Remember - a lot of times it's the parents that are sick: if some one as he matures decides that he does not like religion, does not like going to the temple with other kids and repeatingly baptized for dead people, read that teenagers need their sleep and decided that to get him up early in the morning to learn scriptures most likely taken out of context and taught by someone who could not teach a religion class at a university is dumb....and the list goes on and on...he doesn't like that people are asking him where his "mission" is going to be and he thinks getting married on the beach with his girlfriend is the most romantic way. If he tries and little independent thought then there is trouble. It's really the parents - My suggestion - you got a 16 year old who doesn't want to fullfil the parents desires - emanicpate him and let him go. Help him after he is out to get started.
utah: Title 78, Section 3
california:
7000. This part may be cited as the Emancipation of Minors Law.
7001. It is the purpose of this part to provide a clear statement defining emancipation and its consequences and to permit an emancipated minor to obtain a court declaration of the minor's status. This part is not intended to affect the status of minors who may become emancipated under the decisional case law that was in effect before the enactment of Chapter 1059 of the Statutes of 1978.
7002. A person under the age of 18 years is an emancipated minor if any of the following conditions is satisfied: (a) The person has entered into a valid marriage, whether or not the marriage has been dissolved. (b) The person is on active duty with the armed forces of the United States. (c) The person has received a declaration of emancipation pursuant to Section 7122.
7120:
7120. (a) A minor may petition the superior court of the county in which the minor resides or is temporarily domiciled for a declaration of emancipation. (b) The petition shall set forth with specificity all of the following facts: (1) The minor is at least 14 years of age. (2) The minor willingly lives separate and apart from the minor's parents or guardian with the consent or acquiescence of the minor's parents or guardian. (3) The minor is managing his or her own financial affairs. As evidence of this, the minor shall complete and attach a declaration of income and expenses as provided in Judicial Council form FL-150. (4) The source of the minor's income is not derived from any activity declared to be a crime by the laws of this state or the laws of the United States
rcrocket wrote:An ex-wife entitled to child support on the basis of the ex-husband's income is not a "thieving pickpocketer." You're just a mountebank. Deal with it.
He didn't say anything about child support. He said, and I quote, "[S]he wants me to use my hard-earned raise to increase her standard of living" (emphasis mine).
Note that he said her standard of living--as opposed to the kids' standard of living--implying alimony, not child support.
Of course, I can see why someone advocating the defense of one's own pocketbook would be so disturbing for a lawyer such as yourself.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
liz3564 wrote: What answers did they give you, Eric? What did they tell you?
How much evidence do they need to throw someone in jail for child abuse? Photos of bruises? What?
I'm not at my computer so don't quote me on names, but the licensing department supervisor Jamie Harris has never returned my emails or messages.
When my article was featured on DailyKos an email campaign was organized by several concerned citizens(you can read about it in the comments of the article). As far as I know, no one recieved a response.
I was told that Bonnie Stuyver - the licensing administrator in charge of the MG - has some kind of intimate relationship with the Board of Directors, but I have not looked into that further.
rcrocket wrote:An ex-wife entitled to child support on the basis of the ex-husband's income is not a "thieving pickpocketer." You're just a mountebank. Deal with it.
He didn't say anything about child support. He said, and I quote, "[S]he wants me to use my hard-earned raise to increase her standard of living" (emphasis mine).
Note that he said her standard of living--as opposed to the kids' standard of living--implying alimony, not child support.
Of course, I can see why someone advocating the defense of one's own pocketbook would be so disturbing for a lawyer such as yourself.
Likewise, if she is getting spousal support she may be entitled to an increase if his salary increases. That's the law.
Any way you look at it, it is poor character to lie or to advise lying about one's income in mandatory government proceedings. I don't care if he makes an effort to defend against such confiscation, but lying about it would throw him in the klink and would cause his lawyer to lose his license. I imagine as you read this thinking to yourself -- well, its ok to lie to the mother of my children and her divorce lawyer as long as I don't get caught. Right on, bro.
And to basically hand-wave it away by disparaging my profession makes your position all the more unreasonable. Mountebank. Abuser of women's rights. It is people like you who cause single mothers to live in poverty while ex-husband fathers party on their boats in Willard Bay. It is people like you who cause divorce proceedings to be so expensive and oppressive against out-of-money mothers. Amazing.
Last edited by _rcrocket on Fri Apr 10, 2009 7:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
liz3564 wrote: What answers did they give you, Eric? What did they tell you?
How much evidence do they need to throw someone in jail for child abuse? Photos of bruises? What?
I'm not at my computer so don't quote me on names, but the licensing department supervisor Jamie Harris has never returned my emails or messages.
When my article was featured on DailyKos an email campaign was organized by several concerned citizens(you can read about it in the comments of the article). As far as I know, no one recieved a response.
I was told that Bonnie Stuyver - the licensing administrator in charge of the MG - has some kind of intimate relationship with the Board of Directors, but I have not looked into that further.
Something very wrong with this story. All you do is rely upon phone messages and emails?
When you make a complaint that a child is being or has been abused, you file a formal complaint with Child Protective Services and/or with the police. That means filling out a form. That means asking for the form. In lieu of that terrible burden, one writes a letter to CPA and the police, offering evidence and requesting an audience.
A government employee is not likely to do anything with phone mail messages or emails.
I'd urge you to be more serious about your complaints. Blog entries and and email campaign are just little swats.
rcrocket wrote: Something very wrong with this story. All you do is rely upon phone messages and emails?
(Sigh)
Hi Bob,
(waves, shows Bob he's getting attention)
You're right, something is very wrong with this. Very, very wrong.
As far as "all I do," I think we all know that I am doing much more than writing emails. Liz had a very specific question. Thanks for your concern and for reading my story.
I hope you'll forgive me for continuing to ignore your more absurd comments.
if you are going to report abuse you need to know the name of the child and the incident and where the child is at the time. You could say Jamie Doe was hit last wednesday on the head by supervisor Jim Doe for roling his eyes at Jim Doe. Jamie Doe told me he saw double for about one minute and then had a bad head ache. He still tells me he has head aches. It can't be general information.
If you were hurt over a period of time when you were there why didn't you are don't you sue them. Take the facts to an attorney.
