Click to go to Forum Home Click to go to maXbimmer Home

Go Back   maXbimmer Forums > Misc > Off-topic
User Name
Password


Welcome to Maxbimmer.com!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 11-10-2010, 04:04 PM   #16
pawcio
6th Gear Member
 
pawcio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mississauga, ON
Posts: 1,609


Quote:
Originally Posted by talltorontoguy View Post
Just because someone didn't pay child support doesn't make them a douche; see my comments above. Plus, you've left out visitation. Arguably regular visitation is more important to the well being and development of the child than the amount of money paid. If a custodial parent lives near the paying/visiting parent the logistics of visitation is not a huge issue. However that's not always the case and in those cases taking a car away from someone can limit that visitation ability, hurting the child's well being.

Ever had to take a 1 year old from Mississauga to Scarborough and back, in winter, on transit, on the same day? You think that spending 4-5 hrs round trip on public transit is quality time with a parent? How would one accomplish that trip if the visit was only for the evening afterwork and not overnight? How about if the child had to be in school the next morning and the parent had to be at work at the same time? Think about it.
of course visitation is important. i'm not going into the intricacy of being a good parent. its up to the visiting parent to live close enough to their child to be able to visit them regularly and provide the basic necessities in life. its not the child's decision to live in scarborough and the other parent in mississauga, milton, oakville etc. as the parent you need to take responsibility for your child. if you have enough money then have a car and pay child support and live far away if you like from either your work or your child and drive everywhere. but if you're poor and make little money live near enough to your child that you don't have to spend the money you could pay for child support on transportation or a car.

i'm not saying people who pay child support shouldn't have cars or not visit their children. all i'm saying is you gotta do whatever you gotta do to provide for the child, both financially and emotionally. if the result means you need to move from where you currently live to be closer to work & your child for visitation reasons, sell your car, sell your kidney...whatever and don't make excuses.

if someone really wanted to see their child regularly and provide for them in all necessities they would find a way to do it and not make excuses.
__________________
__

pawcio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2010, 05:15 PM   #17
talltorontoguy
Go Topless
 
talltorontoguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Under my e30
Posts: 803
Quote:
Originally Posted by pawcio View Post
its up to the visiting parent to live close enough to their child to be able to visit them regularly and provide the basic necessities in life. its not the child's decision to live in scarborough and the other parent in mississauga, milton, oakville etc. as the parent you need to take responsibility for your child.

If you're poor and make little money live near enough to your child that you don't have to spend the money you could pay for child support on transportation or a car..
Disagree 100%

example:
The ex decides, without consultation, to move 50 miles away from downtown location with the children. Visiting parent had it worked out by working locally at the job he's had for 10 years. He could not afford a car because he had to pay child support but didn't need it as he lived close to work. He borrowed a family member's car (at no cost) to go see his kids. He loses his job, cannot pay support, and gets license suspended. He cannot move because he doesn't have a job reference for a new place. So he effectively loses the right to see his children because he couldn't pay child support. It's not because he was blowing his money on explorers with 22" rims... he just doesn't have the money.

Do you think that guy will suddenly pay his child support as a result of a license suspension? No - he doesn't have enough money... he CANNOT PAY. In this example this guy had no car, no car payment, no insurance payment... This has nothing to do with ownership of a car, its about access to transportation and ergo access to his kids.

For your comment "its up to the visiting parent to live close enough to their child to be able to visit them regularly"... There are TWO parents involved. BOTH parents are supposed to look out for the best interests of the child. Part of that best interest includes ACCESS/VISITATION for both parents. Why should the visiting parent alone be responsible for being close to the custodial parent? Does he have to chase her around as she moves? Why can't the custodial parent move closer to the visiting parent so visitation is easier? Why... because the rules don't work that way. This law exasperates that already biased situation.

Unfortunately, the custodial parent frequently views the child as THEIR child alone and the visiting parent is an afterthought. This is why you often see custodial parents move significant distances from the visiting parent without any consideration of the visiting parent, and there is little recourse by visiting parent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pawcio View Post
i'm not saying people who pay child support shouldn't have cars or not visit their children. all i'm saying is you gotta do whatever you gotta do to provide for the child, both financially and emotionally. if the result means you need to move from where you currently live to be closer to work & your child for visitation reasons, sell your car, sell your kidney...whatever and don't make excuses...
I agree with you on responsibility and do what you gotta do. Unfortunately its the paying / visting parent that does most of the "what you gotta do". This law links financial support and emotional support together and that's unfair. The two are mutually exclusive.

What if the other parent moves again, and again... do you keep selling kidneys?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pawcio View Post
if someone really wanted to see their child regularly and provide for them in all necessities they would find a way to do it and not make excuses.
Seeing the child is separate from paying support. Period.

for paying support remember ... CANNOT is different than WILL NOT. WILL NOTs (lol) will make excuses. CANNOTs simply... cannot.

Don't forget about the hammer already in place vis-a-vis wage garnishee that the FRO already has. If the guy can pay and will not, then use the garnishee. If the guy has no income to pay child support then don't stop him from seeing his kids by suspending his license.

