*Spin off* How would you like to see the CS system organised?

[Bubmum]

CL says up to 25. and legally maybe not but what about morally? this isn't some kid 3 streets away this is their child they created. Sure the custodial parent has the 'choice' to throw them out while they are studying, but what decent parent would? would you put your 19 year old who is at uni, studying to better themselves, out on their own bc their 'father' doesn't want to help financially?

Would your opinions be the same if, like I said to FOB, your partner moved on again and started a new family and decided he no longer wanted to provide for your kids together? or would you just take it on the chin and say nah, his other kids are more important now, I'll just support them all myself and all his money can go to the new kids?

I think we know the answer to that.

and I should add - if CS was paid after 18 I think it shouldn't be the full amount since the child can work casually and go to uni. But even 25% of the usual payments would help the child to stay in uni.

What a load of tosh... I had to drop out of Uni because I couldnt' afford to stay there, and like 3 times. I love people who live in handed to me on a plate world, and make up ridiculous laws that profoundly affect others. The real world is nothing like that..only in make believe we have lots of money land.

[Alexander Beetle]

What a load of tosh... I had to drop out of Uni because I couldnt' afford to stay there, and like 3 times. I love people who live in handed to me on a plate world, and make up ridiculous laws that profoundly affect others. The real world is nothing like that..only in make believe we have lots of money land.

Agreed. I have supported myself since 16. I don't know anyone who's parents paid for them while at uni. Accommodation maybe, but most people I know had jobs as well and financed themselves.

[BlissedOut]

Agreed. I have supported myself since 16. I don't know anyone who's parents paid for them while at uni. Accommodation maybe, but most people I know had jobs as well and financed themselves.

I know a lot of people who had their parents support them through uni, but you know... that's their parents choice, not responsibility IMO.

I don't know what the laws are like here, but my brother couldn't get a student allowance until he was 25, as under 25 my parents were expected to support him, which is ridiculous. I could get a student allowance as I had 'emancipated' at 16.

I think CS should extend to 18 or the end of high school if the child is 18 and still in high school. Any support beyond then is a parents choice.

Anyway.

Some of you sound like Kanye West, I'm sure 99.99% of MOBs aren't in it for the lifestyle, yet the exceptions are how the ignorant measure everyone else often.

"

18 years, 18 years
She got one of your kids got you for 18 years
I know somebody paying child support for one of his kids
His baby mamma's car and crib is bigger than his
You will see him on TV any given Sunday
Win the Superbowl and drive off in a Hyundai
She was suppose to buy you shorty TYCO with your money
She went to the doctor got lypo with your money
She walking around looking like Michael with your money
Should of got that insured got GEICO for your money
If you ant no punk holla we want prenup
WE WANT PRENUP! Yeah
It's something that you need to have
'Cause when she leave yo *** she gone leave with half
18 years, 18 years
And on her 18th birthday he found out it wasn't his"

[zombiekitty]

CL says up to 25. and legally maybe not but what about morally?

You seem to think everyone should hold the same moral values as you and that's just not how the world works. People have different values and morals. True!
Even if a child is under 18 and working FT, their wage should be taken into account when CS is calculated. It doesn't seem fair that it's not.
Shouldn't more money going to the child equal less money the payer should bd forking out? Makes sense to me.

[Alexander Beetle]

You seem to think everyone should hold the same moral values as you and that's just not how the world works. People have different values and morals. True!
Even if a child is under 18 and working FT, their wage should be taken into account when CS is calculated. It doesn't seem fair that it's not.

I completely agree.

[PorkyPies]

I might get shot down here, but I actually think CS is actually run the best that it can be. The one thing that needs to change is probably the consequences for non payment of CS, perhaps something like a 'dishonour fee' for missing/skipping a payment. I'm sure that'd stop a lot of non custodial parents from dodging.

Sent from my GT-I9100T using BubHub

[delirium]

What a load of tosh... I had to drop out of Uni because I couldnt' afford to stay there, and like 3 times. I love people who live in handed to me on a plate world, and make up ridiculous laws that profoundly affect others. The real world is nothing like that..only in make believe we have lots of money land.

Huh? I don't understand. So a young adult, living at home while studying, not getting austudy bc mum is working, should not have the father contribute even a small amount to help mum? Is that what you mean? if that's the case, mum isn't living in money land either.

Or are you saying anyone that allows their adult child to live at home and is handed everything on a plate.

I wasn't handed everything on a plate lol I worked on and off thru uni, worked 30 hours a week all thru my final year and finished. Obviously we disagree somewhere along the line but no reason to get narky.

[delirium]

You seem to think everyone should hold the same moral values as you and that's just not how the world works. People have different values and morals. True!
Even if a child is under 18 and working FT, their wage should be taken into account when CS is calculated. It doesn't seem fair that it's not.
Shouldn't more money going to the child equal less money the payer should bd forking out? Makes sense to me.

Of course they do. Where did I say no one can disagree with me? I'm simply discussing how I would like to see CS set up just like everyone else in this thread. This thread was set up to discuss, isn't that what we are doing? But instead of people replying to me why they disagree, people are becoming rude and personal.

and yes I did say if the child was working casual there wasn't a need for full CS, just a small amount to offset the cost. What do you propose? that the child work full time and end up dropping out, or the mother be burdened with the cost for 3-4 years while the father says well they are 18, my obligation is done?

in regard to fat lazy slobs... how do you define what that is? many are SAHMs just in this thread who are being supported?

[zombiekitty]

in regard to fat lazy slobs... how do you define what that is? many are SAHMs just in this thread who are being supported?

It doesn't have anything to do with the subject at all. That was my whole point.
Someone ranting about not wanting to associate with someone who doesn't financially support their child etc etc has nothing to do with how you would like to see the CS system organised.

[delirium]

I guess after so many posts the thread, like most, tends to veer off in different directions just like a conversation.