State of MD. violates Federal Child Support Law.

[JPC, Sr.]

The Federal law requires that child support be deducted by percentage. From one percent to 65 percent for child support. See it here,

The Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act and Garnishment for Child Support.

But the hotshot laws in Maryland defy the law and they order parents to pay only unflexable set fixed amounts and by doing so the child support in Maryland is a fraud and an injustice.

Reference Maryland Annotated Code, Maryland Family Law, Section 12-204, specifically orders fixed amount and no percentages.

 

[vraiblonde]

But the hotshot laws in Maryland defy the law

How can a law defy a law?

 

[FromTexas]

There is no conflict between the laws.

 

[MMDad]

The Federal law requires that child support be deducted by percentage. From one percent to 65 percent for child support. See it here,

The Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act and Garnishment for Child Support.

But the hotshot laws in Maryland defy the law and they order parents to pay only unflexable set fixed amounts and by doing so the child support in Maryland is a fraud and an injustice.

Reference Maryland Annotated Code, Maryland Family Law, Section 12-204, specifically orders fixed amount and no percentages.

Please take your medicine. Since we, the taxpayers, are paying for your healthcare, please do what the doctors ask and take the medicine.

 

[bcp]

Please take your medicine. Since we, the taxpayers, are paying for your healthcare, please do what the doctors ask and take the medicine.

I think that is a very humane and caring post MMDad.
To have such compassion for this twisted man is a value that I can not muster.

You are a better man than I.

Perhaps we could set it up so his son could force feed him the medications with a slingshot?

 

[mrweb]

The Federal law requires that child support be deducted by percentage. From one percent to 65 percent for child support. See it here,

The Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act and Garnishment for Child Support.

But the hotshot laws in Maryland defy the law and they order parents to pay only unflexable set fixed amounts and by doing so the child support in Maryland is a fraud and an injustice.

Reference Maryland Annotated Code, Maryland Family Law, Section 12-204, specifically orders fixed amount and no percentages.

It's like watching a train wreck...no, no I can't look....but I keep looking. What a

 

[Ken King]

You cannot be serious that you want to be in a position where you would be crafting laws. It is totally obvious to me that you don't understand or can show the proper application of a law.

For your benefit what you have referenced are limitations as to the amount of garnishment of a person’s salary that can be imposed, not an obligation on the limits of support that can be ordered. Additionally, what you linked states that “The consumer protections of § 303(a) of the Act do not apply, however, to any order for the support of any person issued by a court of competent jurisdiction”. It goes on to state that a person can have their wages garnished to the tune of “60% where the individual is not supporting another spouse or child.” Is it your belief that this means that child support should equal 60% of a person's salary?

I think you should seriously consider a course of study that will enhance your reading comprehension ability.

 

[FromTexas]

I think you should seriously consider a course of study that will get you off the crack pipe.

:fixed:

 

[onebdzee]

Ok....let's just set the record straight....this "fraud and injustice" your talking about....who is that about EXACTLY?

Is it about the non-custodial parent that thinks he/she doesn't have to pay his/her obligation(let alone go to jail for non-payment) of his/her children?

Or

Is it about the custodial parent that has to work 2-3 jobs(or depend on the state) in order to feed, clothe, and house those children because of deadbeats, like yourself, that don't pay their obligation.

 

[bcp]

But the hotshot laws in Maryland defy the law and they order parents to pay only unflexable set fixed amounts and by doing so the child support in Maryland is a fraud and an injustice.

There was no law requiring the use of headlights at night,, until the car came along

There was no law restricting wire tapping, until the technology to do so came along

There was no law that governed right of way on the water until boats came along

there was no law that said you could not yell fire in a crowded theater, until the theater was there.

There was no law that governed the payment of child support until people like you surfaced.

To put it simply, the very laws you hate so much had to be created to protect children from DEADBEATS like yourself.

You created the reason for the law. Now live with it DEADBEAT

 

[onebdzee]

There was no law requiring the use of headlights at night,, until the car came along

There was no law restricting wire tapping, until the technology to do so came along

There was no law that governed right of way on the water until boats came along

there was no law that said you could not yell fire in a crowded theater, until the theater was there.

There was no law that governed the payment of child support until people like you surfaced.

To put it simply, the very laws you hate so much had to be created to protect children from DEADBEATS like yourself.

You created the reason for the law. Now live with it DEADBEAT

I wonder if there is a law that says a Democrat candidate for the Maryland Legislature District 29B can legally remove himself from the gene pool?

 

[crabcake]

Perhaps we could set it up so his son could force feed him the medications with a slingshot?

Given his head appears to be up his azz, perhaps an enema dosing would be the most efficient delivery. :shrug:

 

[JPC, Sr.]

The Truth Will Set Us All free.

How can a law defy a law?

I guess I did write that one piece incorrectly as it is the Maryland Courts that defy the Federal law and not just law defies law.

So I am not perfect, BUT, the statement of the post itself still stands correct.

 

[JPC, Sr.]

The Truth Will Set Us All free.

