Petition2Congress logo

14,725 Public Comments So Far

View More Comments:
April 8, 2011
Someone from Houston, MN writes:
Quotation mark icon
I am a divorced mother and I am now remarried however I was a single mother for a couple years. I fought the county tooth and nail every step of the way with the child support process. I do not want my ex-husbands money. The government wants it. When we were married our children qualified for the same county assistance as they were on once we seperated but now one of us has to pay for them to be on it? My ex-husband and I have a 50/50 parenting arrangement and are currently fighting the county because they still want one of us to pay the other even though we have completely equal obligations. I think that the focus should not be on the money but on trying to get children as equal as possible time with both parents.
April 10, 2011
Someone from Paterson, NJ signed.
April 13, 2011
Someone from Burlington, VT signed.
April 13, 2011
Someone from Huntington, VT signed.
April 14, 2011
Someone from Pittsburgh, PA writes:
Quotation mark icon
I am divorced to a woman who has not worked in 13 years. Her actions were a major reason in ur divorce. I am not rich. The State has rewarded her for her actions and left me wit payment that are not even enought to survive. noe i go to work to pay her while she still sits at home. the dynamics of the family has changed why isn't our system sophistated enough to adapt to change. THIS IS NOT FAIR!
April 25, 2011
Someone from Wichita, KS writes:
Quotation mark icon
The family law is the biggest scam in this country stripping familys from their children's future. The judges and lawyers are all in it. The more parents fight, the more money they make. Courts get incentive for every dollar child support they collect from the federal govt. This is pure conflict of interest. Child support does not even go towards the children. The system put a money prize called child support and watch parents fight for it while they fill up their pockets along the way. Very unethical system. IT HAS TO CHANGE!!!!
April 26, 2011
Someone from Medford, MA writes:
Quotation mark icon
The child support guidelines and the way child support is handled in general is a mockery of the justice system and shows the incompetency and corruption that exists in our Government. Changes need to be made and rulings need to be handled on a case by case basis to stop this insanity.
April 28, 2011
Someone from Wausau, WI writes:
Quotation mark icon
The Wisconsin child support needs to be changed. Child support should be a shared obligation between the parents. Tax consequences should be also considered, custodial parent is much better off. The percentage method was created so many years ago that it is time for a change! "Essentially,the cost estimates are based on a definition such that all that matters is economic well-being of the parents?as though that is the only consideration used to determine whether to have children or not. The definition leads to an overstatement of child costs. In real life, when parents choose to have children, they both realize it is with the loss of the standard of living for them . They choose this lower standard of living for because of the satisfaction from having children." So why when parents split,the custodial parents get a higher standard of living with high child support awards instead of taking all factors into consideration.
April 29, 2011
Someone from Quakertown, PA signed.
May 3, 2011
Someone from Willoughby, OH signed.
May 9, 2011
Someone from Rockford, IL writes:
Quotation mark icon
Child support should be fair and one should not be able to add "alimony" to it so they don't have to pay taxes on that amount. It's all an unjust system!!! Also, a father who paid almost 25,000 in child support in one year for an 18 yr old and 17 yr old is hardly a deadbeat dad while the mother is being supported by her new boyfriend, flying around the world and sent the daughter off to live with her brother in a different state!!
5 years ago
Someone from Mount Holly, NC signed.
5 years ago
Someone from Albemarle, NC signed.
5 years ago
Someone from Sun Prairie, WI signed.
5 years ago
Someone from Denver, CO writes:
Quotation mark icon
From misadventures of my youth I have fathered 6 kids with 4 women in 2 states. I work full time and before taxes I pay nearly 55% of my earnings for child support. When it's all said and done (after taxes) I work full time and take home just over $100 a week. My employer doesn't provide medical insurance and I am now being asked to pay to provide medical insurance. 3 of the four women don't work and receive state benefits, one even graduated college for free as a single parent and still don't work. I get charged a percentage (9%) if I am late that the women don't receive. I'd like to find a lawyer to maybe help get it lowered but can't afford one, if not for my fiancé I don't see how even working full time I could afford to live.
