J. Moss: Child support case hurting reputation

[Jmanley1116]

You know what, though, I see where AF is coming from.   It's not because she is the mother, but the fact of the matter is, that when the child lives with you, you by default have to make the majority of the sacrifices.  Couple that with the fact that his legitimate children have a certain standard of living of which this child has been deprived.  A lot of deadbeat dads complain because they are so afraid the child's mother will benefit minutely from what they pay, but SO DOGGONE WHAT!  If she lays her head in a nicer place so his child can live in a safe and comfortable place, then I say so be it.

If he was participating in the child's life and had like a joint custody thing going, then he would probably pay less, because his share would only be some calculation of the difference of his income over hers pro-rated for the portion of time she has the child, but since he chooses not to be a father to this child, and no one can force him to do that, then he can compensate his child AND the mother for having to raise him alone.

My argument is that she knew from the gate that she (or, the baby for that matter) had no chance to even be afforded the opportunity to enjoy the full benefit of living the same as his legitimate kids or their mother.  She was the jump-off...let's be honest.  She knew that she was the jump-off.  The man was married for 12-years...and with him being a celebrity she had to have known it. 

Again, taking care of the baby is priority one.  Make him pay what is due...just don't make it seem like he is responsible for taking care of Mom because she is in this "predicament".  There is no entitlement here on her behalf...only the child.

If I can be transparent here....I saw first hand what happens in these situations.  I was paying $900 a month in support to my daughter before I finally got custody of her.  Her mother didn't do anything for my daughter...I, to this day, have no idea what she was doing with all that money.  The system doesn't hold the mother accountable for checks and balances.  That is where the whole thing breaks down to me...the non-custodial parent just has to blindly give money...which is cool...if the custodial parent is doing what they are supposed to do. 

I just don't think that J.Moss is liable for the mother, and she shouldn't benefit for his stupidity.  His only responsibility is to that child.  And, if she takes $10 to get her nails done then that is absolutely wrong and constitutes stealing in my book.  If there are any overages that money should go in an account for the child.

[LaylaMonroe]

You know what, though, I see where AF is coming from.   It's not because she is the mother, but the fact of the matter is, that when the child lives with you, you by default have to make the majority of the sacrifices.  Couple that with the fact that his legitimate children have a certain standard of living of which this child has been deprived.  A lot of deadbeat dads complain because they are so afraid the child's mother will benefit minutely from what they pay, but SO DOGGONE WHAT!  If she lays her head in a nicer place so his child can live in a safe and comfortable place, then I say so be it.

If he was participating in the child's life and had like a joint custody thing going, then he would probably pay less, because his share would only be some calculation of the difference of his income over hers pro-rated for the portion of time she has the child, but since he chooses not to be a father to this child, and no one can force him to do that, then he can compensate his child AND the mother for having to raise him alone.

Unfortunately, custodial parents often take advantage of CSOs by spending the checks frivolously (especially those who get nice checks).  Stuff like that gives the custodial parents a bad rap.  I've heard plenty of stories (some of them from acquaintances) of baby mamas who DON'T WORK because they can afford to live off of the child support.  Or nothing they have is good enough.  They live in a decent home, but they want an even nicer home -- at the "baby daddy's" expense.  Or they have a reliable car, but they want a nicer car.  Or they quit their jobs to go back to school... all in the name of the child.  I want better for my child.  Yeah, right.  That, to me, is despicable.  Although the majority of custodial parents may not do this, too many do.  And sure, SOME custodial parents really do have pure motives and good intentions, many do NOT.

Another thing, it's not necessarily true that when you have joint custody you will probably pay less.  Although that SHOULD BE the case, and sometimes it is, a LOT of joint custodial parents are still paying support up the wazoo.  The bottom line is that the courts really screw this stuff up on the regular.  Especially here in Georgia.

But, I do agree with the gist of what you said.

I just wish folks - ALLLLL FOLKS - would just wait until they get married to start making babies. (And of course, only make babies with your spouse... lol).

[ApostolicFemale]

I don't agree with that part.  Child Support is supposed to take care of everything you mentioned.  Medical is always separate from financial support.  So, that is a given as well.  What many fail to realize is that "financial" responsibility is two sided.  I know this, because I went through this as well (not the infidelity part....just the child out of wedlock part). 

