Missouri child-support law change touches many issues

Sep 8, 2007 Full story: Kansas City Star 4,296

“This is not in the best interest of Missouri's children”

Children, according to popular notion, don't buy Johnnie Walker Red or engage enemy combatants in Iraq.

So why should parents be required to pay child support for someone old enough to do either?

A Missouri lawmaker from Belton doesn't think they should. Rep. Brian Baker pushed for change, and last week a new state law dropped the maximum age for child support from 22 to 21. It also set new academic standards for students whose parents receive child support.

Baker, a Republican, had wanted the limit to fall to 18, because that is when people first can vote. It is also the age at which most states, including Kansas, draw the line for child support. Read more

Full Story
JohnEDoe

United States

#3904 Mar 1, 2010
Kyle DeFrain wrote:
My journey with the Missouri Division of Child Support started in 1985 after I was promised by a court of law that my children would be taken care of with an order of child support. It was an experience that left a bitter taste in my mouth, and I will take to my grave. I was treated like a diseased leper by anyone that handled my case. It was an experience that left me humbled beyond words. It took me about 5 years to realize that the child support offices had no intention of helping my children. I took it upon myself to go back to school to become self sufficient and raise my children the way they deserved to be raised without want of the simple things like coats, hats and shoes. The funniest thing about all of this is I recieved a letter form the Warrensburg office,(where my case was transferred??????) asking me if I knew where my ex-husband was. 21 years and they are asking for my help. I had to laugh. I sent them a letter back asking that they leave me alone, and never contact me again. Do it yourselves people. It was worth it for me. One of my children is now getting ready to attend law school. People need and deserve good representation for many matters, and we all deserve to be treated with respect.
I am not a NCP nor do I pay any child support. I have been married for 38 years to a wonderful wife who gave me two great children. I could not afford to send my children through college after High School. I wish I could have if they wanted college. Both of my children grew up with respect and self tought themselves. I believe that if they would have worked very hard if they wanted college and hard work never hurt anyone.
I am sorry the State of Missouri did not give you any help in your case. Now let me ask you this do you believe a young adult should be emancipated at the age of 18? The reason I am asking is because an 18 year old can do almost anything they want, other then drink alcohol. The more I thought about what I said in post #3899, I'm begaining to realize at 18 years of age I consider an adult. They might not always make the right choices in life, but some older adults do the same thing. I think they should be emancipated.
JohnEDoe

United States

#3905 Mar 1, 2010
well wrote:
<quoted text>
you must be the craziest person alive or dont have children. by the time these jokers (man or woman) make a payment you have already spent more then they can ever send. pay when you are suppose and stop quitting jobs when child support find you and when they get 18 maybe you can stop paying. i have two sons in their 30s and still get support, AND I WANT IT BLAH with your comments and whatever i do with it so what, they didnt do without they needed are wanted sometime when they were children, and why should we care about the absent parent, when more then likely this was a choice they made to be absent. you better not send me a voucher.
I have to apologise, but I couldn't understand a thing you were talking about or the point you were trying to make.
Joe

Dayton, OH

#3906 Mar 1, 2010
Yes!!! I want emancipation at the age of 18 just like non divorced parents have it now as well as social security not paying past the age of 18.
Paying support past the age of 18 is the double standard i was talking about. I don't see how this could possibly be legal and yet it is.
It's extortion plain and simple and i can't believe they're getting away with it.
This is what drives in the final wedge and destroys the relationship between the NCP and their kids.
JohnEDoe

United States

#3907 Mar 1, 2010
Joe wrote:
Yes!!! I want emancipation at the age of 18 just like non divorced parents have it now as well as social security not paying past the age of 18.
Paying support past the age of 18 is the double standard i was talking about. I don't see how this could possibly be legal and yet it is.
It's extortion plain and simple and i can't believe they're getting away with it.
This is what drives in the final wedge and destroys the relationship between the NCP and their kids.
Joe, I sure wish I could use your signature, for mine and others, with this injustice issue. Thank you for your support though.
What The Hey

Clinton, MO

#3908 Mar 2, 2010
From the Missouri Revised Statutes

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/chapters/chap...

