Should deadbeat dads be turned in by relatives?

[Wenchy]

Oh ok. When they become 18 they are adults.

Yes. The fact remains they will always be your children.

It's not like getting married and saying those vows. Your children are really yours until death do you part.

 

[missperky]

Yes. The fact remains they will always be your children.

It's not like getting married and saying those vows. Your children are really yours until death do you part.

I know this. And you can't control everything they do once they are an adult. That's all I'm saying.

I hope they are yours til death, I love my kids more then anything.

 

[This_person]

It is deap and telling,

it shows that the child support is what separated the child from the separated parent. And where was the custodial when this child was moaning the loss of their other parent? The custodial had a duty not to let the law interfere with the child's upbringing but instead the unjust child support laws violated that family unit and if we read the text that kid knew it was the child support that did it.

That is my point that the unjust child support divides the family unit.

The child support breaks up families.

So, not only do you have a problem with definitions of words, you have a reading comprehension problem, too? Re-read the poem. Neither the child support SYSTEM, nor the child support PAYMENTS are what separated out the author from the parent. The PARENT separated themselves out. In part, by not providing the payment, and in part by not being there for the child in every other way. A poor parent financially is not necessarily a poor parent emotionally and morally, just like a rich parent financially is not necessarily rich emotionally and morally. A poor parent that provides what they can, and is THERE (not in another state or jail, THERE) for the child is infinitely better than the rich parent that refuses to be there emotionally and morally for a child. Again, I implore you to read the poem again without your defense-of-your-own-guilt shield on. Pretend you can understand something from someone else's point of view.

 

[This_person]

I consider honesty as being far more important than servitude - and more manly too.

Just more proof of your manliness........

 

[This_person]

I believe in genetics and social conditioning weighing about 50/50. It's now up to you to make sure your children never do such a thing.

You make an excellant point, which pretty much answers the question of this thread: parenting doesn't stop at 18. The results of your offspring become far more their responsibility than yours (around 99% more), but you still have an obligation to teach and guide your offspring. Help them see the correct morals of life, or help them be held accountable for their actions!

 

[JPC sr]

Scofflaw and Personal Responsibility.

Others brought this up and so I am bringing it out.

those child support checks were the
only reminder of you we had-
and they stopped coming when I turned six.

So how is it that a six year old would know anything about the child support?

Because the mama bad mouthed the separated dad while the dad was not there.

The six year old knew nothing except the slander put into the innocent head and corrupted his innocent mind.

but unfortunately

I had your sinful eyes
your mellow complexion
your deceptive smile
& your narrow mind

How could a child think of himself in the above quoted way? Whether the child was 6 years old or 21 years old then how does he see "sinful eyes" in himself? except that mama told him so. Why would any child of any age see some other "mellow complexion", a "deceptive smile", and a "narrow mind" in himself? and it can only happen if the mama told him so, as mama certainly did not deny it. She bad mouthed the father to the son and the children believe slander coming from their custodials.

and I continued to remind mama of

your departure,
your exit, and
your stoic demeanor towards our survival-

This boy says that he the six year old child then 10 years and 21 years old and it is he the child reminding his "mama" about his daddy's "departure" his "exit" his "demeanor" and it does not work that way because the custodial is the adult and it is the custodial that did the reminding to the child. It is called bad mouthing slander behind the separated parent's back to turn the child against the separated parent.

and the support you never sent,
made my life's existence an accident,
and the support she didn't see,

was debited from the
support given to me

Mark Anthony Thomas

Again there is no way for a six year old child to make those kind of statements except that the custodial slandered the separated parent to the child. By the time the child grows to 21 that means after 15 years of bad mouthing slander by the mama against the separated father in this case.

The child does not know anything about child support unless the custodial tell the custodial's own opinion. How can a child say his "life's existance" was "an accident" because of the child support that mama "didn't see" except by mama talking trash to the child as aparently mama did most thoroughly.


===========================
I do acknowledge that male custodials slander the separated moms too as such dishonorable actions are gender neutral. And the point remains the same that the child support is interfering in the families and the child support is the excuse given here in that quoted post above for the child to affront his own father and put the father's supposed guilt onto the child himself and the whole slander is totally based on those unjust child support laws, and on the slander by the custodial to the child.

The unjust child support laws divide and further separate the family unit and that text quoted above is giving proof that the child is self defacing himself and self degrading his own God given father totally on the unjust child support imprinted on him in this case by "mama" as he says "mama."

 

[hvp05]

Yes, I would turn in my son/daughter if they were a deadbeat.

