15 Steps To Become a Psycho Ex-Wife

#1 - Get pregnant without the knowledge of your boyfriend - This is crucial. This is how you become his wife in the first place.

#2 - Look Gorgeous - After the wedding, gain 150 lbs. and really let yourself go. Nothing he can do now!

#3 - Never accept a gift graciously - Even if you want it and it was on your list, he should know better!

#4 - Threaten divorce everytime you don't get your way - You have the upper hand! If he calls your bluff you get the kids, house and all his money. It's a win-win for you!

#5 - Pawn your wedding ring when you have a fight - Because you need to pay for an apartment now that you are getting divorced. When you make up, make sure he buys you a new one! And no, you don't know where the money went.

#6 - Physically abuse your spouse - That way you can claim he touched you when he tries to stop you from beating him further. The cops will always believe you. But hey, you don't even need to call them and report it, everyone will believe you anyway!

#7 - Agree to marriage counseling and then quit when the counselor gives you something to work on about yourself, rinse, repeat - There is nothing wrong with you, you are clearly smarter than all counselors.

#8 - Accuse your 2 year old of being mentally ill because he won't listen to you - Fuckin' kid, who does he think he is?

#9 - Something bad happens to your husband - Repeatedly tell him it's a sign from God that he should give you a divorce.

#10 - Tell your children they witnessed their father strangling you - that's why they are fucked up.

#11 - Verbally abuse him viciously - When he yells at you after your lengthy tirade, tell him he is abusive and that you are leaving with the kids.

#12 - Cause a scene at a formal public event - Leave him stranded so he has to hitchhike a ride home in his tuxedo.

#13 - Sleep with the kids every night - this way you can scream at him that he must be gay because you never have sex.

#14 - Keep this in your pocket for emergencies only: (Like for that 3-carat anniversary band you want) - Throw yourself down the steps and hit yourself in the face with a pan before he comes home from work. When he arrives tell him, "I can make this happen anytime and you're going to prison, this is what I want..." Short-term pain for long-term gain, baby! This is your motto.

#15 - Find a divorce attorney - Refuse all property settlements and pay your attorney more than you get in the settlement just so you can say you got what you were entitled to! (e.g. Turn down $50k, and then give your attorney $65k to get a $60k settlement.)

Subscribe In a Reader or by Email

Parenting Issues Discussion of 1/06 - Part II of II

Link to Parenting Issues Part I

Over the years, discussions, emails, and instant-message fightfests begin to take a massive toll on your psyche. With borderline personality disorder, things can be fine one moment and then come completely unhinged the next. I found myself, at times, questioning my own sanity. However, judging by the interactions I had with those others in my life - I knew I wasn't off my rocker. Most of what you've read so far has come after I had a understanding of what I was dealing with. I'll start showing you stuff that long preceded that understanding.

The reply came about an hour later and it was as expected - full of venom, projection, complete lack of acknowledgement for what she does do (or doesn't do) and it's impact on the children. Due to it's length and the number of issues, I'm combining her reply with my follow-up to it, broken up into the items needing to be addressed (as it was in the email reply). She listed 10 items... all of her parts were the contents of one email, all of my comments are from my reply to hers:

(Email follow-ups, 1/26/06)

PEW: Well this is interesting LM. This email shows the total lack of respect that you have always had for me.

LM: Hardly. Pointing out how your words and your actions never seem to match is not being disrespectful, it's being truthful. And get over your respect issue, this is about the kids, not you. Respect is earned, and when you begin to treat me and your own children with respect, you will get it back.

PM: #1 The boys are almost always in bed by 8:30-8:45 and asleep by 9. Despite whatever you think you know. Occassionally I let them stay up later, but that is the exception not the rule.

LM: Then I suppose the 3 times that I called at 9PM or later this month alone and they were awake (one time S6 was asleep) was merely a strange coincidence? You're a liar.

PEW: #2 They do not watch inappropriate shows. We watch the Discovery Channel, Animal Planet (mostly) and Nick. That's basically it.

LM: If you say so. I know that they watch those, was simply suggesting that if there are others, you should consider reviewing them. And it's really not what they are watching, it's the amount of time they watch TV. Studies suggest less than 2 hours of TV a WEEK. You let them watch over 2 hours nearly every day. They are not learning how to interact with other people, including you. And the fact that you have them in NO other activities, diminishes their social skills even further. It's no wonder every time S9 gets a chance to interact on his own with other kids he gets frustrated and potentially violent, he doesn't know how to handle it.

