Let Me Educate You: Child Support and Custody in Alabama

There is physical custody and legal custody.  Alabama defaults to joint legal custody (both parents must be involved in decisions of school, education, major medical) unless there is some reason that the parents cannot communicate about these issues.

Physical custody in Alabama is decided on a 'Best Interests of the Child' standard.  That means that the person that attends parent-teacher conferences, takes the child to the doctor/dentist, helps the child with their daily activities (getting up, dressed, to school, etc) is likely to be the parent to receive primary physical custody.  In our society, it is usually Mom that does these activities.  If more Dads were willing to skip a day of work to take care of these things, more Dads would get custody.

In an unmarried situation, it is very likely that the parent having custody is going to be Mom.  That's because there's a whole bunch of folks around when Mom delivers the child.  One would hope that babies aren't created in a group setting.  By the time many custody/support cases get to court, Mom is already the primary caregiver.  Mom is not allowed to list a legal father unless she is married to him at the time of the birth.  Personally, I think that a DNA test should be required before ANY father is listed.

Alabama does not have a parenting (aka visitation) plan coded in law, it is up to the parties in a child custody case to work out who gets the child when.  There are a few judges that have 'standard' visitation plans, but it is not statewide.
http://alisondb.legislature.state.al.us/acas/CodeOfAlabama/1975/128972.htm

On to Child Support:
Treat your checking account like a swimming pool. Every month, you add 500 gallons of water from child support. You add another 1000 gallons from your job. Maybe you have a birthday and get another 50 gallons for gifts.

Now, you take 300 gallons out to pay your rent. You take 200 gallons out for food. Another 200 gallons for medical care.

How in the world would you be expected to know that the gallons you took out for food, clothing, etc was the same as the money that went in for child care? Obviously, you can't. Treat your checking account like a swimming pool. Every month, you add 500 gallons of water from child support. You add another 1000 gallons from your job. Maybe you have a birthday and get another 50 gallons for gifts.

Now, you take 300 gallons out to pay your rent. You take 200 gallons out for food. Another 200 gallons for medical care.

How in the world would you be expected to know that the gallons you took out for food, clothing, etc was the same as the money that went in for child care? Obviously, you can't.

*******************************************
Alabama is a shared income model when determining Child Support. The Custodial Parent's and the Non-Custodial Parent's incomes are taken as a whole.  A percentage of that is determined to be the amount of Child Support.

http://www.alacourt.gov/ChildSupportObligations.aspx

And trust me, one can't live on Child Support any more than one can live on Unemployment in Alabama.

Let's look at expenses for a family of two (parent/child).
House:                      $800
Utilities:                  $400
TV:                          $75
Groceries/Sundries:        $ 500
Total:                     $1775

Half that amount is $887.50.  I've not included school supplies, clothing, activities, gas, insurance or cell phones.  If both parents are making $40k/year, Child Support in Alabama will run about $343 a month.

And one cannot DEPEND on child support.  It's considered a happy bonus.

A Voting Primer - Reason Over Emotion

I've seen many liberal friends post about how this candidate is Pro-Something and that makes them a bad person that shouldn't be allowed to hold public office, much less even consider running for dog catcher.  It's time to take a step back and consider these ideas from a rational standpoint.

Presidents and Vice Presidents don't introduce ANY legislation in Congress.  The President submits a budget, he/she can talk a Congressional leader/member into writing and introducing legislation into Congress, but The President cannot.  The Vice President cannot.

The Federal Government is responsible for spending OUR money (using some common sense would be nice), regulating commerce between states and defending our borders.    They're not Constitutionally responsible for much else.  So let's not ask them to do much more than that.  Let those things fall back to the states which are more aware of what needs to be done locally.

The State Legislature is where the Pro-Something really matters.  These are the people who can pass those laws that are so controversial.  The State Level is going to be more responsive and accessible to citizens. 

Suspend emotion and vote with reason.  Do you like your money going to fund something overseas, or would you rather spend that money yourself?   If companies are allowed to keep more of their money, would that not benefit you?  That money will be spent somewhere.  Who knows more about what's going on locally?  Somebody who lives in the community or someone who lives 600 miles away? 

Vote on the economy in Federal elections.

Vote on Pro-Something in State elections. 

This Debate Again....

I'm pro-choice (and I'm not going to argue with anyone about it-I'm not changing my mind), but I also support these folks.

Might need to head up to the Cullman store and see what they've got.

