Bristol Palin sues Levi Johnston for $1,750 / mo child support, retroactive to birth of son in 2008

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Bristol Palin to Levi Johnston -- Pay Up Deadbeat

Posted Jan 22nd 2010 8:00AM by TMZ Staff

Bristol Palin has gone to court, demanding that Levi Johnston step up as a dad and pay her some of the money he's raked in from his naked media blitz.

Court documents were filed by Bristol's lawyer late Thursday afternoon in Alaska, demanding $1,750 a month in child support from Levi, retroactive to the birth of son Tripp on December 27, 2008.

According to the docs, obtained by TMZ, Bristol believes Levi has pulled in "in excess of $105,000 in 2009 through various media interviews and modeling related activities."

Bristol says in her sworn statement, "I have received limited and sporadic financial assistance from Levi." Bristol says Levi has forked over only $4,400 over the 13 months of Tripp's life -- $3,000 on September 9, 2009, $1,400 on December 19.

Bristol's request is for temporary support, pending a permanent child support order.

UPDATE: Levi Johnston's manager, Tank Jones, tells TMZ Levi has paid Bristol more than $10,000 since Tripp was born. Jones also says Levi does not make money off of every interview he does, though he did not say exactly how much Levi has made.

http://www.tmz.com/2010/01/22/bristol-palin-levi-johnston-child-support-payments-sarah-palin-tripp/

[arcadian]

1. Be careful Bristol

This might cause him to start blabbing about whatever it is he claims he knows.

[KittyWampus]

2. how's Bristol's money laundering operation for her mom going, I wonder?

[JBoy]

5. Hah! I forgot about that.

[RockaFowler]

3. I would demand a paternity test

[Soylent Brice]

55. if i'm correct, and it goes to court, there will be a court mandated paternity test for

child support.

[totodeinhere]

4. This is so petty. Her mother is raking in millions now.

Yet Mrs. family values Sarah Palin can't help support the child? That $1,750 per month is chicken feed to them. This is all about vindictiveness toward Levi.

[WolverineDG]

7. It's not the grandparents' responsibility

That being said, I just can't wait for the father-haters to show up on this thread. :popcorn:

dg

[totodeinhere]

18. I hear what you are saying. I am a soon to be father myself.

But whether it's their legal responsibility or not, I would say that if they can financially afford to help, which they can, and if the child is in need of help, and that part I'm not sure about, then it's their moral responsibility to help, especially since so-called family values is Palin's shtick.

[Javaman]

21. Bristol is a useful tool for failin quitter...

when that tool no longer serves her twisted perpose, it goes back into the shed allowing to rust until it's needed again at some point in the future.

failin isn't so much a mom as she a user.

[dems_rightnow]

103. What makes you think she's not?

I have no idea. But even if she is, it's the father's responsibility to support his children.

If he's not, then she SHOULD sue him, regardless of what mom might contribute.

[Statistical]

121. Well the kid isn't starving and Levi isn't paying SOOOOOOO I guess they are.

Like any Grandparent they are stepping in for a deadbeat dad.

However that doesn't mean they shouldn't use the courts to hold the POS accountable.

You make a kid you take care of it. Too easy.

All the running around on TV, radio, magazines, etc. Levi has to be making enough to pay child support. So he should.

He isn't so the courts will make him. Once again too easy.

[Arkansas Granny]

25. Her mother's money has nothing to do with this matter. Parents have a legal

obligation to provide for their children.

[paulsby]

92. exactly

some folks partisanship goes WAY too far.

it doesn't matter who bristol's mother is, or what their politics are.

if levi is the father, he needs to step up to the plate.

he has also made a lot of money BASED on his relationship, so the claim seems especially valid

[Touchdown]

132. Oh' please! You can't possibly think this twit is suing for the child, do you?

Want to buy a bridge in Manhattan?:rofl:

[emilyg]

43. It's HIS child.

[totodeinhere]

89. We all know it's his child. But that doesn't mean that the grandparents can't help if they are able.

Child support payments are one thing, but those payments usually aren't enough to live on. So why can't Sarah help too?