The father in this particular situation is responsible for the child and the child alone.  It is not his duty to provide for "quality or life" expenses for the mother...only in situations of divorce.  Don't fail to realize that she laid down with him as well...there was no rape here.  So, she knew that if she made this decision that she would have to "step up" as well.  So, we cannot hold him liable and not her simply because she is the mother. 

     

Ok now I see YOUR angle...you went through it.  You don't think the child's mother should be HELPED... I did say HELPED with expenses pertaining to the pregnancy.  That's because you don't care about the woman you were sleeping with.  You know good and well child support doesn't happen until AFTER the child is born cause most of these punks out here sleeping with a woman run, and then fight the case anyway.  In most situations, she's on her own though the whole thing.  If you think because you both EQUALLY decided to fornicate, and the COST OF PRENATAL is ALL ON HER... That's fine.  You sleep tight at night k? k.

It's not my business, but just remind yourself who pays for what, for that child.  Who is contributing more...who spends the most time with him.  Child support MAKES up for one of the parents being absent. Haven't you noticed that when there is JOINT CUSTODY...there is no child support being payed? 


Well EVERYONE oughta think about WHAT CHILD SUPPORT IS REALLY FOR.  It is to make up the difference.  It IS so that the child can share in the lifestyle they would have if the absent parent were the custodial parent.  It IS to make up for extra energy the custodial parent has to put in caring for the child alone, it IS to make sure the custodial parent has enough time available to EMOTIONALLY SUPPORT the child because daddy/momma doesn't care enough to see them everyday, or call to tell them they love at night before bed, like he does with the kids in his house...that's what child support is.  To HELP SUPPORT THE CHILD.  Custodial parents need HELP SUPPORTING THE CHILD.

[Jmanley1116]

Unfortunately, custodial parents often take advantage of CSOs by spending the checks frivolously (especially those who get nice checks).  Stuff like that gives the custodial parents a bad rap.  I've heard plenty of stories (some of them from acquaintances) of baby mamas who DON'T WORK because they can afford to live off of the child support.  Or nothing they have is good enough.  They live in a decent home, but they want an even nicer home -- at the "baby daddy's" expense.  Or they have a reliable car, but they want a nicer car.  Or they quit their jobs to go back to school... all in the name of the child.  I want better for my child.  Yeah, right.  That, to me, is despicable.  Although the majority of custodial parents may not do this, too many do.  And sure, SOME custodial parents really do have pure motives and good intentions, many do NOT.

Another thing, it's not necessarily true that when you have joint custody you will probably pay less.  Although that SHOULD BE the case, and sometimes it is, a LOT of joint custodial parents are still paying support up the wazoo.  The bottom line is that the courts really screw this stuff up on the regular.  Especially here in Georgia.

But, I do agree with the gist of what you said.

I just wish folks - ALLLLL FOLKS - would just wait until they get married to start making babies. (And of course, only make babies with your spouse... lol).

It's madddd funny, but at the same time kinda sad that you had to throw that in there.

[LaylaMonroe]

My argument is that she knew from the gate that she (or, the baby for that matter) had no chance to even be afforded the opportunity to enjoy the full benefit of living the same as his legitimate kids or their mother.  She was the jump-off...let's be honest.  She knew that she was the jump-off.  The man was married for 12-years...and with him being a celebrity she had to have known it. 

Again, taking care of the baby is priority one.  Make him pay what is due...just don't make it seem like he is responsible for taking care of Mom because she is in this "predicament".  There is no entitlement here on her behalf...only the child.

If I can be transparent here....I saw first hand what happens in these situations.  I was paying $900 a month in support to my daughter before I finally got custody of her.  Her mother didn't do anything for my daughter...I, to this day, have no idea what she was doing with all that money.  The system doesn't hold the mother accountable for checks and balances.  That is where the whole thing breaks down to me...the non-custodial parent just has to blindly give money...which is cool...if the custodial parent is doing what they are supposed to do. 

I just don't think that J.Moss is liable for the mother, and she shouldn't benefit for his stupidity.  His only responsibility is to that child.  And, if she takes $10 to get her nails done then that is absolutely wrong and constitutes stealing in my book.  If there are any overages that money should go in an account for the child.