June 5, 2011
Someone from Saint Louis, MO writes:
Quotation mark icon
my income was reduced. i filed modifications in court and with the agency. the agency simply ignored me, then said no. i finally got the court to order a review, but then the agency declined again. Finally had an actual Trial. The court imputed income to 70K when i actually made 3800, 4800 and 38,000 AND misrepresented my custody. Men need to organize marchs and more political action.
June 7, 2011
Someone from Hanover, PA signed.
just now
Someone from Mosinee, WI writes:
Quotation mark icon
They allow the CP not to work, make it impossible for the NCP to have a second family. But yet the CP can get married has her new husband to also help pay the rent, utilities so in like that CS should reduced some..a NCP should not still be assumed to pay half of the rent and utilities.
just now
Someone from Mosinee, WI writes:
Quotation mark icon
They allow the CP not to work, make it impossible for the NCP to have a second family. But yet the CP can get married has her new husband to also help pay the rent, utilities so in like that CS should reduced some..a NCP should not still be assumed to pay half of the rent and utilities.
June 8, 2011
Someone from Mosinee, WI signed.
just now
Someone from Mosinee, WI writes:
Quotation mark icon
Child Support needs revision!! Current laws were based mostly on the works of Jacques van der Gaag of the Institute of research and poverty, University of Wisconsin, Madison. These guidelines were only intended for welfare cases. The study assumed ? The Custodial parent had the child 100% of the time ? The CP had no income ? The NCP was a low income worker ? The NCP paid little in taxes The current guidelines are making it so the CP receives alimony in the disguise of child support. Anything above low income creates a windfall for the CP, not to mention the high income payer who gets higher taxes ? Wisconsin has no cap on child support, why? This again creates a huge windfall for the CP and a larger tax burden on the NCP ? The CP gets the entire tax burden yet the NCP receives the tax benefits ? .Both the CP and NCP should be responsible for the costs of the child. Second Families ........NCP's are left with little to support a second family, yet the CP can get remarried, and her new husband pays for half of rent and utilities, so why is that not taken into consideration? However To receive benefits from the state (food share , ect) , Wisconsin uses ALL income from households to determine if a family receives benefits....so it is okay for the state to uses a new husbands income or a cohabitants income, but for child support factors that the mother no longer pays all the rent or utilities it is not? The step parent should not be held liable to pay for the costs of the child, but when guidelines were created it was figuring on just the CP and NCP covering rent and utilities. Overtime or bonuses Why is the state not setting child support order just by the CP?s hourly rate? Instead the state takes past years income that included overtime so when they no longer receive the overtime, they are actually paying a higher percentage than they should be or for some falling into arrears each check. ....A lot of NCP?s volunteer for overtime to make up for the child support they pay Same thing for things like incentive bonus that some companies give If a NCP is hired for a 40 he week and given a salary for that 40 hrs, that is all that should be used for child support. If a company gives a incentive bonus or profit sharing bonus on top of that, child support should leave it alone. People receive the bonus for how much extra time and effort they put into it. Wisconsin child support system is incentive for woman to keep getting pregnant. a NCP that has two children from the same mother gives 25% But a woman that has two children from different fathers get 34%, and she gets to choose not to work even after the children are in school all day. Wisconsin gets so much from Federal for every dollar they can collect in child support. No wonder the unfairness for the NCP
June 8, 2011
Someone from Mosinee, WI signed.