[Statistical]

122. WHAT MAKES YOU THINK SHE ISN'T/ WON'T IN THE FUTURE.

Where in the article did they say and Sarah Palin refuses to pay a single dollar for to help that bastard child.

Kid looks to be in good health, well fed, has clothes, etc. So likely the Palins ARE TAKING CARE HER financially.

None of that eliminates Levi responsibility.

So people can only see partisan politics everywhere.

Remove Palins from the picture.

A single mother has a child and father (who has money) isn't paying child support.
The mother & child have been making it relying on the mothers parents.
Mother is suing father for support.

What is wrong with that?

[mikekohr]

149. Ditto -nt

[blueamy66]

51. Exactly.

But isn't that the case in alot of child support cases?

[Crabby Appleton]

68. It's his child, not Sarah's

guess you don't know how child support works

[totodeinhere]

88. I am just asking why, regardless of what Levi does or doesn't do,

what can't Sarah help? Even if Levi pays all of the child support money, that's not really enough to live on in Alaska. With her millions, why can't Sarah help? Why does it only have to be child support? As far as I'm concerned, if a grandparent is a millionaire and their child is struggling, the grandparent has a moral obligation to help regardless of what the father does or doesn't do.

[paulsby]

93. nobody is saying, sarah can't help

nor is it in evidence that she isn't.

that's not the point.

it is levi's moral and legal responsibility.

good on bristol for calling him to task

hth

[blueamy66]

116. I know how child support works

and it's a crock.

[paulsby]

90. it's petty to want a father to help support his child?

only on DU does political partisanship outweigh basic human decency and the rights of parents and children.


seriously.

[havocmom]

158. Might be Bristol wants to move the hell away from Mom & Dad?

And who could blame her.

[joeybee12]

6. Hey, your mother wrote a best-selling fiction book...you don't need

the money.

[WolverineDG]

9. :ahem:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7544019&mesg_id=7544169

[joeybee12]

13. No, but doesn't she still live at home?

Besides, my real point of the post was to call the book fiction.

[malakai2]

104. Yeah, so question...

If she's still living at home and can't support the child, but he has the money to house, clothe, and feed the child, what are the odds he could win custody? Assuming of course that it's his. But then that's an interesting question, suppose he's paying support, they do a paternity test, and it's not his...could he still file for custody?

[CTyankee]

63. "father haters"?

REally? Just saying a parent should take responsibility for raising their child is "father hating"?

That is so LAME...

[WolverineDG]

110. Well, you obviously haven't seen prior threads on this issue

and yes, the father haters were out in force on those.

Talk about LAME.... :eyes:

dg

[CTyankee]

111. Oh, c'mon. Every parent should take responsibility for their kids!

What's the matter with you? Both parents equally should take care of their children. What part of that do you not agree with?

[WolverineDG]

112. Uh, what?

Never said anything remotely resembling that remark, just said I was watching for the father-haters who in the past have swarmed all over this topic, because THEY want Levi completely cut out of the child's life.

:eyes:

dg

[CTyankee]

113. Oh, please. That is not what is being said.

I believe that both parents should be responsible for their child. Am I a father hater?

[WolverineDG]

118. Again, uh, what?

Did I say that you were? :eyes:

dg

[CTyankee]

128. Great. Then what were you saying?

[WolverineDG]

130. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7544019&mesg_id=7544169

:eyes:

dg

[TicketyBoo]

140. I take it every time that you link to that post,

you are insinuating that the poster to whom you're replying is a "father-hater."

However, now I'm wondering what you mean by that term. Do you mean people who hate fathers or fathers who hate? Because you seem to have linked to that previous post when replying to fathers.

[Subdivisions]

8. Okay, that's one. Now,

where are the rest of the thousands of such suits being filed in this country today?

In other words: Who gives a flying fuck?

[dugaresa]

10. as much as I don't like the Palin's the young man has to step up to the plate and help take care of

his son.

He helped bring that child into the world, the best thing he can do is be a good father in every regard, financial, emotional, etc

[tabatha]

11. He should also be allowed access --- which he has been denied.

[dugaresa]

16. that is wrong, both of them have to grow up and share in parenting that kid

even if they don't like one another any more.