211.021.*1. As used in this chapter, unless the context clearly requires otherwise:

(1) "Adult" means a person seventeen years of age or older except for seventeen-year-old children as defined in this section;

(2) "Child" means any person under seventeen years of age and shall mean, in addition, any person over seventeen but not yet eighteen years of age alleged to have committed a status offense;
What The Hey

Clinton, MO

#3909 Mar 2, 2010
Emancipation

"Emancipation" is a legal concept related to when and whether parents are required to support a minor, and the concept of emancipation is not relevant to the determination of whether the juvenile or adult court should hear charges related to either traffic offenses or other crimes committed by the person arrested or charged.

A person who commits a non]felony traffic offense at age 15 or after is subject to proceedings in the adult courts. A person who commits a non]felony traffic offense before age 15 is subject to proceedings in the Juvenile Division.

A person who, at age 17 or after, commits:(1) a felony traffic offense or (2) any other act that would be a crime, is subject to proceedings in the adult courts. A person who, before age 17, commits:(1) a felony traffic offense or (2) any other act that would be a crime, is subject to proceedings in the Juvenile Division.

Different rules may apply to juveniles previously certified to stand trial as adults who have not been found "not guilty" in adult court and questions related thereto should be directed to the appropriate authority.

If one reads carefully, you will find that at 17, under RSMO, you are defined as a child for "status offences", and you will find, under Defintions in the Juvenile Code that a Status offence includes Beyond Parental Control, and Runaway. Your parents CAN have you arrested, and detained, they can have you placed in a mental health clinic or hospital against your will, and you can even (if they refuse to allow you back or voluntarily give custody to a family member) be detained by the Juvenile system, and likely end up in a foster home. While authorities may be reluctant to act, all it takes is persistence upon your parents part.
What The Hey

Clinton, MO

#3910 Mar 2, 2010
JohnEDoe wrote:
I do not have any problems with the other sections in the maintenance support laws.
There is nothing wrong in an 18 year old paying for their own higher education.
I understand we need to take one issue at a time and I will and can support yours but I know one that needs addressing.

The director can issue a child support order and has the power to modify it but is not forced to when certain circumstances are presented. In this case which I am talking about and have heard of others is when a claim of fraud has been made against someone receiving services and an order has been issued. The agency still forces the "supposed" NCP to pay for something (Child support) which was created by fraud. In two cases I know of the mother and children were living with the father while he was working. They knew nothing of an order until their license were pulled, both could prove their situations but are still being forced to pay and not given their licence back. With at one least one of them having their wages garnished.

What I believe needs to be done is the director "will" place a stay on the order until the investigation is complete and if fraud is involved, the crime "will" be made public (as all other crime) and prosecuted.
JohnEDoe

United States

#3911 Mar 2, 2010
What The Hey wrote:
From the Missouri Revised Statutes
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/chapters/chap...
211.021.*1. As used in this chapter, unless the context clearly requires otherwise:
(1) "Adult" means a person seventeen years of age or older except for seventeen-year-old children as defined in this section;
(2) "Child" means any person under seventeen years of age and shall mean, in addition, any person over seventeen but not yet eighteen years of age alleged to have committed a status offense;
This is what I like to see,people working for a cuase!
JohnEDoe

United States

#3912 Mar 2, 2010
What The Hey wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand we need to take one issue at a time and I will and can support yours but I know one that needs addressing.
The director can issue a child support order and has the power to modify it but is not forced to when certain circumstances are presented. In this case which I am talking about and have heard of others is when a claim of fraud has been made against someone receiving services and an order has been issued. The agency still forces the "supposed" NCP to pay for something (Child support) which was created by fraud. In two cases I know of the mother and children were living with the father while he was working. They knew nothing of an order until their license were pulled, both could prove their situations but are still being forced to pay and not given their licence back. With at one least one of them having their wages garnished.
What I believe needs to be done is the director "will" place a stay on the order until the investigation is complete and if fraud is involved, the crime "will" be made public (as all other crime) and prosecuted.
Don't ever stop your researching.
JohnEDoe

United States

#3913 Mar 2, 2010
Below is what I emailed my Representative this morning. If you would like you can use a similar email when writting your Representative. I urge you to do this first. That way they can't say we left them out. This is only one of the first steps.

Dear Representative __________;
I was told to write you regarding my issue. The issue is the emancipation of a person when they reach the age of 18 years.

