Two Sides to Every Story

After reading everyone's comments in this post, I will conceed "there are" two sides to every story. On one hand, you have dads who run away from their responsibilities. On the other, you have women who use child support for their own benefit. The fact of the matter is that the laws are there to protect the kids. Like it or not (I don't), the state will make you pay support to the mother regardless how it's being used.

Read the family code and it states it's "presumed" child support will be used in the interests of the child. They didn't word it that way on accident. Understand, the system has no mechanism in place to validate any expenditure, nor will they. A simple answer is to force the custodial parent to produce a budget statement that outlines the needs of the child. Ever fill out a credit application, If the non-custodial parent has the means to pay it, then I'm all for it. The amount should not exceed 20% though. This will force some accountability and hopefully keep the parents from being at odds with each other.

My story: My ex used the AG (Victoria, TX) and took me back to court after a heated argument we had. She even threatened to do so which indicates a form of harassment. Anyhow, the AG could care less about that. The AG filed suit against me and I appeared in court on 2 Jan. Thinks they don't represent the custodial parent (indirectly)?

What they would not do is provide me with a computation sheet indicating how 20% of my income would be calculated. The easy answer is gross income minus taxes and healthcare (for the child). The truth is that they will take all your earning and find the way to maximize 20%. Let me explain:

When asking for your pay records, they want to see the last two years. Why? If you made more money last year than the current year, they will add it altogether and then divide the amount to come up with an average. If you made more this year, then that's the amount they will use. Again, it's not mentioned in the law this way for a reason. If you received any bonuses or other perks, they will look at total income earned and then divide the amount to come up with an average. In my case, they claimed that my gross monthly pay was $9088.00 when in fact is $675.00 less. It's obvious why they wouldn't provide me a copy of the computation sheet until it was presented in court. Get the picture?

So yes, it is about the money. My ex was awarded $1202.00 a month for one child and they let her keep the adoption subsidy of $500.00 a month too. Also, they make me pay healthcare even though she already has it through the state as an adoption subsidy.

If there's anyone out there who can argue in favor of the custodial parent, I would like to hear it. There's no way in HELL this woman can or will use that amount of money on my daughter, and the AG says "she don't have too".