[paulsby]

94. and the court can mandate he get visitation

the same court that awards child support.

that's how it works

[Missy Vixen]

12. According to Levi, he doesn't see his own son

Is it right that he pays child support without any set visitation?

[tsuki]

15. In Florida, the two have nothing to do with each other and must be handled

separately. Although, she could go to jail for denying access.

He has apparently made some payments. However, not $1750.00 a month. That is steep given her circumstance.

[Missy Vixen]

23. This is Alaska

I'm not sure what the visitation laws are there, but somehow, I feel fairly positive that Bristol's mama just bit off more than she can chew. She does NOT want Levi in open court, and we all know who's funding Bristol's custody action.

Also, seventeen hundred dollars a month child support? Yeah.

Bring it. I can't wait to see this.

[Arkansas Granny]

27. I understand it's the same in my state. Child support and visitation are two separate

issues and one does not depend on the other.

[saigon68]

143. But in reality they are closely tied together.

A judge will not sit idly by and award $1,000.00 a month in CS and then forbid the non-custodial parent from seeing His/her child.

It takes talent to pay $1,000.00 per mo or in this case $1,500.00 a month in CS. Her adventure by going after him for CS will result in a huge custody/placement proceeding.

The attys will be "FEEDING AT THE TROUGH" The little kid will reap nothing from this.

[Maru Kitteh]

31. Please explain "her circumstance" and why that should be legally relevant?

[blueamy66]

53. Her circumstance is

that she lives at home with her millionaire mother. She, nor the baby, need the money. Yet she is filing for support.....to get back at him....nothing else.

[WolverineDG]

61. His kid, his obligation to support

doesn't matter if Bristol "doesn't need the money."

dg

[Missy Vixen]

70. His kid, his obligation

He also has the right to see and spend time with his own child, which Sarah Palin and her daughter seem to have forgotten.

[WolverineDG]

80. that's right

and with court orders, he's in a better position to have those rights enforced.

dg

[Christa]

96. Exactly. nt

[Maru Kitteh]

106. Totally agree but that's still a separate issue. Support does not equal rent or visa versa.

[blueamy66]

72. Gotta disagree with you.

If the custodial parent doesn't need the money, the other parent shouldn't have to pay.

Just my opinion....and I feel very strongly about it.

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blueamy66]

101. No, I'm not stupid.

But, if you don't have any productive to add and must fling insults......

[Maru Kitteh]

108. If every law in every corner of every civilized country says you're full of beans

You just might be. It's a thought you might want to entertain.

Parents in absentia owe a portion of their income to their children until they reach the age of majority. Period.

[blueamy66]

115. And I disagree with you too.

All laws do not make sense. You should know better than that. I think they kill people in Malaysia for an ounce of pot.

But hey, if you want to measure intelligence by laws of countries....go for it.

[Statistical]

126. This law makes sense.

If you have a child expect to support that child financially.

If you are living with the child you should support him/her.
If you are not living with the child you should support him/her.

If you have a good relationship with the other parent you should support the child.
If you have such a horrible relationship with the other parent you can only work through the courts & lawyers you should support the child.

If you make minimum wage you should support the child.
If you make a million a day you should support the child.

If you die you should support the child (this isn't the law but it the moral thing to have life insurance to pay for support payments you won't make)

If you father a child in 100% of instances you should support that child.

It is called RESPONSIBILITY.

[blueamy66]

147. nice post

but I still disagree

[Touchdown]

133. You really think she's suing for this wad of cash "for the child"????

:rofl:

[Maru Kitteh]

105. Of course the baby needs the money, and it's rightfully his. It's not a grandparents job to provide

support, it's a parents.

The child is entitled to support from both parents based on their parents incomes, not who their grandma is.

[Statistical]

123. Child support isn't about a need.

Man & woman have a child. Both are financially responsible for said child. PERIOD.

Doesn't matter if Bristol herself was a BILLIONAIRE. Levi (or any father) should provide child support.

Not sure why people want to make it more than it is.

[tsuki]

135. She does not have an education. She does not have a job. And

I doubt that she is capable of more than a minimum wage. He should support the child, but is he capable of making the money he made last year.