Hobby shop chain faces backlash for stance against ObamaCare 

Oklahoma-based Hobby Lobby filed the suit with the U.S. District court, alleging that the Health and Human services mandate should not be enforced upon them because it is unconstitutional but critics are responding, saying that the company is denying basic human rights to its employees.

Young Yankee Friend You support people who don't believe in science and want to be counted as a "religious employer" just because the company owner goes to a whacko church?

Kat The Geekess How is a conservative Baptist church 'wacko'? They're free to practice their religion in this country, like you are, like I am, like everybody that wants to pray before a HS football game. And like Chick-Fil-A, their employees know the score when they go to work there.


Teacher Friend They are free to believe whatever they want. They are not free to impose their beliefs on anyone, including their employees and their private medical decisions.


If that is offensive to them, perhaps they should close their for-profit business, and do volunteer work.


Young Yankee Friend They do not actually have the right to impose their beliefs on their employees, that's the whole point of the law. And they're whacko because they don't believe in science and they think birth control pills cause abortions.

Kat The Geekess The employees who work there know the corporate culture. Nobody is holding a gun to their heads to make them work there. I bet those working there don't have a BIT of problem with the way the company is run.


From the article:
"The company does not object to providing coverage that includes birth control pills, but refuses to provide or pay for two specific abortion-inducing drugs such as the so-called "morning after" pill, because Green's "most deeply held religious belief" is that life beginning at conception, the family said in a statement released through its attorneys."

So, if an employee wants an abortion, they pay for it themselves. I've had many health insurance policies through employers that wouldn't pay for termination of pregnancy.

Kat The Geekess How are they imposing their beliefs? When I worked at the hospital, there was scheduled prayer over the intercom every day. When I was in HS, one of the students broadcast a prayer over the intercom every day-my only complaint was the timing (which he graciously changed). There was prayer before every football game, every band and theatre performance. I bowed my head with the rest, but my thoughts are my own.

The First Amendment says that we have freedom of religion and the FREE expression thereof and Congress can't take that away. And if you think they should be shut down, then are you going to shut down all the Christian bookstores that are out there? I'm willing to bet that they have daily prayer.

Teacher Friend They are selective about their employees and outspoken about their beliefs and outspoken about their corporate culture.

If they are concerned that one of their Conservative Christian employees may find herself in the position that the morning after pill may be her only option, they should look into solving THAT problem.

Minimum wage, benefits to cover family members being prohibitively expensive...

And they may want to read up on what the morning after pill *actually* does. Because it isn't an abortion pill.

I -DON'T- think they should be shut down. I -NEVER- said that. But they are running a profitable business in the United States. They FREE to EXPRESS whatever they damn well want. But they cannot IMPOSE or FORCE it on anyone.

I said that if they wish to operate only in the bubble of their beliefs and avoid conflicts of having a business in the public sector then they may CHOOSE to drop out.

That's a choice that many homeschoolers make.

Kat The Geekess So let the employee pay for it out of her funds. Insurance didn't cover The Teen's braces. I paid for them. Should the Feds have forced the insurance to cover those braces?

I -DON'T- think they should be shut down. I -NEVER- said that. But they are running >a profitable business in the United States. They FREE to EXPRESS whatever they damn well want. But they cannot IMPOSE or FORCE it on anyone.

And again, how are they imposing or forcing it?

Teacher Friend It is basic medical coverage, not dental. Apples/Oranges.

They may not meddle in a decision that is only between a woman and her doctor. By picking and choosing which medical treatments they'll allow their employees to access, they are hoping to impose their beliefs and misinformation about how that pill works.

They have a right to challenge the law. And they should lose.

Kat The Geekess They are not meddling. At all. But I don't see why they should be responsible for paying for it. No more than I see why a Catholic institution should be required to pay for such services. If you don't like the insurance benefits/coverage the employer provides, you are always free to pay for your own insurance.


Teacher Friend On the other hand, I don't really get the boycott.

I understand the Chick-fil-a boycott.

It wasn't just their beliefs, they were funneling millions of dollars into, what *I* consider a hate group. I won't split hairs about whether the owners are hateful themselves. I choose to not spend my money where it will be transferred over to a hate group.

But these Hobby Lobby folk are peacefully challenging a law. Which they have every right to do. How does my buying a model airplane kit effect that? Not at all.


Teacher Friend They offer a benefit though Whatever Insurance. That is an earned benefit of that employee. They WOULDN'T be paying for it. Nobody is asking them to give their employes gift certificates to Abortions-R-Us. But they can't meddle in their medical decisions.