just now
Someone from Arlington Heights, IL writes:
Quotation mark icon
The child support laws, legal system, and the legal system always being partial to the CP (event though she lies) is an absolute joke. My husband has been paying child support for two kids since 2001 (which neither may even be his, but because they were married and he?s listed on the birth certificates, WI will not allow a paternity test); He has been destitute since the divorce, living in his car, living with family, etc so that he can make ridiculous payments. His ex has full custody, has been alienating the children against him since the divorce, has not allowed him to see his kids for years (citing he can?t pay/he can?t see the kids), has violated every single part of the Joint Parenting Agreement - and last year HE brought HER to court for modification and contempt for her taking dependent exemptions for 8 years running against the IL order (she moved the order to WI in 2006 and made no extra provisions for WI laws regarding dependent exemptions and arrears). The state of WI has allowed the CP to LIE on her enforcement application, claiming NCP did not pay her a dime for five straight years (he paid cash, and has no record as she never gave him a receipt - his bad, we know). The state of WI has allowed the CP to lie under oath for multiple pieces of false information - yet the NCP is the bad guy. He?s had very bad luck with jobs, unemployed more than employed, has 5-digit arrears as a result with interest continually compounding... he has three years left with the last minority child, and there is absolutely no way that this debt will ever be paid off. How can a ?fair government? allows good, upstanding citizens to live in less-than-poverty conditions, based on the continued lies of a CP who uses all the money she receives on her own clothes, shoes, hair, nails, boob jobs, a new Audi every year... where is the fairness in any of it? How can a good father move on with his life and create the family he always deserved - with this kind of baggage being allowed to hold him down for so long? It is shear and utter nonsense! And Wisconsin is one of the worst states in the nation with regard to child support - as almost 80% of the NCP?s in the state are in arrears(!) And the only way to fight the contempt and child support orders - is to have a bunch of money to throw at Family Law attorneys! So what little money the NCP would have, is lost fighting a fight he is going to lose anyway, because he is the father? Child support needs revision, plain and simple. Wisconsin is an absolute joke.
5 years ago
Someone from Mundelein, IL signed.
June 24, 2011
Someone from Webster, NY writes:
Quotation mark icon
Seriously UNJUST, UNFAIR & OVERWHELMING! When will someone, anyone take into consideration your "take home $" and stop with the "gross". I make $110K and take home roughly $60K - HELLO!!!! $21,450 a year in support and daycare RIDICULOUS, not to mention MEDICAL $260 weekly, 75% of whatever she decides she wants to do, doctor copays and the list goes on. I'd like the people who make these rules to follow them to the "T" like we have to & maybe then they'll realize how frustrating and unrealistic it really is.
June 28, 2011
Someone from Chicago, IL writes:
Quotation mark icon
It is so unfortunate, that these are the examples that our future children have to look up to. Some form of action needs to be taken. Our children are obese because their mother refuse to get off their behinds and do something meaningful with their life.
June 29, 2011
Someone from San Antonio, TX signed.
June 29, 2011
Someone from Springfield, MO writes:
Quotation mark icon
my husband of almost seven years was a truck driver when he got divorced (she had an affair while he was working on the road) making over $18 an hour. he was ordered to pay almost $400 a month on 2 young boys which was fine, he agree'd to it because he could afford it. He was in a traffic accident shortly after that and has bounced from job to job since, not able to keep anything steady. about a year ago he found a job cooking but mostly doing the dishes at a small resturaunt 2 nights a week @ minimum wage so we requested a review on the support order. she said she will take nothing less than her rent amount.....i forgot to mention that their 2 kids are at my house everyday, she doesnt want to pay for child care even though she qualifies for state aid, we take care of them over 80% of the time! not to mention that she gets all the foodstamps, wic, housing assistance, and income tax on these kids, she continues to tell people that she's a single mom and will never admit the truth about where the kids are the majority of the time. she also has another baby and is going after that guy for money, and has a class b drug felony for intent to distribute and has violated 3 times already, but w/o a lawyer they are taking her word over ours, we need help!
July 2, 2011
Someone from Winchester, KY writes:
Quotation mark icon
IS IS UNJUST TO THOSE FATHERS WHO REALLY CANT WORK, THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN LAID OFF DURING TOUGH TIMES. PUT US IN JAIL, THEN EXPECT US TO BE ABLE TO GET A JOB ONCE WE'RE OUT. WHAT SINCE DOES THAT MAKE?!
July 6, 2011
Someone from Wisconsin Rapids, WI signed.
July 6, 2011
Someone from Ozone Park, NY signed.