[dugaresa]

17. of course not, the only people who should be denied visitation are those

who pose a threat to a child.

the young man should be allowed to be there for his son, it is the best thing for the child.

[Democrat_in_Houston]

24. Although I get what you are saying

I would prefer to say that the only person who has rights to visitation/custody is the father, unless he is deemed a danger to the child.

"People" don't have visitation rights - just parents. :)

[dugaresa]

32. i used people to be general because i know of grandparents

who have gotten visitation rights. Those cases involved the death of a parent and the surviving parent denied the dead parent's family the ability to see a grandchild who they had been able to see when the other parent lived.

[Democrat_in_Houston]

48. Supreme Court has ruled years ago that grandparents have no rights

to visitation unless they acted as caregivers/guardians for a significant length of time in the child's life. As a grandmother, it would grieve me horribly to lose contact with my grandchildren, but I do believe that parents shouldn't have to deal with expensive lawsuits while they're raising their kids. I saw firsthand what one set of wealthy, pushy, fundy grandparents did to a good friend of mine - it was horrible.

[dugaresa]

145. the case i mentioned is very old and the children are adults now

the grand parents in that case had been an integral part of the children's lives as the parent who died was undergoing cancer treatments. They were granted supervised visitation and eventually the surviving parent reconciled with them, this happened some 30 years ago.

[WolverineDG]

60. That has been decided by SCOTUS

unless the surviving parent has been found to be unfit, grandparents do not have standing to sue for visitation.

dg

[WI_DEM]

35. Yes, and he should go to court for visitation and in meanwhile he should support his kid.

[99 Percent Sure]

109. One thing has little, if anything, to do with the other. Someone's providing the child with

the necessities of life. Why shouldn't it be him?

The courts will set custody and visitation rights when the child support is adjudicated. It would have been nice for them to come to an amicable agreement on custody, support and visitiation but, as is so often the case in matters like these, this didn't happen.

BP is legally and morally wrong for withholding visitation, unless she can prove the father is a danger to the child, but LJ is legally and morally wrong for withholding support, even if he doesn't get to see the child. Judge Judy and family court law say so.

The 7 times married Larry King told him he should sue for custody rights, because he's the father. When Levi said Granny She-Wolf is preventing him from seeing the baby, Larry told him that SHE has nothing to do with it, it's his and BP's child, and he should petition the court to set custody and visitation rights.

OTOH, maybe Levi ain't wanting to see him. Still, he has to pay, and it has nothing to do with Bailin' Palin's financial means. After all, SHE didn't make the baby with him, her daughter did.

[unapatriciated]

148. Yes, the child still has needs, regardless of visitation by non-custodial parent.

He needs to go to family court and have both a child support order and visitation set up.
Until that is done he can not complain about not seeing his child nor will he have any legal rights. Levi should have done this a long time ago.
I'm not a father hater I have three sons one who struggles with this same issue (not being able to see his child) but knows he still needs to support her.

[Blue_In_AK]

36. $10,000 in a little over a year isn't stepping up?

When Bristol still lives at home? Come on. I would have been happy to see half that much from my children's fathers.

[WolverineDG]

62. he should get a credit for what he's already provided

and weren't they still together when she had the baby?

dg

[unapatriciated]

150. unfortunately, he might not get credit for what he has already paid,

That is why he should have petitioned the court as soon as things went bad in their relationship.
Family court will set the order and move forward from that date.
That is how it works in most states. Bristol may also have trouble getting a order for back child support.

[blogslut]

14. Whatever the motivation behind her suit

I hope that eventually, there will be a court order establishing financial and custodial responsibilities for both parents. That way both he and she will be obligated by law to serve the best interests of their child.

[Javaman]

19. Grudge match of the stupids. nt

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[brendan120678]

26. What is it with some folks here...

practically hoping that Todd Palin is the father of his daughter's son?

Incest is disgusting and tragic.

It's horrible that people here are fascinating over incest. Liberals are better than that.

[T Wolf]

42. Yes it is. And should be exposed at all costs, even among the elite. Why do you want to cover it

up?

All I'm asking for is an investigation. If it can bring down that POS, all the better.

[emilyg]

44. You never cease to

amaze me - in a bad way.

