Can children have lifestyles? The reason I ask is because I just heard that Karin Stanford is suing Jesse Jackson for additional child support & visitation rights.
Cough.
Let me think about this for a moment… Jackson is currently (so he says) paying her $3,000 a month in child support, and she doesn’t already have visitation rights? How much money does she need considering Jackson is the one taking care of the child?
Now, considering that the commercial news snippet I just heard on the CNN politics channel is in error, and that the mother does already have the majority of visitation rights to the child (which seems more likely to me since she is after all, the mother), why isn’t $3000 a month enough to raise a child? Methinks she just wants to compensate for her own laziness or suppliment her own personal income level.
Getting back to the lifestyle question: Divorcées of wealthy men often sue for alimony in order that they may continue to live “in the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed”. Can this argument be used to win child support? I realize that raising children costs money, but $36,000 a year? On top of what the mother already makes? Let’s err in the worst way and assume she has only a minimum wage job. So she makes $10,712 a year. Add that to the $36,000 in child support she already gets (with apparently no visitation rights) and I’m sure you can see how she is just barely scraping by :rolleyes:
So whaddays say, people? Is $3,000 a month enough child support for a child you hardly even see?
[The title of this thread was edited because it was much too harsh for IMHO, IMHO]
I think they’re peas in a pod. She’s no more of a “slut” than he is. (Well, the male equivalent of “slut”.) What? Are we supposed to feel sorry for Jackson? I sure don’t.
First let me say thanks to yosemitebabe for capturing the original thread title before it was emasculated by the mod. Secondly:
Nope. Made it that way on purpose in the interest of maintaining parallelism. Had the Stanfor/Jackson situation been reversed, I would have said “women often sue for alimony…” and it would not have made the converse any less true.
Arden Ranger wins the award for best supporting SDMB poster actually speaking to the intent of the OP rather than finding the uncrossed t’s and undotted i’s in it.
Not that it wasn’t faulty in the eyes of some, granted. Maybe it should have been a GQ: Can a parent be sued for massive amounts of child support above & beyond the obvious needs of the child? Maybe this shoulda been in the Pit, so I could have kept “slut mistress hoochie-mamma” in the thread title.
Maybe I should go back to bed. Ah yes… that’s the ticket!
Hypothetical situation - Man is loaded. He gets married, his wife does not earn an income. They have three kids. Those kids are given private tutors, private schools, vacations to exotic locales, singing/dancing/sports lessons, ponies for their 7th, 9th, and 11th birthdays, etc, etc. They expect cars when they turn 16. Of course, they live in a mansion with servants and maids and gardeners, etc.
He then cheats on his wife, and his lower middle class mistress gets pregnant. So, does kid number four get enough to live, or does he get the same benefits as kids one, two, and three?
I’ll admit that I don’t know much about the situation. I keep hearing references to the mistress as being this little hoochie mama whore. Why is she so terrible?
I believe its because she slept with a man she knew was married. Not that HE’S blameless, either. I concur with others who say they’re BOTH whores. Neither one had respect for Jackson’s marriage or familial obligation, and deserve all the contempt that has been thrown their way. Especially when you consider Jackson’s position as a preacher. As far as I’m concerned, the man is permanently discredited.
And hey, Arden Ranger, I know what you mean. My widowed and divorced mother raised her family of three without ever making more than half what Mr. Jackson’s concubine is getting for that one kid. And mom even had to earn it all herself.