Your right…its pretty unpopular…to me anyway….Why should I give up the right to a family who is with me everyday…because some woman decided she didn’t want to be married to me anymore….Get a grip on reality here….My family being broken up was not my idea…I have a seven year old daughter who loves me very much and tells me so every day….and I do not have to fight her mother to see her or spend time with her.
And it is ludicrous to ask or expect or even think about every 18 year old getting a vasectomy…Your job has burn’t you out….try a new line of work….I am tired of being told by the state what I have to give up in my life because a woman didn’t feel “in love” with me any more. Yes I love my children…all of them…when asked who is my favorite…my answer is the one who needs me most at the time….
I pay my child support… I am even ready to opt for loans and I battle the state and its unrealistic demands upon my salary…my visitation gets screwed with…..and thank god my children ( first three are grown and can drive and make their own decisions. I guess every mother should have her tongue cut out when she has children…that way she can’t lie and manipulate the system….try to turn my children against me…which she did for 10 years but then it backfired on her when my children got to know me….sounds fair…they cut my tubes while she is lying next to me getting her tongue cut out…BTW…they should also do lobotomies too…
Quit promoting the states rhetoric…trying to convince a man he is second class and his only existence is to pay money “for the children’s sake”…That’s bullshit….besides…my daughter loves her sissy and bubbys very much and they are now a part of her life…but it took them reaching the age to get out of the “system” that people like you created…..so think about it…look at my life and experiences..and tell me I should have gotten a vasectomy….jesus….
#1. A court order is required to modify your support…not a suggestion by your ex or her attorney…They will need to schedule a modification hearing to address this issue. Any time support is modified it requires either an agreed entry signed by both parties..or.. a modification hearing.
I am in the same battle in Indiana…My divorce decree states I am to pay until the children reach 18. No mention of further education. I have been told by the child support prosecutor that the state law says I must pay until they are 21… We go to court next month to battle this…They want to make it retroactive…and they are going to lose…Because if they win..I will sue the ex, court, prosecutor, and the state for breach of contract. They all signed the agreement…and it was an agreement and approved..not ordered by the court.
#2. Another good argument is the cost of room and board and tuition..like you said…you had no say or input in this decision…tell them to try a state college or community college…where it is more affordable…
I’m going to express an unpopular view point here, but I want everyone to remember that I’ve been a full time volunteer for 12 years, working with divorced and single fathers, so I’ve seen these cases where men have children by different women.
Personally, I think it is highly selfish of this man, and any man, to be having children by multiple women when they cannot, or will not, support the children they already have. “Children need both parents” is more than just a saying, it has to be a life. When you have children by a woman, those are the children you need to dedicate your life to, not subdivide you life between those children, and children by another woman. If a man has to have sex, he can do so without producing children. Vasectomies are cheap, easy, and reversible when the first children are grown and he is available to have more. There are plenty of women willing to have children with older men, and even plenty of older women willing to have children despite their age. Our average life spans have been increasing steadily for over 50 years, having nearly doubled since when our grandparents were young. There is plenty of time to have more kids, if we want them.
What would be nice is if young men would get a vasectomy right out of high school. That way they can go around and have sex as much as they want, without having children until they have matured and are ready for that responsibility. Or, have married someone and spent enough time with them to know they are the one they want to have children with and spend a life time with.
What the court should have done was ordered the man to get a vasectomy. That way he can shack up all he wants and not worry about producing more dependents. It would certainly my work easier. And it would make it a lot easier on children to know they have a father that is theirs, and theirs alone. I’m 45, my children are grown, so now I’m out looking again. I would love to have more children, but only now that I no longer of the responsibility of support my daughters. I would even be willing to raise the children of another man, who has run out on his responsibilities. But, not until I have tracked him down to learn why, and to make sure that what I’m being told by her is the truth.
how the former lawyers and judges who comprise Wisconsin’s Supreme Court will explain to the citizens their reasons for incarcerating Mr. Oakley for 8 long years? That cost, I mean, to incarcerate Mr. Oakley would far and away exceed $25,000–TAXPAYER DOLLARS!!!–and so I wonder how they will explain their purpose? How will the taxpayer benefit by locking away Mr. Oakley?
These princes of Wisconsin’s Supreme Court must be masters of Machiavellian principles, and politics, and so I imagine they are saying to themselves, something like: “Hain’t we got all the fools in town on our side? And ain’t that a big enough majority in any town?” (Twain) Perhaps the Wisconsin high court justices are even more sinister and cunning, and, like Hitler, they are saying: “How fortunate for government that the people do not Think.” Human rights, indeed. Since when do Princes (and interested majorities!) think of human rights?