I am not a NCP nor do I pay any child support. I have been married for 38 years to a wonderful wife who gave me two great children. I could not afford to send my children through college after High School. I wish I could have, if they decided college. Both of my children grew up with respect and self tought themselves. I believe that if they would have wanted college they would have worked very hard to get that higher education, and hard work never hurt anyone.
It is wrong that the State of Missouri forces a NCP to pay for higher education. Now let me ask you this, do you believe a young adult should be emancipated at the age of 18? The reason I am asking is because an 18 year old can do almost anything they want. Join the military and be responsible and operate billion doller pieces of equipment; they can leave home or school, even be photographed in the buff in magazines. Get married and buy cigarettes and loto tickets, as well as vote. The only thing an 18 year old person can't do is buy alcohol. The more I thought about it. I'm beginning to realize at 18 years of age, I consider a to be an adult. They might not always make the right choices in life, but some older adults also don't make right choices. I think a person the age of 18 should be emancipated.
This law is not only unfair to an 18 year old who might want to go to college but can't afford it, but also some NCP's can not afford to support themselves. This law needs to be changed, it is predjudice toward the NCP's and non-NCP's who are not forced to send their young adult children through higher education.

I send this electronic mail to you respectfully and ask that you respectfully answer your thoughts on this matter. If you do not agree that this law is wrong, then please tell me what I can do to have it placed on a bill or put on a ballot for the voters to decide.
With all respect
__________
Kyle DeFrain

Prairie Village, KS

#3914 Mar 2, 2010
It depends on the maturity of the 18 year old. Some people never grow up and become self sufficient. Some kids are ready to go out on their own at 17.
JohnEDoe

United States

#3915 Mar 2, 2010
Kyle DeFrain wrote:
It depends on the maturity of the 18 year old. Some people never grow up and become self sufficient. Some kids are ready to go out on their own at 17.
Your comment is moot. I know age 40 and up that are not mature. I know 18 year olds that are very mature. So what's your point?
Kyle DeFrain

Prairie Village, KS

#3916 Mar 2, 2010
I understand your anger toward a system that exists only to demean people trying to raise children the best they can. If a woman has a child and leaves them they are considered criminals. If a man abandons his children, he does not have to answer to anyone, other than God Almighty. If a man/woman pays and pays, then misses a payment, they are in trouble. If a man never pays, it is overlooked. If the NCP owes the IRS and child support, the IRS gets paid, not the children. I think the government is really messed up. And just to think: They may start a draft and actually ask these very children to help this country. After they needed the government to help them. I say just drop the whole idea of child support. It is a joke and a waste of tax payers money supporting the people who work for them. (Or say they do)
Joe

Dayton, OH

#3917 Mar 2, 2010
It was never about the kids, it's about the money. These greedy bastards are hiding the truth by saying it's for the kids. If it were for the kids then social security wouldn't stop at age 18 and non divorced parents would be forced to pay as well.
It's extortion and they're getting away with it.

Reading some of the post in here clearly shows that the NCP has no rights or say in how the money is spent. The system takes their cut and hands the rest to the CP with no expectation of how that money is spent.
If a child of the NCP goes to a college he or she doesn't approve of they have no say in the matter, their rights are revoked.
It infuriates me that the lawmakers intruded into family matters and is in the process of distroying family relationships but to take it past the age of 18 is clearly extortion.
JohnEDoe

United States

#3918 Mar 2, 2010
Kyle DeFrain wrote:
I understand your anger toward a system that exists only to demean people trying to raise children the best they can. If a woman has a child and leaves them they are considered criminals. If a man abandons his children, he does not have to answer to anyone, other than God Almighty. If a man/woman pays and pays, then misses a payment, they are in trouble. If a man never pays, it is overlooked. If the NCP owes the IRS and child support, the IRS gets paid, not the children. I think the government is really messed up. And just to think: They may start a draft and actually ask these very children to help this country. After they needed the government to help them. I say just drop the whole idea of child support. It is a joke and a waste of tax payers money supporting the people who work for them.(Or say they do)
First of all I am not angery. Just trying to make a (wrong) right. Then are you for this issue, emancipation I have been talking about, and are you willing to send a letter to your State Representative?
JohnEDoe

United States

#3919 Mar 2, 2010
Joe wrote:
It was never about the kids, it's about the money. These greedy bastards are hiding the truth by saying it's for the kids. If it were for the kids then social security wouldn't stop at age 18 and non divorced parents would be forced to pay as well.
It's extortion and they're getting away with it.
Reading some of the post in here clearly shows that the NCP has no rights or say in how the money is spent. The system takes their cut and hands the rest to the CP with no expectation of how that money is spent.
If a child of the NCP goes to a college he or she doesn't approve of they have no say in the matter, their rights are revoked.
It infuriates me that the lawmakers intruded into family matters and is in the process of distroying family relationships but to take it past the age of 18 is clearly extortion.
Thank you for your support Joe, I know you would write a letter regarding emacipation at 18 years of age.
hmmmm