And at the other end of the spectrum, we have others - or should I say one other - around here who are actively aiding their son to become a deadbeat, just as they were.

 

[hvp05]

Well, TP, he did go back and read it again...

So how is it that a six year old would know anything about the child support?

Uhh, the poem is written from the perspective of an adult looking back at being 6 years old.

Because the mama bad mouthed the separated dad while the dad was not there.

And it is most likely whose fault dad was not around... ?

Whether the child was 6 years old or 21 years old then how does he see "sinful eyes" in himself?

How does your brain manage to take a few words printed in straight English and distort them so badly?

She bad mouthed the father to the son

Is it not possible that maybe... maybe the dad deserved to be bad mouthed for running away? Some custodial parents do talk badly about their ex for no reason, but I'll bet that, more often than not, if the ex is being put down they probably did something to earn the label.

How can a child say his "life's existance" was "an accident"

Because, even if the child is raised in an otherwise loving home, they will still wonder where the one parent is. The child will wonder what happened, why dad never comes around or calls, and they might feel guilty under the assumption that they were the cause of the parent's departure. Such an effect is seen frequently in separation/divorce cases, and many children (and parents) seek counseling to overcome these thoughts... but hey, you already know that because you're so well trained in psychology.

And the point remains the same that the child support is interfering in the families

You know, I almost wish we could slip into some form of parallel universe to see a world without child support. A world where parents would not be legally obligated to provide for their child[ren]... a world where, most certainly, the rate of abandoned children would skyrocket. I wish we could see this world just to hear what kind of limpdik excuse you would formulate then.

What is a custodial parent supposed to say when the other parent runs away? "Oh, don't worry, I'll take it all on myself - no problem!" If dad leaves town and provides nothing emotional or financial to their child, how should the remaining parent respond? Also, why is it acceptable for the non-custodial to desert their "god given" child without a care, but if the child reacts with anger that is bad and slanderous?


How much perfectly good time did I spend on this?

 

[meme]

Others brought this up and so I am bringing it out.
So how is it that a six year old would know anything about the child support?

Because the mama bad mouthed the separated dad while the dad was not there.

The six year old knew nothing except the slander put into the innocent head and corrupted his innocent mind.
How could a child think of himself in the above quoted way? Whether the child was 6 years old or 21 years old then how does he see "sinful eyes" in himself? except that mama told him so. Why would any child of any age see some other "mellow complexion", a "deceptive smile", and a "narrow mind" in himself? and it can only happen if the mama told him so, as mama certainly did not deny it. She bad mouthed the father to the son and the children believe slander coming from their custodials. This boy says that he the six year old child then 10 years and 21 years old and it is he the child reminding his "mama" about his daddy's "departure" his "exit" his "demeanor" and it does not work that way because the custodial is the adult and it is the custodial that did the reminding to the child. It is called bad mouthing slander behind the separated parent's back to turn the child against the separated parent.
Again there is no way for a six year old child to make those kind of statements except that the custodial slandered the separated parent to the child. By the time the child grows to 21 that means after 15 years of bad mouthing slander by the mama against the separated father in this case.

The child does not know anything about child support unless the custodial tell the custodial's own opinion. How can a child say his "life's existance" was "an accident" because of the child support that mama "didn't see" except by mama talking trash to the child as aparently mama did most thoroughly.


===========================
I do acknowledge that male custodials slander the separated moms too as such dishonorable actions are gender neutral. And the point remains the same that the child support is interfering in the families and the child support is the excuse given here in that quoted post above for the child to affront his own father and put the father's supposed guilt onto the child himself and the whole slander is totally based on those unjust child support laws, and on the slander by the custodial to the child.

The unjust child support laws divide and further separate the family unit and that text quoted above is giving proof that the child is self defacing himself and self degrading his own God given father totally on the unjust child support imprinted on him in this case by "mama" as he says "mama."

I HOPE TO GOD YOU CAN'T PROCREATE ANYMORE! And if you can, please do the world a favor and have yourself sterilized!

 

[This_person]

Well, TP, he did go back and read it again...

Yes, he did, and proved (again) it's not just reading comprehension, but reality with which he has enormous problems. But, I'll give credit where credit is due, he didn't ignore this like usual.

 

[This_person]

Others brought this up and so I am bringing it out.
So how is it that a six year old would know anything about the child support?

As you were told, this wasn't written by a six year old. Child support is obvious once one grows up.

How could a child think of himself in the above quoted way? Whether the child was 6 years old or 21 years old then how does he see "sinful eyes" in himself? except that mama told him so. Why would any child of any age see some other "mellow complexion", a "deceptive smile", and a "narrow mind" in himself? and it can only happen if the mama told him so, as mama certainly did not deny it. She bad mouthed the father to the son and the children believe slander coming from their custodials.