PEW: #3 The computer games I am allowing him to play are educational and the others foster good hand eye coordination. I do not let him play for hours on end. I know you like to believe this, but it's simply not true.

LM: When I call, he is typically watching TV or playing on the computer including during homework and dinner when you should be carrying on a conversation with them, not to mention the times they actually sit and watch you play games on the computer, something you could be doing while they are in bed. I'm fairly certain that the combination of the two that you do are in the neighborhood of several hours. It's really great that you're fostering good hand-eye coordination when what S9 so clearly needs at this point is more time learning how to interact appropriately with others, like sports that will really help his hand eye coordination plus his social skills. My suggestions simply offered ways for him to not be so stimulated on his own and actually move towards continuing to teach him how to play nicely with others, be that you, S6, or both.

PEW: #4 Did you realize that S9's lowest test score this year was a 96? Please don't tell me I need to do anything differently with regard to reading, writing, math or otherwise. I am doing an excellent job with the kids acedemically. Don't need your help there.

LM: I know you like to take all the credit for stuff that is going well and divert all of the blame for the things that aren't going well and this is a prime example. Whether or not you need my help is immaterial... I offered suggestions and will continue to do what I can when I can. But recognize this - it's childish of you to accept no responsibility for the things that go wrong and all of the responsibility for the things that go right. This is typical of you and this particular situation is another in a long line of examples.

PEW: #5 I made an appt for Dr. M------- I told you that yesterday. When we go to court, I am going to try to get it written in the court order that you stop your phone calls to the teachers, counselors, etc....because it only muddies the waters for the kids and what is on THEIR minds. I have a great relationship with Dr. M-------, he was recommended by a psychologist that I work with and he knows me very well. We have great communication...thanks.

LM: Yes, I would love for you to go to court and do that. It will only serve to show exactly what I've been saying all along - that you go out of your way to undermine my relationship with the children and also go out of your way to disrupt communication with the people that are involved in our children's lives - especially teachers and counselors. Maybe you can show your attorney the order which specifically states that if you do anything to disrupt said communication, contact, and availability - you are in contempt. Dust off the order and read it.

PEW: #6 I keep a very close eye on the kids when they play with all other children including J. Neighborkid. S9 told J. Neighborkid he doesn't like his video games, so now they don't play his games anymore, they only play S9's games which are Shreck, Shark Tales and Sponge Bob on Game Cube. But feel free to go knock on my neighbor's door next time you're in town....they already know you're a nutcase.

LM: Sure you do. I suppose you were Johnny-on-the-spot when S6 was pushed nearly in front of a car because of J's aggressive behavior. I won't get into some of the other issues I've been told about... but stop pretending like everyone is an angel under your watch. But hey, if all of the violent video games and gunplay that your neighbor's kid engages in is okay with you, there is nothing I can do about it. Besides, you will always have me to blame, right?

PEW: #7 I had someone at my house last night fixing some plumbing. You could have discussed your plan with me prior to your browbeating the child like you used to do to me for an hour. No wonder he's having problems. He's 7 and you have him on the phone beating his ear for an hour about something that I already handled. I did NOT tell him I was going to ask you for consequences. I told him if he continued to complain about the consequences I gave him, I was going to ask you to give him MORE consequences while he is in [your home state]. That's what I said. The fact is, you needed to communicate to me what he was "freaking out" about, but you refused. He went upstairs, shut himself in his room. I was getting my plumbing fixed and at that moment I could only do one thing and it wasn't going to be deal with your bullshit. I didn't hang up on you in front of the children. S9 was in his room and S6 was playing with the little boy next door in the kitchen. Please don't tell me I put you in the position of being the "bad guy" and me the "good guy". It is the total opposite. If you had them full time, I'd be the good guy and you the bad guy, believe me. I have to dicipline them every single day.....you 4 days per month.

LM: Spare me. While stating that you don't set yourself up as the good guy and me the bad guy you proceed to describe doing just that. Use dad as a "threat." Thanks for acknowledging that while attempting not to acknowledge that. As for your overuse of the word "browbeat" - it certainly was not that. As for your contention that I wouldn't tell you what he was freaking out about, I specifically told you that we were talking about his actions and consequences and twice asked you to join me on the line to hear exactly what the discussion was and was met with you being belligerent and hanging up on me (repeatedly).