El Dorado Springs, MO

#3920 Mar 2, 2010
JohnEDoe wrote:
<quoted text>Tell me a little bit more about what you are trying to say where I put your words in quotation. Do you mean it is a predjudice law against young adults of 18 years old who can not afford college, and parents who can not afford to send their 18 year old through college, and or NCP who can not afford to send their 18 years old to college. Do you feel that once a child has turned 18 and can do just about anything they want should be considered an adult in the law of the State of Missouri, and also become emancipated by law?
I'm just saying, how come they can make a divorced parent or a noncustodial parent pay for college, when it's not the same for everyone. I would hope that parents would help out if they are financially able, but for the law to make someone do it...is absurd! I have been married for 35 years, the law did not force us to pay for our kids education after they were adults, yet if we were divorced, they would tell the noncustodial parent (whichever one of us it might be) that we had to psy for college if our kid wanted to go. Yes, I believe that a child is an adult once they turn 18, my goodness, you got to cut the strings sometime! I'm saying the law should not dictate who pays for their kids college, it should be an individual choice, not everyone can afford to. I got student loans and put myself through college, Social Security stopped at age 18. i hope this makes more sense, I just think these laws regarding child support issues are way off.
JohnEDoe

United States

#3921 Mar 2, 2010
hmmmm wrote:
<quoted text> I'm just saying, how come they can make a divorced parent or a noncustodial parent pay for college, when it's not the same for everyone. I would hope that parents would help out if they are financially able, but for the law to make someone do it...is absurd! I have been married for 35 years, the law did not force us to pay for our kids education after they were adults, yet if we were divorced, they would tell the noncustodial parent (whichever one of us it might be) that we had to psy for college if our kid wanted to go. Yes, I believe that a child is an adult once they turn 18, my goodness, you got to cut the strings sometime! I'm saying the law should not dictate who pays for their kids college, it should be an individual choice, not everyone can afford to. I got student loans and put myself through college, Social Security stopped at age 18. i hope this makes more sense, I just think these laws regarding child support issues are way off.
I ask you, will you write your State Representative a letter that you do agree the law regarding a NCP paying for an 18 year old is unjust an predjudice as I have pointed out in past posts? Will you agree with me to your Rep. that an 18 year old should be a emancipated person?
hmmmm

El Dorado Springs, MO

#3922 Mar 2, 2010
JohnEDoe wrote:
<quoted text>I ask you, will you write your State Representative a letter that you do agree the law regarding a NCP paying for an 18 year old is unjust an predjudice as I have pointed out in past posts? Will you agree with me to your Rep. that an 18 year old should be a emancipated person?
Yes i will, he can file it with the other 20 that i have sent. But, yes i will do that. Hope everyone else does too.
JohnEDoe

United States

#3923 Mar 2, 2010
hmmmm wrote:
<quoted text> Yes i will, he can file it with the other 20 that i have sent. But, yes i will do that. Hope everyone else does too.
If what we are doing doesn't work, we will get signed signatures because I have been informed the law has to be changed. I will see if I can make a form page that can be printed off and you can sign and give the county you reside in Missouri. If I have to, I will hand deliver them but I will also have a copy made incase the originals get lost. You know what I'm talking about on that. It seems like no politician wants to put the effort in working this injust issue. I will do this if thats what it takes. I'm sure the Media will love this. Again (United we Stand, Divided we Fall) Just believe in me!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Missouri Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Reports: Missouri governor candidate dead in ap... 13 min barefoot2626 30
Missouri Republican dead after apparent suicide 16 hr goonsquad 34
anyone want a free mobile home? (Mar '09) 20 hr carebear25 12
Living in an RV on Church Property (Apr '13) Feb 20 SeeingEye 12
ANKARA: Gulen lobby influences US lawmakers let... Feb 15 Dander 1
Dems on FEC accused of taking partisan turn Feb 13 Jackie Robinson West 3
Study: 'Worst' drought conditions in more than ... Feb 13 Earthling-1 3
More from around the web