... ...

For your benefit what you have referenced are limitations as to the amount of garnishment of a person’s salary that can be imposed, not an obligation on the limits of support that can be ordered. Additionally, what you linked states that “The consumer protections of § 303(a) of the Act do not apply, however, to any order for the support of any person issued by a court of competent jurisdiction”. It goes on to state that a person can have their wages garnished to the tune of “60% where the individual is not supporting another spouse or child.” Is it your belief that this means that child support should equal 60% of a person's salary? ... ...

Like I wrote, PERCENTAGES, percentages, ...................

 

[Ken King]

Like I wrote, PERCENTAGES, percentages, ...................

You are wrong, the percentages referred to are in regard to what can be garnished from wages, not what the competent court of the state can order for support. If you cannot understand this how can you be expected to understand the complex activities of a legislative body?

 

[JPC, Sr.]

The Truth Will Set Us All free.

I liked this thread first post so much that I have just created a new "Child Support" page to my website.

The info really improves the content and arguement of my platform and I think I owe it to you all for pumping up the info here.

So I do here reaffirm that criticism is a blessing so thank y'all for the inspiration.

If the "Child Support" page fails to show up on your screen then press Ctrl and then press F5 to reset your PC. Some times that is needed at first. I am also going to create a "Navy Base" page too, soon. Thanks again, James.

------------

 

[willie]

I think you better re-read the responses to your post. It might surprise you but they aren't too complimentary.

 

[Ken King]

I liked this thread first post so much that I have just created a new "Child Support" page to my website.

The info really improves the content and arguement of my platform and I think I owe it to you all for pumping up the info here.

So I do here reaffirm that criticism is a blessing so thank y'all for the inspiration.

If the "Child Support" page fails to show up on your screen then press Ctrl and then press F5 to reset your PC. Some times that is needed at first. I am also going to create a "Navy Base" page too, soon. Thanks again, James.

------------

Well I just looked at what you posted on your page for Child Support and what you posted is not the truth. You say:

Reference, Maryland Annotated Code, Family Law, Section 12-204, specifically and only orders set fixed garnishments and no percentages as the Federal law requires.

Nowhere in §12-204 of the Family Law Article does the word garnishment ever appear. Furthermore, the amounts of obligation for child support are not dictated by the Federal Government anywhere in law or they would be uniform amongst the states.

You use the leader "The Truth Will Set You Free" for your posts yet you make false statement. This shows a lot about your character.

 

[sinwagon]

I am not saying that I agree with everything this guy is saying, most of the time I don't even understand what he is saying and i don't believe he does. I also find it odd that he is running for some type of office but the only issue he discusses is CS.

However, I do want to point out one thing. Do you all agree that it is the obligation of each parent to contribute 50% of the support of the child? That has always been my understanding that both parties are obligated to support the child.

But, if you use the maryland child support calculator and both parties have an income, then, it will show contribution amounts for both party.

And if lets say that the absent parent has an income and the custodial parent chooses not to work, then the obligation for the absent parent increases to 100% while the custodial parents obligation is 0. Which means because the custodial parent chooses not to work that also gives them the right not to be responsible for supporting the child. With that being the case, why not just give custody to the absent parent if they are fit and proper to have custody? It makes no sense to me.

 

[sinwagon]

Example of both parents making 50,000.00



WORKSHEET A - CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION: SOLE CUSTODY



Children
Date of Birth
Children
Date of Birth
Son 01/15/2006
Mother Father Combined
1. MONTHLY ACTUAL INCOME (Before taxes) $ 5000 $ 5000
a. Minus preexisting child support payment actually paid -0 -0
b. Minus health insurance premium (if child included) -0 -0
c. Minus alimony actually paid -0 -0
d. Plus/minus alimony awarded in this case +/-0 +/-0
2. MONTHLY ADJUSTED ACTUAL INCOME $ 5000 $ 5000 $ 10000
3. PERCENTAGE SHARE OF INCOME (Line 2. Each parent's income divided by Combined income) 50.00 % 50.00 %
4. BASIC CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION (Apply line 2 Combined to Child Support Schedule) $ 1040
a. Work-Related Child Care Expenses Code, FL,
§12-204 (g) + 0
b. Extraordinary Medical Expenses Code, FL,
§12-204 (h) + 0
c. Additional Expenses, FL, §12-204 (i) + 0
5. TOTAL CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION (Add lines 4, 4a, 4b, and 4c.) $ 1040.00
6. EACH PARENT'S CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION (multiply line 3 times line 5 for each parent) $ 520.00 $ 520.00
7. RECOMMENDED CHILD SUPPORT ORDER (Bring down amount from line 6 for the non-custodial parent only. Leave custodial parent column blank. $ 0 $ 520.00
Comments, calculations, or rebuttals to schedule or adjustments if non-custodial parent directly pays extraordinary expenses:

Deduct from the recommended child support order amount (Line 7) any third party benefits paid to or for a child (e.g. SSA Disability, retirement or other third party dependency benefit).