PEW: #8 I have never "bullrushed" the children. I have chased them up the steps, when they tell me they are not taking a time out.

LM: It's called "bullrushing" - thanks again for acknowledging what I've said while trying not to acknowledge it.

PEW: I have raised my voice, but I will tell you that I can count on ONE hand the amount of times I have physically diciplined them, so you seriously need to cease your accusations of emotional and physical abuse. They aren't afraid of me, they tell me everything and they tell me off when they feel like they need to. If they were afraid of me, why is the answer "Daddy is much scarier than you" when I ask them why they behave so well at your house?? They say you yell louder than me too. Is that a lie? I don't yell at the children. I don't physically discipline them.

LM: Parents who physically discipline their children do so because they lose control and can't speak appropriately. Physically disciplining them only shows them that when they are angry it's okay to hit someone, great job there PEW, and you wonder why S9 is having problems keeping his hands off kids that don't do what he wants. They've been admonished firmly without yelling or screaming. I don't do to them what I've personally heard you do to them while simply on the phone with one or the other. I've heard about smacks in the mouth. I've heard about smacks in the head. But you can continue to tell S9 that things he says happened never happened and that he is a liar. That's good for him, too.

PEW: #9 I spoke to my lawyer about your cockamamy plan of moving to [here] 2 weeks per month and here is where I stand. Re-establish yourself in [here], then come talk to me. I'm not signing anything on your say so. You can't be trusted. You're practically certifyable, why would I agree to give you 50% custody. The kids need stability and you're as far from stable as it gets.

LM: I didn't say when or how long I would be moving to [there]. I simply said that, if, as you have repeatedly claimed, and I have in multiple writings that if I move back to [there] you would give me 50/50 custody - would you agree to do so... and as expected, you hedged on the basis of finances, reversing course (as usual) because you didn't think it was a realistic possibility. My guess is you fear having to back up your words... words you gave to evaluators, lawyers, and such... something you didn't expect was going to happen anytime soon. It was pretty easy to say you would give me 50/50 when you didn't think there was a possibility of it happening, as usual it made you look like the "good guy" to the counselors. But as I, and you, know, it's not the truth and you proved it yet again. I called your bluff and you showed your true hand, now we'll let the courts see it. I guess that's another bridge we'll have to cross when we get there, but I'll be sure to save this email when you're crying about how *I* cause you to incur legal bills when my suggestion would have done just the opposite... again.

PEW: #10 We will never be able to co-parent together as long as you have a total lack of respect for me. I did want you to talk to S9 last night......talk, not browbeat. But that's your specialty, so I shoulda known better. That's why I have the kids full time and not you. I am the better parent. Sorry but thems the facts.....There are plnty of proffessionals to back me up.

LM: We will never be able to co-parent together because you don't know how. You're a user and a manipulator and always will be. I have professionals that will back me up as well... at least those who have seen your words and/or actions firsthand.

PEW: By the way, I never asked for your input. I was merely letting you know what was going on with our son. Nor did I ask for you assistance. But thanks anyway.

LM: Actually, you did, but even if it weren't true, it doesn't preclude me from addressing issues with my sons in a meaningful way, at least until you sabotaged the effort and attacked me instead of getting on the phone like I asked and assisting in showing S9 that we were on the same page where the problems are concerned.

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

That was really productive, wasn't it?

Every once in a while, you have to give that "state of reality" speech, despite the knowing that it will never work. Between the obvious parental alienation going on (dad is so gonna punish you when he calls, acting out towards me in front of the children, cursing me in front of the children, etc.), the projection, the rage - you feel hopeless. All told - this will be my 13th year dealing with this child in a grown-up's body. For DW, she's entering her 4th year as a volunteer in this war. All we do is try to mitigate the impact her behavior has on my children (and hers, too, despite there being no contact). Oh, you'll see...

Subscribe In a Reader or by Email

Parenting Issues Discussion of 1/06 - Part I of II

This post is one of many examples dating back to the birth of our first child which demonstrate the polar opposite approaches we have regarding parenting the children. Since a person with BPD or suspected of having BPD suffers from developmental issues that stifle the emotional maturation at about 10-years old (give or take a few years) - it's unreasonable to expect that a 10-year old would know how to handle, parent, and raise children appropriately beyond some very basic needs like food, water, shelter, and clothing.