I wholeheartedly agree.  (Although I think it's kinda hard to call the $10 nail thing stealing since she could possibly be paying for all kinds of things for the child beyond whatever the daddy is paying).

My cousin is going through the same thing with her husband's kids from his first marriage.  My cousin's husband pays $1600/month for two children.  Their mother doesn't work and lives in a 2 BR apartment which can't possibly cost more than $800/mo (if that much).  The children come to my cousin's house every weekend with no clothes, sometimes no coat.  They eat Ramen noodles and potato chips for dinner on a regular basis.  Sometimes, they get pork and beans.  Whenever they need anything at all, my cousin and her husband have to buy it.  They pay for the boy's haircut every week, and school supplies, clothes, toys, and everything.  When the kids take pictures at school, their dad has to pay for them.  When they go on class trips, their dad pays for it... When something goes wrong with her car (and I'm sure the car note comes from her child support since she has no job), she manipulates him into paying to fix it so she can have transportation "for the children."  She takes these little weekend trips all the time with her boyfriend, and the children's dad has to go all the way to pick them up every weekend (1 hour) -- she never drives here to drop them off.

Yet he sends $1600 every month.

[LaylaMonroe]

Ok now I see YOUR angle...you went through it.  You don't think the child's mother should be HELPED... I did say HELPED with expenses pertaining to the pregnancy.  That's because you don't care about the woman you were sleeping with.  You know good and well child support doesn't happen until AFTER the child is born cause most of these punks out here sleeping with a woman run, and then fight the case anyway.  In most situations, she's on her own though the whole thing.  If you think because you both EQUALLY decided to fornicate, and the COST OF PRENATAL is ALL ON HER... That's fine.  You sleep tight at night k? k.

It's not my business, but just remind yourself who pays for what, for that child.  Who is contributing more...who spends the most time with him.  Child support MAKES up for one of the parents being absent. Haven't you noticed that when there is JOINT CUSTODY...there is no child support being payed?  


Well EVERYONE oughta think about WHAT CHILD SUPPORT IS REALLY FOR.  It is to make up the difference.  It IS so that the child can share in the lifestyle they would have if the absent parent were the custodial parent.  It IS to make up for extra energy the custodial parent has to put in caring for the child alone, it IS to make sure the custodial parent has enough time available to EMOTIONALLY SUPPORT the child because daddy/momma doesn't care enough to see them everyday, or call to tell them they love at night before bed, like he does with the kids in his house...that's what child support is.  To HELP SUPPORT THE CHILD.  Custodial parents need HELP SUPPORTING THE CHILD.

1. Re: the part in bold/itals, who told you that?  That's erroneous information.

2. Calm down a bit, sis. You really sound angry, as opposed to passionate.  And with your choice of words it sounds more like you're trying to antagonize than debate.  I'm not coming at you, just trying to help. Take a step back and re-read your stuff.  And for goodness' sake, exhale! LOL!

[sjonathan02]

*wonders if AF checks and confirms whether or not folks are ACTUALLY married before they send her their lingerie money* 





*runs outta thread*

[ArcaneValor]

I think the ONLY way she should benefit is if J moved them into a nice neighborhood and covered most of the rent.

Nothing beyond that.

J SHOULD cover everything.  Private school, daycare, clothes, food, college, you name it.  That's what I would do.

She shouldn't receive "compensation".  "Compensation" is a payment.  She shouldn't be paid for taking care of their child IF he covers all of the child's expenses.  They should share the load, and if takes care of ALL of the child's expenses then he's doing his part.

And, if she takes $10 to get her nails done then that is absolutely wrong and constitutes stealing in my book.  If there are any overages that money should go in an account for the child.

The first time I read this I thought "I don't know about this".

But after thinking about it you're completely right.

Child Support is exactly that: CHILD support.  If the court has ordered J Moss to pay CHILD support, then she shouldn't take one penny of that money for herself.

Of course we know that that's not how it works.  She'll take that money and it will mix with her money.  The money will go to THEM.  No worries though.  I wouldn't stress that too much.


I truly don't understand knowing that you have a child (he had a paternity test) and still not being their for your child.

I'm not talking financially now.

