Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 28, 2014, 03:43:45 AM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Men's Health Network

+  Stand Your Ground
|-+  Stand Your Ground Forums
| |-+  Main
| | |-+  Child support cost is an ambush for some
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Child support cost is an ambush for some  (Read 821 times)
PowerMan72
Member
*
Posts: 1177



View Profile
« on: February 11, 2004, 08:14:12 AM »

:x
http://www.freep.com/news/childrenfirst/child10_20040210.htm


HIGH PRICE FOR MICHIGAN'S PAYING PARENT: Child support cost is an ambush for some
BY WENDY WENDLAND- BOWYER
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

February 10, 2004

Ken Hymes loves his only child, Kristyn, visiting her and paying child support regularly.

But Hymes, an unemployed Redford Township electrician, is currently about $4,000 behind on support.

The cause? Court records show an order raising his child support payment was issued in January 2002 dating back retroactively to December 1999 -- which was roughly when his ex-girlfriend asked for an increase that took more than 2 years to grant.

Hymes said he is trying to pay down the arrearage, but with an annual 8-percent surcharge, he's not making much progress.

"I was never behind. I was always current on child support and then, overnight, I had an arrearage and am being hit with this surcharge," said Hymes, 48, whose daughter is now 15.

While he knew about the request, he said he wasn't aware it would be retroactive. Michigan parents owe more than $7 billion in past due child support, the third-worst record in the country. The stories of how they get behind vary, but some say the situation is made worse by the state's 8-percent interest, or surcharge, added to past due support.

A Senate committee will hear testimony today on a package of 11 bills aimed at changing the Friend of the Court. The bills would reduce the interest rate, stop it from being compounded annually and let judges waive it in certain situations.

"Seven billion -- that is just an awful lot of money. If we had that going to kids and families, it would certainly be a blessing to them," said Sen. Bill Hardiman, R-Kentwood, chairman of the Senate Families and Human Services Committee.

Hardiman said his committee could schedule a second hearing if necessary. A final vote is likely several weeks away.

Federal numbers show most Michigan parents who are behind on child support have an annual reported income of less than $10,000. While some may be hiding their earnings, others fall behind when they are sent to prison and the support order is not adjusted, or by certain circumstances created in current law.

For example, if a woman never tells a man that he is the father of her child and then she files for support within 6 years of the child's birth, the man could be ordered to pay support dating back 6 years. If the couple are not married, he could also be liable for hospital and pregnancy-related medical costs, creating an instant arrearage of thousands of dollars.

Bills in the package would change this.

One would make unmarried couples share medical costs related to the pregnancy, based on each's ability to pay.

Another bill states that back child support could only be collected dating to the date the paternity complaint was filed.

"There has to be a time limit here for when someone can go back and retroactively access child support," said Rep. Jim Koetje, R-Walker,that bill's sponsor.

Another bill would reduce the surcharge, or interest, imposed on past due support from 8 percent to 4 percent. It would also give judges freedom to waive it in some circumstances.

Raymond Smith of Clinton Township said that's a great idea.

Smith said he came home from work one day to find a letter telling him he had fathered a son to a woman he had a brief relationship with 13 years earlier. The note was a shock, he said, and so was the bill.

"Thirteen years had gone by. I mean, I have gotten married and had my own kids. She never once tried to contact me. I never had any knowledge," said Smith, now 39. "Then 13 years later here comes this notice in the mail."

Smith said he was ordered to pay about $200 a week dating back roughly three years ago, creating an instant $5,000 arrearage.

Smith said he's current on his weekly payments, but can only afford to pay the minimum on the arrearage. Because the 8 percent interest is added to the past due amount annually, Smith said his arrearage is still about $5,000 some three years later.

Contact WENDY WENDLAND-BOWYER at wendland@freepress.com.
Copyright 2004 Detroit Free Press Inc.
Logged

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."

>> Daniel Patrick Moynihan
FEMINAZIHATEMARTYR
Member
*
Posts: 1316



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2004, 09:49:53 AM »

Quote
Federal numbers show most Michigan parents who are behind on child support have an annual reported income of less than $10,000. While some may be hiding their earnings, others fall behind when they are sent to prison and the support order is not adjusted, or by certain circumstances created in current law.


This is tyranny. Plus the child support rates are unreasonable. Most of the time the money collected is far more than the actual cost of caring for the children or even used by the receiving parent for something else. (My friends ex-wife used it to pay for a boob-job). As usual people are treating a symptom instead of a cause.
Logged

What good fortune for government that people do not think."
                          Adolph Hitler

"Where madness rules the absurd is not far away."

We must not make the mistake of thinking that all those who eat the bread of dictatorship are evil from the first; but they must necessarily become evil....The curse of a system of terror is that there is no turning back; neither in the large realm of policies nor the 'smaller' realm of everyday human relationships is it possible for men to retrace their steps."
- Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius
(1904-1974)
Pernicious
Member
*
Posts: 899



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2004, 11:58:07 AM »

http://www.casey.org/cnc/documents/foster_care_maintenance_payments.pdf

People should not be required to pay more than the amount listed above in the foster care maintenance payments document listed above.

This is the amount given to people who take care of "state children".

If people do not like the amount given they can come to arrangements to pay more, or require validation of the expenditures.
Logged

 do what I need to do to protect my loved ones, friends, and family. This is what men do.
LSBeene
Member
*
Posts: 3836


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2004, 02:02:12 PM »

and it would be nice if the money were accounted for.  Easily done with a debit card on a specific account.  And I totally agree that it should be based on need of the child and linked to what the state pays foster kids.  And, something I wanted to add for a while is this:

Wouldn't it be better, in the long run, to remove the child from a financially irresponsible or struggling parent and give the child to the parent who can better support the child?  Also, we don't want to teach our kids the welfare state mentality.  And slightly off-topic, women who engage in Parental Alienation Syndrome should lose their kids until a LOT of counseling is done and they see that doing PAS loses them their children.  It sure would cut down on the poisoning of our children's minds.

Steven
Logged

'Watch our backs at home, we'll guard the wall over here. You can sleep safe tonight, we'll guard the door."

Isaiah 6:8
"Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?" And I said, "Here am I. Send me!"
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!