Before I really started to heed the advice of so many others dealing with similar situations involving a spouse or ex-spouse with a personality disorder and stopped engaging and getting into long email exchanges to debate a spouse incapable of understanding and accepting reality - I would do things like what will soon follow. Of course, after 10-years of this bullshit, I entered into such exercises with a realistic expectation that I was wasting my time. This email followed another phone call where, in exasperation, she tells me that she "can't handle the kids." Every once in a while you simply have to try to give that dose of reality.

(LM email 1/25/2006, 12:43PM)

The following are some thoughts and suggestions regarding the behavior of both S9 and S6 for which you asked my input. These are important given the ongoing circumstances, particularly where S9 is concerned.

Bedtime - It is my belief that the boys are kept up entirely too late for their age. I would suggest that their bedtime consistently be 8PM, 8:30PM at the latest (in bed). A lack of sleep contributes pretty significantly to the potential irritability of the boys. Surely you remember how cranky that they could be even at their earliest ages and that doesn’t really change so much at 4 and 7. When they’re tired, they’re cranky, and certainly more easily “set-off” when they are not well-rested. For them to be up as late as 9PM (and beyond in several cases) is not doing them any good. A lack of appropriate rest may well contribute to the frequency of their illnesses, too.

TV - It is my belief that the boys spend too much time watching television, and while I’m not exactly sure what shows that they are watching, I know that many of the cartoons that are available to them after 8PM are geared more towards children of older ages and probably contain a little more violence than S9 should be watching right now given his propensity towards physical confrontations both at home and at school. Further, it does nothing to aid the children in finding ways to interact meaningfully with one another, which, if cultivated, would help in their interaction with others at school.

Computer - It is my belief that S9 spends too much time on the computer playing games, which again fails to foster meaningful interaction with others. In fact, I found it quite disturbing that S9 acted rather demonstrative and belligerent towards you with regard to what he expected you to do and not do with regard to the Fish Tycoon game when I last came to pick them up. You did nothing. I would suggest that you spend more time with them playing interactive games like board games and such, which would certainly aid in continuing to reinforce the good sportsmanship and learning how to play well with others that I have been working so hard to teach him. Clearly, from the episodes that have taken place, S9 has not learned what is appropriate game play given that his most recent choice was to play a “game” with someone who wasn’t interested in playing, probably due entirely to the fact that the game S9 conceived of involved taking away something from J----- against her wishes. Too much computer and tv time will not aid in this development.

Books - S9 can read and does so well. You should consider both reading with him (which I am certain you already do to some degree), but also, replace some TV and computer time with easy books that he can read by himself and then when he is finished, have him tell you what the book was about and give you some highlights and stuff. It will continue to help improve not only his reading skills, but his comprehension and memory and will serve to help him with interacting with you in more positive ways instead of being hyper about when it’s his turn on the computer or what show or movie he can watch next.

Dr. M----- – Despite your contention that the boys are more unruly when they see Dr. M-----, evidence points to the contrary. His last visit being just before Christmas means he went nearly a month without incident. 3 incidents in a span of 3 weeks seems to indicate to me that S9 is missing the productive outlet that Dr. M----- provides when he has regular visits and 2 months don’t pass between them. If you haven’t already, I would be sure that Dr. M----- knows in advance of the situations and that he needs to try to aid S9 in understanding his behavior and work with communicating alternatives to being physical with others when faced with a stressful situation. I will be contacting Dr. ----- prior to their next visit to discuss my concerns in this regard.

J. Neighborkid - Based on your say-so, he is apparently a really nice kid. Based on what very little I know about J. Neighborkid - he plays lots of violent video games and much of his gameplay involves guns and violence. Perhaps you should keep a closer eye on the types of games that these boys play together and more closely monitor their interaction. I know you claim that S9 and/or S6 don't stay over there when he is playing those video games. I only hope that you are being truthful in that regard. I'm concerned for S9, S6, AND J. Neighborkid regarding the types of video games he is allowed to play at such a young age. And you still haven't gotten back to me on the titles of those video games. You're over there enough to know what they are, but I'm guessing you persist in failing to disclose the titles knowing that they are probably not remotely age-appropriate.