He didn't see his son on Christmas?  He hasn't been spending time with the boy?  How?  How can you proclaim to be a Christian Man and decide you're not going to be a father to your own son?


Lakisha Hughes and J Moss never lived together, she told the court. Hughes also said Moss offered to pay abortion expenses but never provided any of the medical care. He never visited the child, but had given her "a total of $450 for Christion", she wrote.

 

[MissMusic04]

Unfortunately, custodial parents often take advantage of CSOs by spending the checks frivolously (especially those who get nice checks).  Stuff like that gives the custodial parents a bad rap.  I've heard plenty of stories (some of them from acquaintances) of baby mamas who DON'T WORK because they can afford to live off of the child support.  Or nothing they have is good enough.  They live in a decent home, but they want an even nicer home -- at the "baby daddy's" expense.  Or they have a reliable car, but they want a nicer car.  Or they quit their jobs to go back to school... all in the name of the child.  I want better for my child.  Yeah, right.  That, to me, is despicable.  Although the majority of custodial parents may not do this, too many do.  And sure, SOME custodial parents really do have pure motives and good intentions, many do NOT.

Another thing, it's not necessarily true that when you have joint custody you will probably pay less.  Although that SHOULD BE the case, and sometimes it is, a LOT of joint custodial parents are still paying support up the wazoo.  The bottom line is that the courts really screw this stuff up on the regular.  Especially here in Georgia.

But, I do agree with the gist of what you said.

I just wish folks - ALLLLL FOLKS - would just wait until they get married to start making babies. (And of course, only make babies with your spouse... lol).

BOTTOM LINE!!! That's it! It can all be avoided IF

ALLLLL FOLKS - would just wait until they get married to start making babies. (And of course, only make babies with your spouse... lol)

[Jmanley1116]

Ok now I see YOUR angle...you went through it.  You don't think the child's mother should be HELPED... I did say HELPED with expenses pertaining to the pregnancy.  That's because you don't care about the woman you were sleeping with.  You know good and well child support doesn't happen until AFTER the child is born cause most of these punks out here sleeping with a woman run, and then fight the case anyway.  In most situations, she's on her own though the whole thing.  If you think because you both EQUALLY decided to fornicate, and the COST OF PRENATAL is ALL ON HER... That's fine.  You sleep tight at night k? k.

It's not my business, but just remind yourself who pays for what, for that child.  Who is contributing more...who spends the most time with him.  Child support MAKES up for one of the parents being absent. Haven't you noticed that when there is JOINT CUSTODY...there is no child support being payed? 


Well EVERYONE oughta think about WHAT CHILD SUPPORT IS REALLY FOR.  It is to make up the difference.  It IS so that the child can share in the lifestyle they would have if the absent parent were the custodial parent.  It IS to make up for extra energy the custodial parent has to put in caring for the child alone, it IS to make sure the custodial parent has enough time available to EMOTIONALLY SUPPORT the child because daddy/momma doesn't care enough to see them everyday, or call to tell them they love at night before bed, like he does with the kids in his house...that's what child support is.  To HELP SUPPORT THE CHILD.  Custodial parents need HELP SUPPORTING THE CHILD.

You sound like you're mad at me or something.  Are you lashing out at me or past experience?  I sleep well because my daughter now live's with me AND I AM NOT GETTING A DIME FROM HER MOTHER...no medical...no money.  And, her mother divorced her husband with whom she had two kids with and those kids are living with their father as well.  She is living single in Texas...by herself. 

If anybody has a right to be upset and bitter...it's me.  But God know's and He cares and that's why things worked out the way they did.  Money doesn't replace a parent...never did...never will.  Money is not to "make up a difference".  Support is just that...support.  A Parent cannot be replaced with money.  I don't even understand why you offered that up. 

Anyway...I hope that any of you on this board who is NOT married take this thread as a PSA about pre-marital sex.  Don't do it.  Save yourself for marriage.  And, when you get to be married SAVE YOURSELF FOR MARRIAGE!!!  J.Moss could easily be paying support for three children right now.  His wife is apparently a saint.

[LaylaMonroe]

I think the ONLY way she should benefit is if J moved them into a nice neighborhood and covered most of the rent.

Nothing beyond that.

