Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jbe who wrote (46819)	7/24/1999 1:20:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

... and I am certain the original vision for America was not to create a government synonymous with "Big Daddy"!

To: jbe who wrote (46819)	7/24/1999 1:42:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 108807

How many of these "parents" actually stopped paying child support because the "ex" refused to let them play any role in their childrens' lives, except that of cash cow? In Washington, and I believe in most states, there is a great disconnect between money and visitation. Even if you are refused access to the kids, you still legally owe the money. If you believe that the receiving parent really does use the funds for the kids benefit, this is reasonable -- why should the kids go hungry because their custodial parent hates the noncustodial parent? But in reality, you're right -- it is a horrible travesty.