Now, while you continue to speak of S9’s ability to allegedly manipulate me without support (only that he may lie to me), you continue to demonstrate just how well he is able to do this to you. I understand that there are times when S9 is not entirely truthful. He has certain “ticks” that tend to tip me off to when he is not being forthright and ultimately, I like to believe that I get to the truth in the overwhelming majority of cases. He knows how I feel about lying. Now, last night was a prime example of what I have repeatedly told you about. We were having a calm discussion about how future instances such as this should be handled. He didn’t like the prospect of having to understand that I would suggest an increasing scale of recess-detention because missing one recess for abusive behavior didn’t seem to be working. I asked him what he thought about the possibility of losing 1 recess for each incident that occurred and gave him the for-instance of losing 5 recesses since this was his 5th incident and if there were a 6th, 7th, or more incidents, he would lose the same number of recesses. That’s when he lost control, started screaming and yelling and got off the phone.

What did you do?

You didn’t calm him down and tell him to act appropriately and continue the discussion – a discussion that you wanted me to have with him. You didn’t respond positively to my suggestion that you get on the line and we discuss the future consequences together so that he knows we are a unified front and have the same concerns about his behavior. You got belligerent with me demanding to know all of the details of our conversation. You didn’t ask him to get back on the phone as I had repeatedly and calmly asked you to do. You did exactly what he knew you would do. You badmouthed me. You repeatedly hung up the phone on me in front of the children. And, as always, rather than focus on the children, you used the situation to further undermine my relationship with the children, not only then, but by telling S9 before I had even called that I was going to tell him what his punishment was. You did this without consulting me first. You do this rather consistently and it’s all in a premeditated effort to put me in the position of “bad guy” and you in the position of “good guy.”

S9 and S6 will never listen to you if you insist that I create limits that you then never enforce. As their mother and primary caregiver, you are responsible for setting the limits and ENFORCING them, not handing them over to me. And when they break the limits, whether at school or at your home, I'm not responsible just because I'm not the primary caregiver. You need to start taking responsibility for their actions and your own actions, or they will never take responsibility for what they do. They will find someone to blame just like you do with me. In our home the boys are responsible for their own behavior and I'm responsible for teaching them appropriate behavior. I don't call you and blame you when they misbehave here. I don't need to call you to dish out consequences for their behavior. My desire is to have primary custody and deal with these issues more consistently and appropriately. Any time you want the roles to be reversed - instead of complaining that I don't do primary caregiver work and pretend to believe that I don't want that - you put it down on paper and let's do it. Don't pacify yourself by claiming that I don't want the kids 24/7 - the fact is - I do.

Your behavior last night reinforced the very behavior in S9 that has you allegedly concerned. When S6 sees how you act with me on the phone, he acts the same way. No wonder he so often gets on the phone, is very short and gets off the phone – he sees how you act and acts accordingly. So it seems that you want me to solve your problems rather than working together to assist in getting S9 (and S6) to understand actions and to behave better in the future to avoid the ongoing situations that have occurred both at school and at home as you have reported.

Your actions are a template for the children. The way you act when stressed and angry is the way they will continue to act. I hear it on the phone when I call. I hear you go from zero-to-freakout when one or the other is doing something that you don’t want them to do. I hear you scream at them and get angry and threaten S6 to get on the phone with me when he is resistant – and you wonder why he doesn’t like to talk to me. And if you wish to lie about this contention, I suggest you allow me to record conversations again so we can see who is lying. I hear their reports of how you treat them when they do something that gets them in trouble. It’s not like they say “I don’t do anything wrong and mom just freaks out for no reason.” They tell me that they’ve gotten in trouble. They tell me that you hit them and threaten them with bodily harm. They tell me that you bull-rush them, chasing them to their room when they don’t go immediately upon order and, in both S9’s and S6’s words “she scares us so bad that we run to our room and shut the door.” Could some of that be fabricated or embellished? I’m sure that there is a chance that some of it may be. However, when the stories are so frequent and detailed, it’s hard to imagine that it’s all a figment of their imagination.

In your mind, it’s an easy out to blame me. But know this – the reality is that their behavior is learned and it’s learned from you. It’s learned from your family. I can’t fix that unless you’re willing to recognize that and work with me – something that I have become increasingly hopeless that you will ever do since the children are your last weapon against me. I’ve experienced nothing sadder in my life than what I have witnessed you do with these boys and I pray that someday you will wake up and change your ways before it is too late.

