I am acquainted with a kid who wants to make a law which makes it beneficial for states to save money on and for children in foster care. This law would entail attachments to wages, Tax refunds, disability payments and social security benefits, much like child support.
Parents who are in a child's life but divorced pay support. When they can't things get attached. So Why should a parent who loses custody through no fault but their own, not have to pay. Why? They go on and have more marriages, relationships and even worse, more children. They get off scott free. These parents get years of help from the state to try to redo their wrongs in order to keep a family together. When the children are finally taken and rights terminated, that state and taxpayers pick up the bill. WHY?
Okay I know why as do you, but why does the state allow this? So please let me know how you feel about a kid trying to make a law to have biological parents pay into a system for their well-being, at least from the time custody was lost until a child is eighteen, and it should be retroactive. Once the state decides how much should be paid monthly or bi-monthly, if that isn't kept up until eighteen, then the amount and court order continues until the amount is paid. Just to be clear, as an example if a child is seventeen, parents lost custody and the court ordered one hundred a month, that child should receive into an account or the state for care, a total of twelve hundred by the time the child is eighteen. If the money isn't paid it stays on the books until paid in full.
These people move, change names and have replacement babies, but what about the kids left behind? If you agree, please leave a comment so he can see he has support to achieve his long term goal.
No comments:
Post a Comment