[brendan120678]

74. Because there is no credible evidence that it even happened!!

Or do you think that every single father should be investigated every single time his teenage daughter gets pregnant, just to be sure that there wasn't anything nefarious going on there?

I'm not trying to cover anything up!

[last1standing]

22. She's entitiled to the money and he should pay it. I don't see where the argument comes in.

That said, this is a really bad move on the part of the Palins. If Levi begins to talk, it won't matter what is true or not, many people will believe him and those who don't will still wonder.

This will be nothing but bad publicity for Simple Sarah if she decides on a run. She should be paying him to keep his mouth shut, not pushing him to open it.

[Lance_Boyle]

29. She ain't entitled to jack happy shit - the CHILD is entitled to support.

What is Bristol's means of support, anyway? Still sponging off mommy dearest and daddy dude? Maybe Levi should have primary custody since Bristol doesn't seem to have any means (or motivation) to support the child on her own.

[last1standing]

33. The checks go to Bristol, not the baby.

She is entitled by law to receive support for her child. As for who receives custody, that is for a court to decide. I don't know either of them well enough to make a call on that.

[LeftyMom]

47. Does caring for a baby cost that much a month?

I know mine certainly didn't. But even if I'd wasted money on the absolute best high end branded examples of everything, I don't think I could spend that much a month on a baby in a month if I tried. Even if you're rocking the Silver Cross pram and the Britax car seat and the fancy boutique crib, you only need to buy one.

[hfojvt]

56. for some reason

child support is tied to the father's income rather than actual baby costs. Thus, if you father a child by an NBA star you get a cut of his huge check and if you father a child by a part-time janitor you get a certain percentage of diddly-squat. I don't think that's fair, but it's the same thing that would happen if the man and woman got married and raised the kid together. NBA kid would have rich parents and janitor kid would have poor ones.

[WolverineDG]

64. Actually, it is fair

can't make people pay what they don't have.

dg

[hfojvt]

73. you could if you pooled the money

NBA guy pays $30,000 a month. $2,000 of that goes to his kid. $28,000 goes to the mothers with poor fathers who are not getting enough money to survive on.

The unfair part, to me, is not, however, that the janitor father pays so little, but that the NBA father has to pay so much. It's not paying for "child support" as much as it is paying for "luxurious living by an ex-girlfriend".

[WolverineDG]

78. why should NBA guy pay to support someone else's kid?

but I see from the rest of your response that you think women have kids to live off child support. Buh bye.

dg

[hfojvt]

82. that isn't what I said at all

Why should NBA guy have to support an ex-girlfriend.

Whether the girl has a kid so she can live off the child support is irrelevant. Under current law, if her kid has the right father, the fact is that she CAN live very well off of child support, irregardless of the reason she had the kid. Maybe she seduced NBA guy for that reason, or maybe she was in love (or even lust) with NBA guy and he turned out to be an abusive, two-timing, lying sack of crap.

If the bottom line is still that she gets to live on $360,000 a year in child support (and admittedly that is a made up number rather than one taken from an actual court case, but 20% of Lebron James' income is how much?) then she still is on easy street, unlike anybody foolish enough to fall in love with me only to find out that I am an abusive, two-timing, lying sack of crap. In the latter case, if she gets 25% of my income that is only $250 a month and good luck raising a kid on that, much less providing for yourself.

[WolverineDG]

84. He's not supporting his girlfriend, he's supporting his child

and why should that child have a life that is different from NBA guy's other kids?

With your attitude, I'm pretty sure you'd bitch about your ex sponging $250/month off of you. :eyes:

dg

[Yupster]

129. I would like to see

all child support payments go into a central pot to be distributed equally to every eligible kid in America.

No kid is more deserving than another.

[last1standing]

58. You'll have to take that up with the court that decided the amount.

If Levi is making enough to pay it, then his child deserves it as far as I'm concerned. If he's not, then he needs to head back to court to ask for a lesser amount.

One thing I'm not going to do is argue against the concept of paying for one's offspring just because I don't personally like the recipient of the money.

[LeftyMom]

59. I'd just like to see the value tied to reasonable expenses.

A percentage basis seems unjust- it costs the same to feed, clothe and care for a child no matter what the non-custodial parent makes.