It’s scary that you have this ongoing alleged offer of 50/50 custody if I just come back to [her state] because you realize that these boys need me more and you need more help. You tell everyone that. You told G---- that. You told A------ that. Now that I am trying to pursue just such an opportunity that would allow that to take place and you refuse because of the impact on your finances? Demand that I pay your outstanding legal bills in exchange for 50/50 custody? Tell me that you can’t because the change in support would force you to have to change your lifestyle? If it wasn’t so sad it would make me laugh that you say one thing in the face of evaluators and attorneys and anyone who would believe your obvious lies – tell one story when it’s convenient for your agenda - and now faced with the realistic possibility that I may be able to find and get back to [her state], you refuse and will fight a joint-custody agreement. As always, it has been about the money for only one person in this relationship – YOU. Your actions, your words, and your lies have always supported that fact. During that entire discussion, there was never a mention of the positive impact a 50/50 arrangement would have on the lives of S9 and S6. Those same postive impacts that you stressed to the counselors, evaluators, and everyone else. All you spoke to was how your finances would be impacted. Sad.

So, you asked for my assistance, there it is. What you do with it is entirely up to you.


~LM

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

I sat and braced for the pending storm... knowing that this monumental asshole was going to go off. I couldn't help it. Unless you've experienced it, you can't begin to imagine how helpless you are as a parent when you're dealing with a Psycho Ex-Wife with little or no capacity to grasp her own parental inadequacies.

Make no mistake about this - I do not consider myself a perfect parent by any stretch of the imagination. However, I do love the interaction I have with them. I love to teach the children "stuff" and get as excited about seeing them being excited about having learned something as a child on Christmas morning. I love seeing them interact with others in a positive way. I love seeing them learn from their mistakes. I love it all or, most of it.

The problem I have with PEW is, oftentimes, the children demonstrate more friggin' common-sense and understanding than the one of the persons primarily responsible for their upbringing - their own mother. The bigger issue is, they spend so much time with her and her family of dysfunctional fucktards that I have a hard time believing that they will not grow up with some sort of "interpersonal relationship" problems, if not worse.

To be continued... Link to Parenting Issues Part II

Subscribe In a Reader or by Email

Mother's Rights

A Mother is driving along with her 4 year old daughter in the back seat of the car, the child's father comes up from behind, ramming his car into the mother's rear bumper until she finally stops the car. The father gets out of the car, runs to the mother's car and takes the daughter, running into the woods.

What does the father get charged with?

Domestic Violence, kidnapping, endangering the welfare of a child, and interfering with custody. Read on below...








This is a trick question. See, the above story actually happened, except it was the Mother ramming the car and then abducting the child. And do you know what she got charged with? Endangering a child for HAVING HER OUTSIDE WITHOUT A COAT ON. You can read the full story on how mother's can get away with domestic violence, kidnapping children, and interfering with custody, with no consequences, while a father would be sent to jail.

Subscribe In a Reader or by Email

"Child" Support or State Windfall?

DW:
Child Support. These are two of the ugliest words in our language. It wasn't meant to be that way, but when you say these words they bring up very specific, wide-ranging feelings and thoughts. Most of them, not positive. I can tell you from experience over the last 4-years that child support has only partially to do with actually supporting children. It only partially has to do with the best interests of the children.

In 1995 a full 89% of a primary parents were mothers. The media would like you to believe that's because fathers have abandoned their children. Not only did they abandon them, they refuse to pay child support. (They would also like you to believe that men are all abusive, but that's for another post.)

The media likes to pull out statistics like the fact that over 30% of single mothers live in poverty. They never actually answer how those "absent", really just non-custodial, fathers are living, you are left to believe they are millionaires who ran away with their secretary on their private yacht. We spend millions of dollars a year conducting studies on these single mothers, and yet we spend nothing to find out how the fathers are doing. We conclude over and over that children with absent fathers have higher risks of everything from dropping out of school to ending up in jail, and yet we continue to legally take fathers away from their children through custody agreements hammered out in court, just so they will be forced to pay child support so the state can earn more money.

Keith McLeod told the Ways and Means Committee in a hearing, "One must wonder if child support enforcement is one of those misguided social hysterias that are causing more harm than they are solving exactly because we are, yet again, addressing the wrong thing; the wrong end of the stick. Perhaps government policy should change to ensuring any child’s family remains intact irrespective of what happens between its parents. (Whether its parents are married, divorce, or never married, the child’s family be the same people and allowed normal parental roles unless a clear and present danger from one can be proved. Current policy is to intervene upon divorce to prevent one parent from parenting.)"