J SHOULD cover everything.  Private school, daycare, clothes, food, college, you name it.  That's what I would do.

She shouldn't receive "compensation".  "Compensation" is a payment.  She shouldn't be paid for taking care of their child IF he covers all of the child's expenses.  They should share the load, and if takes care of ALL of the child's expenses then he's doing his part.

The first time I read this I thought "I don't know about this".

But after thinking about it you're completely right.

Child Support is exactly that: CHILD support.  If the court has ordered J Moss to pay CHILD support, then she shouldn't take one penny of that money for herself.

Of course we know that that's not how it works.  She'll take that money and it will mix with her money.  The money will go to THEM.  No worries though.  I wouldn't stress that too much.


I truly don't understand knowing that you have a child (he had a paternity test) and still not being their for your child.

I'm not talking financially now.

He didn't see his son on Christmas?  He hasn't been spending time with the boy?  How?  How can you proclaim to be a Christian Man and decide you're not going to be a father to your own son?


Lakisha Hughes and J Moss never lived together, she told the court. Hughes also said Moss offered to pay abortion expenses but never provided any of the medical care. He never visited the child, but had given her "a total of $450 for Christion", she wrote.

 

1. He should cover for Ms. Hughes' child what he covers for his other children.  If they aren't in private school, then there's no reason he should cover private school for that one.  I think you were just being hypothetical, but I wanted to throw that in there just in case.

2. Be careful of taking news articles at face value.  I'm not taking anyone's side, but we all know that the media doesn't always report everything factually.  All of that stuff is hearsay.  We don't know if it's true, we just know what SHE said.  

3. I look at the $10 nail thing like this: you take a pack of M&Ms and put it in a bowl.  I take a pack and put it in the same bowl.  I tell you to take your green ones out to give to a kid for a snack.  Who knows which green ones are yours and which are mine?  When it comes to money in such a small amount, it's really hard to tell what's wrong and what's not.  Consider that he could be paying $1000/mo. and she's also providing $1000/mo.  She may end up spending $1010 of her money on the child for whatever reason, and then taking $10 out of the check he sends to get her nails done.  I mean... I just think $10 is too small an amount to judge fairly - UNLESS the custodial parent is doing some line-by-line accounting.

And don't get me started on the custodial parents who have other children from another man (or other men).  That's an accounting nightmare.  You take the kids out for ice cream and have to spend $2.00 from the CS check for Johnny, and $6 from the other account for the other 3 kids... or you take them on a family trip... just an accounting nightmare.

I think when it comes to that kind of stuff, you just have to have integrity and ensure that you are taking good care of your child.  That's all most non-custodial parents want anyway: to know that their money is going toward taking good care of their children.  If you do that, most NCPs won't trip over $10 here or $5 there.

[MissMusic04]

You sound like you're mad at me or something.  Are you lashing out at me or past experience?  I sleep well because my daughter now live's with me AND I AM NOT GETTING A DIME FROM HER MOTHER...no medical...no money.  And, her mother divorced her husband with whom she had two kids with and those kids are living with their father as well.  She is living single in Texas...by herself. 

If anybody has a right to be upset and bitter...it's me.  But God know's and He cares and that's why things worked out the way they did.  Money doesn't replace a parent...never did...never will.  Money is not to "make up a difference".  Support is just that...support.  A Parent cannot be replaced with money.  I don't even understand why you offered that up. 

Anyway...I hope that any of you on this board who is NOT married take this thread as a PSA about pre-marital sex.  Don't do it.  Save yourself for marriage.  And, when you get to be married SAVE YOURSELF FOR MARRIAGE!!!  J.Moss could easily be paying support for three children right now.  His wife is apparently a saint.

AMEN! Best advice on the the whole thread!

[sjonathan02]

I just wanna thank God for keepin' me while I was out there until marriage.


All of this just reads way too much. I don't know how I'd actually live through it. 

[csedwards2]

I just wanna thank God for keepin' me while I was out there until marriage.

MMhmm

[Fenix]

I just wanna thank God for keepin' me while I was out there until marriage.

So that WAS you?