It is NO DIFFERENT than if an employee were to use their Hobby Lobby salary to pay out of pocket for the morning after pill. Except that at minimum wage, there's a good chance they wouldn't have the money in time.


Kat The Geekess A company paying for the insurance of the employees is not an "earned" benefit, it's a really nice perk. I've worked places where I had to pay the total cost of my insurance. I've also worked for companies that 'self-insured'. I've worked for companies that covered the entire cost of my insurance and those that I split the cost of the insurance. The only place I've worked where I was required to have insurance was when I was employed by the hospital.


"Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. said Monday that the company is bumping up the minimum wage to $13 per hour for full-time hourly employees and $9 per hour for part-time hourly employees."
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/news/2012/04/16/hobby-lobby-increasing-the-minimum-pay.html



Teacher Friend Cookies in the lounge are a perk.

Health insurance is an *earned* benefit, not a treat the employer gives out of the kindness of their heart and out of the employer's pocket. It makes the competitive in hiring the conservative family types they desire.


"Obamacare" requires basic medical coverage for companies meeting a minimum size. Who gets to define what basic is? Not employers.



I think their position on the morning after pill is grossly misinformed, but I don't think it's extreme. I'm sorry to apply the slippery slope, but where is the line for employers meddling in medical decisions? Can they choose to not cover contraceptives all together? What about refusing to cover treatment for an STD? After all, an STD is a natural consequence of promiscuity given by God. Right?


Nope. Sorry. Employers should not get to define what is basic medical care if they wish to operate in the public sector. And with good reason.


Young Yankee Friend If it's a self-insured plan, they may technically be paying for it. Most employers of any decent size self-insure these days. But the morning after pill does NOT cause abortions, so there is no scientific basis for their belief. And at least in what I read, they were considering regular BC pills in that same category too. They can challenge the law if they want, I don't believe they will be successful, but I don't support their desire to control the reproductive choices of their employees. I don't even think bonafide religious employers should be able to do this, though I understand the law does allow it. The law says (at this time), you don't have to offer medical insurance, but if you do, you can't exclude coverage for birth control. Eventually, I think the law will require them to offer it. But the idea is that the burden to pay for BC should not be shifted back to the woman who pays her premiums for her insurance, or who works the hours required if the premiums are fully paid by the employer, it should be covered like every other medical treatment that she chooses to get. Women should have access to birth control if they want it, because the cost to society when women can't afford it is much higher.


Kat The Geekess Please explain how they are meddling. If a woman wants the Oh-No! pill, then she can pay for it. Her having to pay for it out-of-pocket is not the company infringing on her rights. The company has no say on how she spends her money.


Kat The Geekess You keep saying this. You do realize what 'public sector' means, right?

"The public sector, sometimes referred to as the state sector or the government sector, is a part of the state that deals with either the production, ownership, sale, provision, delivery and allocation of goods and services by and for the government or its citizens, whether national, regional or local/municipal."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_sector


Last time I checked, this company was not owned or operated by the government. That makes them 'private sector'.

"In economics, the private sector is that part of the economy, sometimes referred to as the citizen sector, which is run by private individuals or groups, usually as a means of enterprise for profit, and is not controlled by the state. By contrast, enterprises that are part of the state are part of the public sector; private, non-profit organizations are regarded as part of the voluntary sector."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_sector





Teacher Friend Doh! Damnit. You're right. I am using the wrong term.



The are not a non-profit. They conduct business with and receive money from the general public. They're not enclosed on a Conservative Christian only island where medical science does not exist.



Their employees, male and female, pay premiums for health insurance. They should be able to use it as they and their medical professionals see fit.


Kat The Geekess Read your health insurance COB. You'll see what isn't covered and what is. You'd be surprised. If it's not covered, you pay out-of-pocket. Some plans don't cover vision. Some don't cover dental. Some don't cover mental health-I've not seen any that have any kind of parity with physical health vs mental health coverage. But if your insurance doesn't cover it, then you buy a supplemental policy. You find other insurance elsewhere. Then you're NOT dependent on what insurance plan your employer offers. The employer doesn't matter then, because you are paying for the plan you want. Like my auto insurance; I have full comprehensive on one vehicle and liability only on the other. If I purchase my own health insurance, I can decide what kind of coverage I need, not what the employer offers in its plan.


As far as this: "The are not a non-profit. They conduct business with and receive money from the general public."



That's what having a business is all about. Is it any of the PUBLIC's business how a business owner spends HIS money?