What really gets me about child support is the enforcement issues that follow behind custody orders or rather the fact they our legal community refuses to enforce child visitation even when it's been court ordered. Yet they will spare no expense sending a father to jail because he is behind in child support. If mothers went to jail because they withheld their children from the father, an issue would be solved almost by default because the father would then have his children. However, when a father goes to jail because he is unable to pay his child support, nothing is solved. You have now made it impossible for him to pay because he is racking up more support payments while he is in jail and unable to work. You have now also hindered his ability to get a job with a criminal record once he is released.

Now, I'm not saying some mothers do not have a GREAT reason to withhold their children, such as drug use or sexual abuse or that some fathers just choose not to pay their support obligation. What I am saying is that we need to stop treating fathers as criminals and make the retributions equal if this is really supposed to be about the best interests of the children. Or better yet, keep the families together whether they are divorced or not, sharing costs AND care equally and not just using the horribly flawed "income shares model" which is simply a transfer of wealth from one party to the other in the interests of "providing the children with the same income as if the families were still intact." Reality is, the family is not still intact. There are now two households to support, each with only one income or, in a worst-case scenario, two households to support with only one income to support them.

LM:
The "best interests of the children" is a term that is now used as a shield to justify moronic, punitive measures against payors who fall behind or fail to pay child support. No reasonably intelligent human being can justify using such tactics which only make it difficult, and in too many cases, impossible for the payor (usually the father in nearly 90% of the cases) to earn income. Arrearages pile up, and the parties with a vested interest in promoting mass hysteria propagate the "deadbeat dad" myth.

Even more interesting is some figures I saw worked up using Indiana child support laws, which uses the income shares model. The law says, given a family with a combined income of $50,000 the cost for a child aged 2, it costs $24,272 - the percent of pre-tax income 49%. For a child aged 9, with a combined income of $30,000 it costs $10,600 or 35% of their pre-tax income. This is using the model to calculate who pays what amount of child support.

Why then, is the national average for what states pay out to foster care families for those same children only $7,044 and $7,244 respectively? Because paying out for foster care doesn't earn the state money, but divorce and child support does. The midwest alone is much lower with figures of $5,604 and $5,768 respectively. So then, why would so many people choose to foster care a child when the Indiana Supreme Court indicates that it costs, in some case, almost $20,000 more per annum to raise a child?

You can read the article which breaks it out amongst a wide range of incomes here: Child Support Analysis - boonecountyfathers.org

The reality is that the laws are draconian and defeat the alleged purpose of "the best interests of the children." In my case, during the period where I was a non-custodial parent paying child-support, I paid nearly 43% of my after-tax income to my ex-spouse. At the time, I was bringing home about $3,200/month and paying child-support and childcare "in proportion to the income" of the both of us. $1,250. In each of two consecutive years, I paid to my ex-spouse, tax-free for her: nearly $14,000 in each of those two years. Keep in mind now, that was just my portion of what my state says it "costs for the basic needs of the children" - an amount somewhere North of $21,000. Folks, I can assure you, when we were married, I wasn't paying that much to raise my two children, I wouldn't have been able to afford the house we lived in if, in reality, it cost that much money. When you factor in that it is after-tax money for which I get no tax relief, the costs are far higher. At the time, it left me with approximately $1,800 on which to live. That is, find a home reasonable enough to accommodate two youngster, pay rent ($1,000 would get me an efficiency where I was living at the time), buy furniture, food, clothes, gas, pay utilities, car insurance/repairs/maintenance, life insurance, health insurance co-pays and other medical costs... and all of the things that normal people in normal circumstances have to do.

Few people realize that in most states and even surrounding countries - your normal daily expenses are not even considered when factoring child support. The rules are clear... he makes this much money, she makes this much money, combine them - give the money to her and how you live is NONE OF THEIR CONCERN. Then, they use a formula to determine how much it costs to raise a child per year and it's astounding and based on incorrect data.