In this case, much of that income sounds like it was one-time-only (the Playgirl gig, the interviews) so I don't think basing his ongoing payments on it makes much sense. And from what I've read previously, he's supporting his teenage sister and his mother, so it doesn't sound like he's rolling in money anyhow.

[WolverineDG]

67. Can't make people pay what they don't have nt

[last1standing]

75. That would mean the ultra-wealthy could have legions of children and pay a pittance.

Much as they did before laws were put in place to provide a fair amount based on income. I prefer this way.

[LeftyMom]

76. Child support isn't supposed to be punitive.

It's supposed to provide for a minor child, not punish the non-custodial parent for having had sex.

[last1standing]

77. All laws are meant to steer a society toward a social goal.

In this case it was meant to stop the wealthy from leaving children behind like rabbit droppings. When a biological parent has the ability to pay for a child's upkeep and ensure they have the means to make it in later life, that is their duty, just as it would be if the child lived in his/her house.

You can disagree with the goal but its still the law. I happen to like it.

[blueamy66]

117. AMEN LEFTY MOM

You have said it perfectly!

[totodeinhere]

91. You need more than that to live on in Alaska. In this day and age that's not very much money. n/t

[TicketyBoo]

141. But it's not supposed to pay living expenses

for the mother, too, but only for the child.

Surely, $1,750 per month would be more than enough to take care of a 13-month-old child?

[marshall]

160. The cost of living is higher in Alaska

Fuel costs more, perishable food costs more.

[taught_me_patience]

28. 1750/mo seems a bit obscene

for someone who made 105k.

[Xithras]

40. Hardly.

Children have a right to live a lifestyle porportionate to their parents wealth. Parents are legally required to provide their children with a lifestyle equivalent to that which would exist if they lived in the same home. The non-custodial parent doesn't just get to say "Here's enough to stay warm and not starve" and be done with it.

The average yardstick in the U.S. is 25% of your income monthly for one child. If he made $105,000, that works out to nearly $2200 a month. She's not even asking for that much.

[WolverineDG]

69. 20% for one, 25% for two nt

[Xithras]

81. Depends on the state.

Here in California, I know for a fact that the base number for a single child is 25%. That can be lowered by other factors, such as health insurance contributions, income from the other parent, etc, but the base starting number for child support calculations is 25% for the first child. At 2 children, it jumps to 40%. The national average, the last time I checked, was somewhere around 25%.

[RB TexLa]

114. You mean children of parents who maintain separate households have that right

Children who live with both of their parents have no such right. If she were married to him and living in the same house no one could force him to spend x amount on his children. Those parents can spend enough for them to not starve and stay warm and the children do not have the right to their lifestyle.

Some children are just a little more equal.

[Faux pas]

30. Levi needs to sue the whole f-ing Palin klan for emotional abuse.

I'm really sure the poor schlub was making 1700 a month when that baby was born.

[nolabear]

107. Apropos of nothing, that's a gorgeous image on your post.

[Faux pas]

136. Thank you.

:)

[WI_DEM]

34. Good! She's doing what any mother should to a dead beat dad.

[Blue_In_AK]

37. What part of paying $10,000 in child support

over the past year don't you understand?

[emilyg]

45. He needs to start

paying monthly in a timely mnner. No excuses for him.

[WolverineDG]

71. He's not a deadbeat

he's already paid $10K.

dg

[Obamanaut]

102. If the young man has been paying with checks, and'or through the

court system where this can be verified, the Palin crowd is gonna look dumb.

One can hope that his advisors have told him to keep records.

I believe a father should pay support, but I also believe the mother has no right to screw him over.

[Blue_In_AK]

153. He wouldn't be paying through the court system yet

because there hasn't been an adjudication.

[Blue_In_AK]

154. He wouldn't be paying through the court system yet

because there hasn't been an adjudication.

[ddeclue]

38. I could not give less of a fuck about this.. even less than about JRE whose campaign I worked on

and really don't a lot of a fuck about JRE's baby either.

[butterfly77]

39. Its time for Levi..

to write a book..