Ask your son about this. When a parent abandons a child (in the case of the poem, the abandonment wasn't just financial, but clearly emotional, physical, and moral as well, much like yours!), the child feels it. A child knows whether the abandoned parent is dead, off to fight war, or just chooses to not be around the child. When it's a choice to just not be there, the child feels like less of a person, and every day that goes by, they feel less and less good about themselves. After all, if their own flesh and blood, their parent that is supposed to be there for them always, chooses to not be around, why would anyone else want to be around them, why would they be worth it. Now, as adults, we can explain to them that this is not true, it's a problem with the other parent, not the child. But, a child's mind sees it all on their own this way, no matter how much truth you try to put into them.

This boy says that he the six year old child then 10 years and 21 years old and it is he the child reminding his "mama" about his daddy's "departure" his "exit" his "demeanor" and it does not work that way because the custodial is the adult and it is the custodial that did the reminding to the child.

How, please tell me, do you know how it works? Were you there for a child while another parent wasn't? No, you weren't. You were the abandoning parent. Don't presume to know how it works, because from personal experience as the child of an abandoning parent and the parent of abandoned kids, I can tell you this is exactly how it works - the child needs no reminder of the parent who is not there. Their absence is more than reminder enough.

The child does not know anything about child support unless the custodial tell the custodial's own opinion.

Nope. Once the child becomes mature, he/she begins to think about being a parent. When a responsible individual thinks about being a parent, being there for the child is a huge consideration. So, the child begins asking questions of him/herself, like, why wasn't my non-custodial parent there for me? What did they do to make my life better like I want to for my kids? When they realize the answer (often, without the direct opinion of the custodial parent), they realize all on their own what a piece of crap a non-custodial parent is that doesn't call, doesn't write, doesn't provide in any way.

How can a child say his "life's existence" was "an accident" because of the child support that mama "didn't see"...

Read it again until you understand English. The child felt his life's existence was an accident because of the abandonment, regardless of the child support. Next line, "the support she didn't see was debited from the
support given to me". In other words, the child (as an adult looking back) realized that the support unsent cost him/her in material ways and in loss of time with the parent willing to be there for the child because that parent was gone making up for the non-supporting parent's failure. The lack of child support debited the child. Oh my goodness, an actual person's experience completely disputing your theory.

And the point remains the same that the child support is interfering in the families and the child support is the excuse given here in that quoted post above for the child to affront his own father and put the father's supposed guilt onto the child himself and the whole slander is totally based on those unjust child support laws, and on the slander by the custodial to the child.

There is nothing here that puts the blame on child support alone. The blame is being put on the abandonment - financial, emotional, physical, and moral - done by the separated parent. The point here remains that the separated parent, by choice, is not a part of the child's life (including financial support, but not limited to that) and that makes a child grow up with emotional issues of low self-worth. Again, ask your son, I'm sure he can explain this to you thoroughly.

The unjust child support laws divide and further separate the family unit and that text quoted above is giving proof that the child is self defacing himself and self degrading his own God given father totally on the unjust child support imprinted on him in this case by "mama" as he says "mama."

Your homework is to read the poem again, with the thoughts given you by HPV and myself and your son, and try to understand it again. As I said, eventually, I will teach you English as well as morality.

 

[This_person]

Should deadbeat dads be... 06-11-2007 10:31 AM child support is like do do knobody wants it and it belongs in the toilet. clickity clank clickity clank the money falls into my piggy bank

At least it made sense to you, fool

 

[JPC sr]

Scofflaw and Personal Responsibility.

those child support checks were the
only reminder of you we had-
and they stopped coming when I turned six.

but unfortunately

I had your sinful eyes
your mellow complexion
your deceptive smile
& your narrow mind

and I continued to remind mama of

your departure,
your exit, and
your stoic demeanor towards our survival-

and the support you never sent,
made my life's existence an accident,
and the support she didn't see,

was debited from the
support given to me

Mark Anthony Thomas

This is called codependency, where the "mama" put the slander into the child's mind from the age of 6 till adulthood and the child now has an identity problem based on the "mama" preaching the slander to the child.

And of course the slander is all based on the unjust child support laws which again shows that child support divides families. The child is upset at his father because the "mama" did nor get the cash she claimed.

That is a pitiful rendition.

So TP and hvp and others can brag about the thievery but the reality is that the child support hurts the family, it divides the family, and it harms the children. The lies and the slanders are an abuse of the child by that mama.