[ApostolicFemale]

You sound like you're mad at me or something.  Are you lashing out at me or past experience?  I sleep well because my daughter now live's with me AND I AM NOT GETTING A DIME FROM HER MOTHER...no medical...no money.  And, her mother divorced her husband with whom she had two kids with and those kids are living with their father as well.  She is living single in Texas...by herself. 

If anybody has a right to be upset and bitter...it's me.  But God know's and He cares and that's why things worked out the way they did.  Money doesn't replace a parent...never did...never will.  Money is not to "make up a difference".  Support is just that...support.  A Parent cannot be replaced with money.  I don't even understand why you offered that up. 

Anyway...I hope that any of you on this board who is NOT married take this thread as a PSA about pre-marital sex.  Don't do it.  Save yourself for marriage.  And, when you get to be married SAVE YOURSELF FOR MARRIAGE!!!  J.Moss could easily be paying support for three children right now.  His wife is apparently a saint.

Nah I aint mad at you.  You can say what you want.  Angry or not, I have read child support laws that include the purpose of the support.  Those purposes include not leaving the whole burden on the cusodial parent. Why should she have to spend ALL her money to maintain a household for the child, and not be able to get her hair done once in a while, why the guy sure doesn't cut his hair at home...?  It's basically 'benevolence'...or something like that.

...Mr Manley, if you don't get support FROM that woman, that's fine too.  Obviously this woman is a deadbeat herself.

Bottom line..."JMoss" has shown himself to be a punk.  If you mistreat your child, AND the child's mother/father while they are taking care of the child, you're hurting the child.  A milstone should be tied around your neck, and you should be thrown into the sea.  Im done with this. 

JMoss - musician, singer, songwriter, producer, husband, cheater, liar, deadbeat, father, abomination.

[ArcaneValor]

1. He should cover for Ms. Hughes' child what he covers for his other children.  If they aren't in private school, then there's no reason he should cover private school for that one.  I think you were just being hypothetical, but I wanted to throw that in there just in case.

2. Be careful of taking news articles at face value.  I'm not taking anyone's side, but we all know that the media doesn't always report everything factually.  All of that stuff is hearsay.  We don't know if it's true, we just know what SHE said.  

3. I look at the $10 nail thing like this: you take a pack of M&Ms and put it in a bowl.  I take a pack and put it in the same bowl.  I tell you to take your green ones out to give to a kid for a snack.  Who knows which green ones are yours and which are mine?  When it comes to money in such a small amount, it's really hard to tell what's wrong and what's not.  Consider that he could be paying $1000/mo. and she's also providing $1000/mo.  She may end up spending $1010 of her money on the child for whatever reason, and then taking $10 out of the check he sends to get her nails done.  I mean... I just think $10 is too small an amount to judge fairly - UNLESS the custodial parent is doing some line-by-line accounting.

And don't get me started on the custodial parents who have other children from another man (or other men).  That's an accounting nightmare.  You take the kids out for ice cream and have to spend $2.00 from the CS check for Johnny, and $6 from the other account for the other 3 kids... or you take them on a family trip... just an accounting nightmare.

I think when it comes to that kind of stuff, you just have to have integrity and ensure that you are taking good care of your child.  That's all most non-custodial parents want anyway: to know that their money is going toward taking good care of their children.  If you do that, most NCPs won't trip over $10 here or $5 there.

1.)I was saying what he should do.  If he's making 50 (or even 20) grand a month, his children should be in the best schools.  Of course that shouldn't be court-ordered.  That's just me though.

2.)This entire thread is based off of the articles.    
...but I see what you're saying.

3.)And this is where you lost me.

The M&M's analogy doesn't fly.  The M&M's should be put in separate bowls.   

How hard is it to cash the check, then put the money in an account for the boy?

When you withdraw the money, put it in an envelope with his name on it so you know it's his.  It can be done if you WANT to.

If the man has to follow the ruling of the court, then the woman should follow the ruling.  CHILD support is just that!

[Brittsings87]

**peeks in, shakes head, and walks back out**

[MissMusic04]

JMoss - musician, singer, songwriter, producer, husband, cheater, liar, deadbeat, father, abomination.

....Until he repents, does what's right and GOD forgives him 

[ArcaneValor]

....Until he repents, does what's right and GOD forgives him 

And this is what LaRue was trying to say.  Agreed.