[southernyankeebelle]

41. Bristol's momma pimp's her out to make money. I have never seen a family so money

hungry. Sarah Palin is the devil herself and you would think she is in the relationship with Levi instead of Bristol. The sad thing this woman is going to give him hell until that child is old enough for him to say fuck off granny. Well before long she'll get her eyes off of Bristol. Now is has to worry about Willow coming home with extra baggage.

[Raster]

65. "...and here's to you, Mrs. Robinson, Jesus holds a place for those that prey..."

Hey Hey Hey

[jmowreader]

46. I know expenses are higher in Alaska, but damn...

$1750 per month is more than I spend in total household expenses, and we're a couple in our forties with rent payments, cats and utility bills.

[LeftyMom]

49. Like I said upthread, I don't think it's even possible to spend that on a baby.

And she's supposed to cover her share of expenses too.

[Xithras]

83. $1750? Easy. Hire a nanny.

If he's making over $100k a year in Alaska, then he's solidly upper middle class, and the kid is entitled to all of the perks that go along with that social class. Eco-friendly cloth diapers, the best pre-schools in town, and maybe even a nanny for the nights or weekends when mom wants to go out.

Children have a right to be raised with the same social status and economic opportunities as the people who conceived them.

The yardstick here is a simple one. If he and the mother were still together, raising this child as a couple, and he were making over $100,000 a year, would they be spending that income on the child? In nearly all cases, the answer would be yes. Your lifestyle is often tied to your wage, and people generally spend a lot of money on their kids if they have it to spend.

The child should not lose out on that simply because mom and dad don't live together. If the money is there, the kid should be raised according to a lifestyle befitting his parents income.

[totodeinhere]

95. Exactly. And some posters here are acting lie $1750 is a lot of money.

In this day and age, it's not. A lot of people's house payments are more than that, let alone all off their other expenses.

[LeftyMom]

120. He's not supposed to be supporting anybody but the baby.

And only half of that.

[hobbit709]

142. $1750 a month is more than I make

Of course I don't have any kids. But there are millions of people in this country living on less than $1750 a month.

[LeftyMom]

119. A nanny for what?

Bristol isn't exactly out working a corporate job, and I doubt there is a primo spendy preschool. We're talking Wasilla, not Manhattan.

[anonymous171]

50. LOL looks like someone wants to get back at Levi for his "porno" exploits

[blueamy66]

52. $1750 per month?

For what?

[arthritisR_US]

54. a hooker would have been cheaper ;-) n/t

[blueamy66]

57. Amen.

:-)

[umyeah]

66. She supplied amounts and dates....

...he supplied his manager's word for it. Be skeptical.

[tanyev]

85. Bristol would accept money earned from a *gasp* porn career?

Sakes alive.

[Statistical]

127. I think in her mind she will pretend the money she gets is the non-porn money.

[Touchdown]

86. As a gay man all I have to say is...

I simply don't understand how you straight guys put up with them.:rofl:

[pinniped]

87. This punk might have to get a real job when the Springer show circuit dries up.

.

[Christa]

97. Why do you call him a punk? nt

[KansDem]

98. So Bristol says Levi has "pulled in in excess of $105,000 in 2009?"

And she wants $1,750 a month going back to 2008. Even if that was January 2008 that's 24 months, roughly. So that would be a total of $42,000 (not including what he's already paid to date)?

That leaves him $63,000?

Pay up, Todd, and move on...

[lazarus]

99. Preface this by saying I'm a big father's rights advocate

That said, Levi needs to go to court, get an equitable support amount set, then get a visitation or co-custody established, and make Bristol stick to it.

$1,750 seems excessive, but I don't know what his actual income is. I do know they base it on the last year's income, not on current income. When I lost my job due to disability, the court actually raised my child support payments based on the previous year.

[comtec]

138. What about all the time he LIVED with the palin klan?

IIRC she can't demand money for that time because they were common-law married.
AND... he was kicked out.
He HAS spent time (and money) with his son.

I can't see a good outcome no matter what, if/when this goes to court.
the courts traditionally favor the mother, no matter what the right thing is.

1700 seems rather steep. is that number she produced, his actual take-home pay, or before taxes?
105k goes away really fast after taxes.

