30 +0000

@SimpleLife You should consider switching to decaf, I hear many people find it just as good.

My point about both custody and CS being infinitely reviewable did not relate in any way to what a court might rule. It was to draw attention to the fact that once you open these lawsuits, they remain open until there is no more child for the court to have jurisdiction over (barring tragedy, that means when the last child reaches majority). The point is that it is quite common, and in no way improper, for the litigation to continue that entire time. I have seen no more reliable and consistent way to make a lifelong enemy of someone than to file lawsuits against them. So: you want to spend all your money on attorney’s fees until the last child is grown? File lawsuits. Lawyers don’t make their money by telling you to go away and just learn to get along; they pay their mortgage with your conflict. No conflict, no income for them.

“My parents spent my entire childhood, and all their money on attorneys, litigating over me, and I’m so happy that they did,” said no one ever. “And now that I’m going to college, their lawyers’ kids have their educations paid for, and I got a nice card and $25 for graduation.” Successful outcome? Yes… for the lawyers. Not for the child.

I have heard about how backwards Texas is, but even there I don’t believe they will cut off children from a parent “willy nilly.” The “train for good relations,” as you put it, is on a track that the parents put the children on. When there is abuse, there is CPS and criminal charges. When there is not abuse, it is the parents influencing the children. Parents who don’t love their children don’t fight in court over them; they just go away. There are plenty of parents who complain about the other parent never seeing the children; those children (and parents) have a legitimate complaint. In such cases, the absent parent is most likely the one at fault for the poor relations.

No, I don’t “need a refresher course course on what’s really good for children’s emotional and physical health.” I tell you flat out: what is best for children is healthy loving relationships with both parents. Period. That should be the goal of anyone who has any involvement with children anywhere. (Except Texas, apparently. I shall concede your point that Texas is really f’d up.)

I am very sorry to hear that your children are uniquely allergic to having healthy loving relationships with their parents. I foolishly presumed they were normal children.

No, kids are not ever “simply estranged” from their parents. There is always a responsible adult, when the subject is a child. If the parent abandons the child and refuses contact, that parent is responsible. If the parent abuses or molests the child, that parent is responsible. But if the parent continually fights for his/her parental rights to raise his/her own children, is not abusive or a molester, then someone else is responsible for the estrangement - 99% likely it is whatever adult the child is around most often.

Does estrangement = financial need? NO. A child from an intact home cannot go to the FA office and say, “My parents have a good income but refuse to pay for my college; give me money.” The answer is, they are still your parents - if you cannot get them to pay, that doesn’t make you needy. The answer is the same for the from a broken home. If your parents have the money to pay, that’s what the FA office determines - NOT whether you are getting along with your parents.

When a child has been isolated from a parent, going to college is an ideal opportunity to reconnect with that parent. You want a parent to contribute to his/her child’s college costs? Try supporting them having a good relationship first. Let the motivation come from within.

Seeking an NCP waiver instead of reuniting the child with his/her parent is still an option if a person is a danger. If you need a waiver because the contact is too risky, you should also get a restraining order.

The vast majority of cases (and parents) are not of that nature. If you found it necessary to obtain restraining orders against your ex, then it was very easy for you to show why you needed a waiver. For most people, that will be of no help, and is likely to mislead them into maintaining or aggravating a bad situation.

You should really worry more about what is best for the children than about what you imagine my motives to be. But I shall tell you directly: my motivation here is simply to help people. Especially the children, who have the most need and least ability to understand the root causes of their problems and the most promising ways of addressing them. And I also tell you directly: perpetuating estrangement from non-abusive parents is harmful, not helpful.

You should also look up the definition of “bullying.” It does not mean what you seem to think it means.