Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
John Nelson went from six-figure-earning software exectutive to unemployed overnight. But his $2,200 child support payment didn't change that quickly. It took a year for him to get a hearing, and when he finally did, the judge increased his obligation. By that time he had gotten a job as a science teacher, but the newly-upped child support obligation meant that he took home a grand total of $58 per week. Read about it here (WFTV, 11/9/09).
The judge, Julian Piggotte's attitude was "you can afford it; figure it out." Then she discovered that she had a conflict of interest in Nelson's case and withdrew.
His ex-wife sees the situation this way:
"Our lives go on. The kids still have lunches, they still go to school, and they still have field trips."
That's true. And if she and John were still together, the kids would need to be fed and go to school, but their standard of living would drop along with that of their parents. That's what happens when parents lose their jobs - parents and children live on less. They all manage the best they can. It's one of the sometimes-harsh realities of daily life.
Only if the parents are divorced does the concept arise that the children's lives must in no way change due to a parent's loss of income. It's as if Judge Piggotte lives in a fantasy world in which children must and do remain unaffected when their father loses his job. Indeed, it's the same fantasy world in which an adult can live on $58 per week.
Nelson's case is like countless others these days. Some 80% of job losses have been suffered by men in the last year or so. A lot of those guys are fathers, some of them divorced. That means they have to file for a modification of their support orders
It's another strange aspect of the whole matter that, if Nelson's wife had wanted a temporary restraining order against him, she could have gotten a hearing and had an order issued in a matter of hours. But when he loses his job and needs to reduce his child support to reflect what he can actually pay, it takes over a year.
Thoughts?
Then perhaps the other party, the one sending child support, should have custody of the children?Fuck that. The kids are his, he can figure it out. I'm raising 4 (it doesn't stop when they turn 18) and the pittance I get in child support is a joke.
The first set, I've receive a grand total (over 24 years) of $5,200. Woo fucking hoo. We spent that much on one broken arm, 13 years ago.
GlennSacks.com » Blog Archive » Family Attorney Marsha Freeman: 'The System is Broken'
John Nelson went from six-figure-earning software exectutive to unemployed overnight. But his $2,200 child support payment didn't change that quickly. It took a year for him to get a hearing, and when he finally did, the judge increased his obligation. By that time he had gotten a job as a science teacher, but the newly-upped child support obligation meant that he took home a grand total of $58 per week. Read about it here (WFTV, 11/9/09).
The judge, Julian Piggotte's attitude was "you can afford it; figure it out." Then she discovered that she had a conflict of interest in Nelson's case and withdrew.
His ex-wife sees the situation this way:
"Our lives go on. The kids still have lunches, they still go to school, and they still have field trips."
That's true. And if she and John were still together, the kids would need to be fed and go to school, but their standard of living would drop along with that of their parents. That's what happens when parents lose their jobs - parents and children live on less. They all manage the best they can. It's one of the sometimes-harsh realities of daily life.
Only if the parents are divorced does the concept arise that the children's lives must in no way change due to a parent's loss of income. It's as if Judge Piggotte lives in a fantasy world in which children must and do remain unaffected when their father loses his job. Indeed, it's the same fantasy world in which an adult can live on $58 per week.
Nelson's case is like countless others these days. Some 80% of job losses have been suffered by men in the last year or so. A lot of those guys are fathers, some of them divorced. That means they have to file for a modification of their support orders
It's another strange aspect of the whole matter that, if Nelson's wife had wanted a temporary restraining order against him, she could have gotten a hearing and had an order issued in a matter of hours. But when he loses his job and needs to reduce his child support to reflect what he can actually pay, it takes over a year.
Thoughts?
Further evidence that the Child Support system is broken?
That is not right.
I think that it is unreasonable to take more than 30% of anyones after tax income for child support.
i disagree....a man goes on having children..then he is expected to support them
HARRISBURG, Pa. A Philadelphia man was forced to pay more than $12,000 in child support for another man's daughter and spent two years in jail for falling behind on payments
That is not right.
I think that it is unreasonable to take more than 30% of anyones after tax income for child support.
What I find amazing is how much the guy in general gets the shaft because of the reputation of some guys being deadbeat.
Some guys really are deadbeats. And some get the shaft. But I agree, the system is screwed up and somebody always gets screwed in the end. Who gets bent over depends on the lawyers, the judge and the state where it's decided - and the state where it's enforced, if the noncustodial parent lives elsewhere. Everyone has a horror story. Hell of a way to run a railroad.
GlennSacks.com » Blog Archive » Family Attorney Marsha Freeman: 'The System is Broken'
John Nelson went from six-figure-earning software exectutive to unemployed overnight. But his $2,200 child support payment didn't change that quickly. It took a year for him to get a hearing, and when he finally did, the judge increased his obligation. By that time he had gotten a job as a science teacher, but the newly-upped child support obligation meant that he took home a grand total of $58 per week. Read about it here (WFTV, 11/9/09).
The judge, Julian Piggotte's attitude was "you can afford it; figure it out." Then she discovered that she had a conflict of interest in Nelson's case and withdrew.
His ex-wife sees the situation this way:
"Our lives go on. The kids still have lunches, they still go to school, and they still have field trips."
That's true. And if she and John were still together, the kids would need to be fed and go to school, but their standard of living would drop along with that of their parents. That's what happens when parents lose their jobs - parents and children live on less. They all manage the best they can. It's one of the sometimes-harsh realities of daily life.
Only if the parents are divorced does the concept arise that the children's lives must in no way change due to a parent's loss of income. It's as if Judge Piggotte lives in a fantasy world in which children must and do remain unaffected when their father loses his job. Indeed, it's the same fantasy world in which an adult can live on $58 per week.
Nelson's case is like countless others these days. Some 80% of job losses have been suffered by men in the last year or so. A lot of those guys are fathers, some of them divorced. That means they have to file for a modification of their support orders
It's another strange aspect of the whole matter that, if Nelson's wife had wanted a temporary restraining order against him, she could have gotten a hearing and had an order issued in a matter of hours. But when he loses his job and needs to reduce his child support to reflect what he can actually pay, it takes over a year.
Thoughts?
Further evidence that the Child Support system is broken?