 

[FromTexas]

Helping others by betraying family members over to the State,

Yes, because the "betrayed" family member already betrayed their blood by neglecting supporting their child.

 

[Vince]

To all except JPC,

It takes awhile to sink in, but I would think that you all would have learned by now that trying to get any common sense or sense of responsibility into JPC's head is nothing short of impossible. It's a waste of time to talk to him. Put him on ignore....Please!!!

Yours truly,
Vincent

 

[This_person]

This is called codependency, where the "mama" put the slander into the child's mind from the age of 6 till adulthood and the child now has an identity problem based on the "mama" preaching the slander to the child.

Codepencency: Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural -cies:
a psychological condition or a relationship in which a person is controlled or manipulated by another who is affected with a pathological condition (as an addiction to alcohol or heroin)

Are you implying here that the custodial parent is somehow addicted to being abused and defamed by the disloyal, dishonorable non-supporting parent's lack of support? Or, what pathological condition are you referring to? We know it wouldn't be lieing, because the non-supporting parent is actually non-supporting. So, it also wouldn't be slander, either.

And of course the slander is all based on the unjust child support laws which again shows that child support divides families. The child is upset at his father because the "mama" did nor get the cash she claimed.

That is a pitiful rendition. So TP and hvp and others can brag about the thievery but the reality is that the child support hurts the family, it divides the family, and it harms the children. The lies and the slanders are an abuse of the child by that mama.

Once again, for the umpteenth time, you've had it shown (and, even proven it yourself!) that it's not slander, because it's not inaccurate. And, you clearly did not perform your homework - the writer is irrevocably hurt (not upset) by the non-supporting, abandonding parent because of the action of abandonment, not child support. The financial end of child support is often the thing talked a lot about because it is the most tangible show of lack of support. Not being there (say, because you're in a different state and you don't stay in close contact, or, that you perform actions that put you in jail - choosing to not have the ability to be there for your child) is the abandonment. However, most forms of abandonment do not have a tangible, touchable, material show. Child support neglect is just one sign of bad parenting, and one that can be easily pointed to.

Do your homework, ask your son how it felt to know his dad chose to be anywhere but with him. If he's honest (and he wasn't raised by you, so he might be), he'll tell you the hell that abandonment put him through, more than just the material form of child support, but the whole of the abandonment.

 

[JPC sr]

Scofflaw and Personal Responsibility.

Codepencency: Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural -cies:
a psychological condition or a relationship in which a person is controlled or manipulated by another who is affected with a pathological condition (as an addiction to alcohol or heroin)

Are you implying here that the custodial parent is somehow addicted to being abused and defamed by the disloyal, dishonorable non-supporting parent's lack of support? Or, what pathological condition are you referring to? We know it wouldn't be lieing, because the non-supporting parent is actually non-supporting. So, it also wouldn't be slander, either.
Once again, for the umpteenth time, you've had it shown (and, even proven it yourself!) that it's not slander, because it's not inaccurate. And, you clearly did not perform your homework - the writer is irrevocably hurt (not upset) by the non-supporting, abandonding parent because of the action of abandonment, not child support. The financial end of child support is often the thing talked a lot about because it is the most tangible show of lack of support. Not being there (say, because you're in a different state and you don't stay in close contact, or, that you perform actions that put you in jail - choosing to not have the ability to be there for your child) is the abandonment. However, most forms of abandonment do not have a tangible, touchable, material show. Child support neglect is just one sign of bad parenting, and one that can be easily pointed to.

Do your homework, ask your son how it felt to know his dad chose to be anywhere but with him. If he's honest (and he wasn't raised by you, so he might be), he'll tell you the hell that abandonment put him through, more than just the material form of child support, but the whole of the abandonment.

I stand by all that I said and all I wrote in my postings being that all of mine are true and accurate.

 

[This_person]

I stand by all that I said and all I wrote in my postings being that all of mine are true and accurate.

So, are you implying here that the custodial parent is somehow addicted to being abused and defamed by the disloyal, dishonorable non-supporting parent's lack of support? Or, what pathological condition are you referring to? We know it wouldn't be lieing, because the non-supporting parent is actually non-supporting.

Did you ask your son how it felt to know his dad chose to be anywhere but with him?

What makes your feel your posts were accurate when so many people with actual experience and knowledge of the subject suggest that you're wrong?

 

[Ponytail]

To all except JPC,

It takes awhile to sink in, but I would think that you all would have learned by now that trying to get any common sense or sense of responsibility into JPC's head is nothing short of impossible. It's a waste of time to talk to him. Put him on ignore....Please!!!

Yours truly,
Vincent

Done.