Tiredofthis wrote:
Unless the ex is forcing the child to wear summer clothes, then it is abuse.
I get the same treatment from the NJ with my boys (S7 and S10).
Strangely, they both just "happen" choose to wear the
same clothes they happened to be wearing two weeks prior when they went over to their mother's. i.e. she sends them back wearing the same clothes I sent them to her wearing and not one shred of clothing more, regardless of how long they're staying with me (sometimes a week plus), and even though she demanded she get the $500 per month the court formula for CS includes -- "without regard for time spent with either parent".
And the weather was 20 degrees cooler after the week I was out of town when they returned to me.
I'm working on teaching them to assert their independence, dress themselves (at my house they do), and teaching them to not let their mother bully them into wearing the clothes I have been previously forced to provide for them (on top of
already providing for said clothes via CS). Because that's what it is -- she's got a beef with her court orders to provide clothes for them all of the time, not just when they're with her, and takes it out on the kids by bullying them into wearing inappropriate clothes or clothes
she chooses for them.
Guess what? In the real world of grown-up land, people don't have their mothers pick out their clothes every day.
I do what I can and pray for the day when they tell mom to "stick it" when she picks out the rattiest clothes she can (keeping the "good clothes" for only when they're with her, of course) to intentionally create disparity in their standard of living between the their two homes.
The only problem is that the MO court rules for calculating CS don't clearly spell out their assumptions as enforceable. Meaning mom gets the money and it's difficult to stop mom from undermining the children's relationship with their father, creating disparity in their standard of living between the two homes, and putting the children in the middle of her beef with not wanting to live up to the responsibility she took on when she demanded she receive the maximum CS she could get away with.
It's fraud -- cheating your children out of resources that are provided for
their immediate benefit (clothes) and not for the parent's (such as paying for mom's house that she can't afford on her own). IMHO, paying your parent's mortgage isn't something children should be "doing without" on other necessities as a prudent long-term financial strategy.