Now, factor in that the laws also have determined through some never named or cited research, that when you are divorced, suddenly if you get a raise, make more money, get a second job - the costs for the basic needs of the children go up - and your support figure goes up accordingly! I'm pretty sure that I'm not alone in wondering where and how that rationale came to pass, because I can tell you this, if and when I received my annual raise - my kids didn't suddenly need more food, more clothes, more shelter, more utilities, etc. etc. etc. However, once you're in the divorce machine - the laws and computations say that's what happens. Who suffers? The person who pays the price is usually the non-custodial parent - in the overwhelming majority of the cases - the father. Let's not just blame custodial mothers though, I mean, who wouldn't want more money for nothing, right? The system allows it and the only person who loses money is... guess who? The father. Mom can file for a support modification whenever she wants. You have to produce your financials. Who gets paid? Conference officers. Judges. Lawyers. Mother. Court clerks. Transcriptionists. Secretaries. The state fund. Who is paying? The non-custodial parent. It's state and federal sanctioned theft hidden behind "the best interests of the children."

More recently, the company I worked for up and left - moved across the country. I was out of a job collecting $1,300 per month in unemployment compensation. I had previously made a fairly nice wage. My portion of the mortgage alone was $1,100. The cost of my health insurance coverage for myself and the children was more than $700. Do the math, folks. I'm bringing home $1,300. Just housing and health insurance expenses were $1,800. Ask me if I had to stop paying child support. No. No. I filed for a modification and the Psycho Ex Wife contested it at conference. She, after all "needed more money or she couldn't pay her bills" despite having a well-paying job herself. That means an automatic hearing. That means paying an attorney close to $2,000 to prepare for and show up to entertain a judge, who, by the way, said the words that would strike fear in the hearts of the toughest men "imputed income." When a judge decides he is going to calculate "imputed income" - he looks at your earning capacity and can impose child support based upon that. In theory, the judge presiding over the support matter could absolutely have continued to charge me based on what I could be making if I had a job. That means I could have still been paying the PEW almost my entire unemployment compensation check leaving me $100 to live on. Thanks to the $2,000 invested via a credit card for my attorney, I "only" had to pay $200 per month. So now for just the housing, health insurance, and child support, I had $2,000 worth of bills to pay with $1,300 in income. Never mind any other expense. Never mind the other two kids and my lovely partner.

The job loss was unexpected and obviously, the reserve that was in place didn't last long after having to pay an attorney. I was out of work for 9-months despite having resume's in at more than 400 companies nationwide in a matter of a few weeks.

I was fortunate despite the very deep hole we now have to dig ourselves out of. Despite having 50/50 custody, I still am required to pay PEW as much as $600+ per month because I make more money than her. Necessary expenses don't count in most states. Seriously - not at all. I make good money and due to the logistics necessary to secure this position - we can still barely make ends meet. Yes, there are some things we can still cut, but in the grand scheme of things, we still can't save any money for our future together, let alone our childrens' futures.

I'd love to see someone publicize the stories of thousands of fathers just like me who have to clear hurdle after hurdle after hurdle while spending his life savings (and then some) to all those with their hand out at the divorce machine for them to determine how much it's going to cost me to have my children with me in some meaningful capacity.

Forget about the massive legal costs - I paid between $30,000 and $40,000 in child support money to PEW in the last 3-years. Do you think she used any of it to set up college funds for the kids? Nope. Savings? Nope. Investments? Nope. She has nothing to show for it. Nothing. Not a pot to piss in and near the brink of bankruptcy herself making nearly $40,000 per year without all that money. What a total frigging tragedy.

Subscribe In a Reader or by Email

Hi, I'm DW and I'm An Asshole

I would like to publicly apologize to LM for my actions on NYE. No, I won't give you details, but I was completely retarded and LM is the most amazing man on the planet. Or he's insane. I'm not sure, but I'm glad he's mine. I'm going to turn this post over to the concept of relationship fleas, which we all have, but especially in post-BPD relationships.

If you've ever had a moment where you reacted to someone based on your experiences with a past lover rather than based on the actual person you were dealing with, that is what we refer to as fleas. For instance, one of the first funny ones we encountered was one night where I had a bad dream about LM. I woke up the next morning and started telling him about it. His face immediately went ashen and he asked if I was going to be pissed at him all day. Huh? I had no idea what he was talking about, we always share dreams. As it turns out, PEW had a wonderful habit of reacting to bad dreams she had about LM as if they had ACTUALLY HAPPENED! Man, not only was he responsible for things he did during the day, he was responsible for things that happened in her dreams. Can you say psycho?

We had another this year on Mother's Day.