July 8, 2011
Someone from Lake Jackson, TX writes:
Quotation mark icon
Men and women should share in the financial responsibility of their children. It doesn't make sense when a man is laid off to be thrown in jail because he could not pay child support. AND to continute to pay when he is out of work. Just does not make sense!! I believe the courts need to take into consideration the basic living expenses it takes for a man to be independent before they decide what the child support should be. Every circumstance is different and should be treated as such. It is in the best interest of the children that their fathers are a part of their lives. The government provides lawyers, assistance, shelter to women. When men are thrown into jail because they are laid off, they should also be provided with lawyers, assitance, and shelter. AND ones that will fight for them.I hope more people speak out. I wish there was a lawyer that we could trust to send our money to that would speak out for Fathers, where Child Support is concerned. That is where the fathers need help. Fairness where Child Support is concerned. To base child support on overtime, gross income is totally absurd and unjust!! Is there a lawyer out there whom we can trust that will fight for Fathers and voice their concerns on Child Support? I be willing to support him and I am sure you all would also.
July 8, 2011
Someone from Albany, NY writes:
Quotation mark icon
The child support guidelines are unfair to fathers in most cases. Good men do everything they can to take care of their children and pay what the court awards but are left with not enough money to live on when considering alimony and being forced to pay for both his and the ex-spouses legal fees. The court is over reaching to the point of putting good honest men into indentured servituted and removing their chances of providing a reasonable finacially stable environment for thenselves and any other children not addresses but the order. I have two additional children not of this marriage and I was told that they were not considered unless I was brought below the poverty line. In addition no financial responsibilities are considered unless the same situation was met. This is outrageous and makes absolutely no sense. CHildren from a previous marriage should be considered. Why should their life be disrupted and turned upside down. In addition, by completely disregarding all previous financial obligations the court shows a complete and blatent disregard for contractually legally binding agreements. Something must be done to restore sanity to the legal system and the child support guidelines.
July 9, 2011
Someone from Grand Haven, MI signed.
July 11, 2011
Someone from Salt Lake City, UT writes:
Quotation mark icon
women must work part time is 4 hours between 6 hours to support to feed her children to survive......... I love all women are good mothers to her children..... I love my mom Lisa Kitchen so much ... peace out John Bias
July 12, 2011
Someone from Rancho Santa Margarita, CA writes:
Quotation mark icon
This needs to e mandatory law!!!
July 12, 2011
Someone from Los Angeles, CA writes:
Quotation mark icon
I agree wholeheartedly agree; Wisconsin child support is a joke! It is LONG overdue for reform. The knocked up mothers just sit around never bothering to better their lives as they are grossly overpaid by the father, most of which that hard earned money doesn't even go to the child, THE WAY INTENDED! Open your eyes lawmakers! Pathetic rules!!!
July 12, 2011
Someone from Fort Mill, SC writes:
Quotation mark icon
I have been dealing with a crazy lady for 8 years now. She bounces from boyfriend to boyfriend, job to job, and city to city. I have to chase her around the State to get my son. I have to listen to stories of him hiding under his bed when his mother is throwing lamps. I have to hear about her boyfriend punching a car window next to his head. I pay for her to do a poor job of raising my son. He would be in a much more stable environment with me, but it seems nearly impossible to take custody away from her. Our system is deeply flawed and the custody laws are downright unfair. DP
July 13, 2011
Someone from Haines City, FL signed.
just now
Someone from Montclair, CA writes:
Quotation mark icon
My fiance has two children and pays child support to both. At first he was paying without an order almost 500 to the youngest and 400 to the oldest. He noticed that the money was not going to the boys and so he turned himself in to the agency and now he si paying 660 for the oldest all because he is staying at his grandmothers in and not at his mothers. Where she ( the mother) is not paying rent. Shouldnt the system work that the monies goes to the Guardian of the child and that if the child is living with someone other than the mother or father then both pay child support? To top it off they didnt even ask for her financials to prove that she is working. Furthermore, the case is in Puerto Rico and they based it on PR rate not california cost of living. My fiance is earning $2200 net and with $660 child support leaving $1540 for mortgage and bills and 2 car payments and gas to work, gosh there went his life. PLEASE REEVALUATE THE SYSTEM THERE ARE PEOPLE SUFFERING WITH THIS ECONOMY MRS. FEINSTEIN AND MRS. BOXER PLEASE HELP!