TTG
__________________


Join BMW Club of Canada! Click HERE

Best Engine, Bimmercruise '10 / 2nd - e30 Wild, Bimmercruise '10 / 1st - Best Cabrio, Trillium @ Tedfest '11 / 1st - e30 Wild, Bimmercruise '11 / 1st - e30 Wild, Bimmercruise '12 www.vertnation.com

Last edited by talltorontoguy; 11-10-2010 at 05:18 PM.
talltorontoguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2010, 11:02 PM   #18
Axxe
Over 9 F**KING THOUSAND!!
 
Axxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oakville
Posts: 9,775
^ Pretty much sums it up there. The system is so far backwards it hurts. We had a guy start driving for us, because he lost his job at a plant that he had for 15 years, was out of work for 3 months, got behind on child support, so the FRO suspended his license and forced him to lose the only job he could find in 3 months of working. Really nice system.
__________________

S52|ZF|TRM Coilovers 670/895|Staggered 18" 5's
Axxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 12:48 AM   #19
SiR
Vtec just kicked in
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: TO
Posts: 2,761
yup. if you actually sit down and think about this....there is no way you can agree with it. its stupid and doesnt make any sense.
I dont think any of us are fond of deadbeat types....but this makes zero sense to help the situation. none what so ever.

people who say good, grand ...screw them ....are short sighted ....
__________________
-||Old Crayons||-
SiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 10:00 AM   #20
325isdan
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: GTA
Posts: 1,142
Regardless of what that article says. I believe the courts also take into account those who Can Not and those who Will Not pay.

They have to, regardless of what the media is trying to make you think.
325isdan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 10:18 AM   #21
talltorontoguy
Go Topless
 
talltorontoguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Under my e30
Posts: 803
Quote:
Originally Posted by 325isdan View Post
Regardless of what that article says. I believe the courts also take into account those who Can Not and those who Will Not pay.

They have to, regardless of what the media is trying to make you think.
Hello? What courts? There is no court action required for the suspension. No opportunity for a person to defend themselves / explain the situation, no due process. FRO can summarily suspend a license at their discretion.

This new law pertains to impounding the car of someone with a suspended license, regardless of how they got that suspended license. So a guy that is suspended for impaired is treated the same as a guy that missed a child support payment.

Impoundment kind of makes sense in most cases (was suspended for racing, etc). It's to deter continued activity that was related to improper driving behaviour. There's a direct correlation. There is no relationship between paying child support, driving behaviour, and responsible parenting.

So - the real issue at hand is not that cars can be impounded, it's that suspensions are summarily applied to people for non payment to begin with, when there is already a law in place to allow for garnishee of wages.

Why not put a law in that says you are not allowed to use transit if you cannot afford to pay child support? No support - no passport. No support - no Health coverage. No support - no government job retraining programs.

It's a slippery slope.

Note: I maintain that child support must be paid. But if it CANNOT be paid, that doesn't mean that visitation should effectively be curtailed and chances of resuming employment ruined. It goes back to CANNOT vs WILL NOT. There is already a mechanism in place for WILL NOT, no other mechanism is required.

I'm all hot on this topic if you cannot tell... sorry for long winded posts.

PS: I'm not a deadbeat dad
__________________


Join BMW Club of Canada! Click HERE

Best Engine, Bimmercruise '10 / 2nd - e30 Wild, Bimmercruise '10 / 1st - Best Cabrio, Trillium @ Tedfest '11 / 1st - e30 Wild, Bimmercruise '11 / 1st - e30 Wild, Bimmercruise '12 www.vertnation.com

Last edited by talltorontoguy; 11-11-2010 at 10:37 AM.
talltorontoguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 10:25 AM   #22
pawcio
6th Gear Member
 
pawcio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mississauga, ON
Posts: 1,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by talltorontoguy View Post
Why not put a law in that says you are not allowed to buy subway tokens if you cannot afford to pay child support? Why not put a law in that says you cannot have a passport? Health coverage?

It's a slippery slope.
i agree...but in reality its not that slippery. having a drivers license is a privilege...universal health coverage in canada is a right so they won't go there and legally they can't so they can't make up just any law. there is something called the charter of rights and freedoms as well as the constitution to stand behind.
__________________
__

pawcio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 01:10 PM   #23
talltorontoguy
Go Topless
 
talltorontoguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Under my e30
Posts: 803
My point was illustrative. You're right that they cannot literally make up just any law in violation of the charter of rights but they sure can make laws that infringe upon common sense. This law is an example of that.

Anyway... I think I'm done. Thanks for listening to my rants.

TTG
__________________


Join BMW Club of Canada! Click HERE

Best Engine, Bimmercruise '10 / 2nd - e30 Wild, Bimmercruise '10 / 1st - Best Cabrio, Trillium @ Tedfest '11 / 1st - e30 Wild, Bimmercruise '11 / 1st - e30 Wild, Bimmercruise '12 www.vertnation.com

Last edited by talltorontoguy; 11-11-2010 at 01:12 PM.
talltorontoguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Maxbimmer Copyright 2001 - 2015