*shrugs* I don't have kids, and I probably never will.

with all the "Burn the man" kind of posts on this site. i'm not sure i ever want to have kids.

oh well.
let the firestorm continue.

[TicketyBoo]

144. No, they weren't "common-law married."

Alaska doesn't even recognize common law marriages, and the states that do recognize them have specific criteria to meet the definition.

http://marriage.about.com/cs/commonlaw/ht/commonlaw.htm

[Toasterlad]

100. I Feel So Sorry For Poor Bristol Palin. She Works So Hard At Her Job: Being Sarah Palin's Daughter.

And now she's faced with a deadbeat baby-daddy who won't pony up what amounts to a drop in the bucket of the allowance she gets from mommy. Being a single parent is SO HARD!

[Touchdown]

131. And speaking out on absinence after she's already eaten her candy

What a twit!

She's not demanding this money for her baby. Anybody who thinks she is is an idiot.

[Pool Hall Ace]

124. Levi Johnston should support his child, but isn't Bristol brining in some

pretty good coin herself?

http://community.thenest.com/cs/ks/forums/28966622/ShowThread.aspx

Bristol Palin has formed BSMP, LLC to provide "lobbying, public relations, and political consulting services." The 19-year-old would-be power broker's first client, revealed by MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, is the pro-abstinence Candie's Foundation. The firm is named for the initials of Bristol Sharon Marie Palin, which makes it distinctly less exciting-sounding than mother Sarah Palin's Pie Spy LLC.

[Kaleva]

125. If he's the father, he's obligated to support the child. I feel no sympathy towards Levi.

[tammywammy]

134. While he should of course support his son

And it's a good thing this whole custody/support is finally going to be settled in writing, I have to wonder if that's not an excessive amount. While he made possibly made that much last year, Levi won't be making that much forever (his 15 min will eventually be up). I guess he'd then just have to go to court and have it set farther down. As for Levi if he has paid her more than $10k, I hope he wrote a check or can prove it.

As for Bristol, I believe in some interview I read she's working at a hospital, plus she has her new corporation, so she's pulling in money as well. And since she's living at home, she doesn't have the rent/mortgage expense that he would be help paying (for the child's household portion). Also, if there's a joint agreement, wouldn't his support be cut further as opposed to if she got full custody?

[tango-tee]

137. I don't give a shit

if Levi dances naked on a tabletop at Hooters wearing only a lamp shade (wherever) and Momma "Moose Head" Palin poses on a bear skin for Playgirl. That family and everything it stands for is thoroughly, completely and utterly fucked up.

[bitchkitty]

139. That's not unreasonable.

Politics aside. Lots of fathers pay more than that. It's his child, he has a stake in the future of his son, and a responsibility to him.

If Sarah Palin pays to raise his son, it gives her much more power and influence over the child'a identity and future. Would anyone here want that for their child? He's already starting out with a heavy burden, poor little baby, just because of who he is.

Fork over the money, Levi, and fight for shared custody. Don't desert your kid!

[Stevenmarc]

146. I guess he'll have to show his Bristol Pistol in the next spread.

[kskiska]

151. The bottom line is…

that Sarah is putting the squeeze on Levi because she wants him out of her/Bristol's/the baby's life. Despite his current 15 minutes of fame, his lack of education/skills will likely never earn him the sort of money they're demanding, and which will increase as the child matures. Bristol will likely marry at some point, perhaps to someone of means, and may very well try to cut Levi out permanently by urging him to allow her husband to adopt the boy.

I read where, prior to this court hearing, Bristol was ordered to watch a 48-minute video, titled "Listen to the Children." Alaska judges require both parents in a custody dispute to view the video, which explains the impact divorce/separation has on children.

[CTyankee]

156. I think you are right. It makes sense. You want the best for your child and Bristol is no different.

I'm sure that she knows she can do better than Levi also. He's probably a near goner, a has been, washed up before he is even20 years old.

She however has a future. her mom has lots of money now so she and her baby will be fine. Great. She has only to pick among her many suitors who will flock to her for the cushy lifestyle they think they'll get by being "Bristol Palin's mom's son in law."

Wait for it. Marrying well is one of the great themes in history. It never fails...

[Dappleganger]

152. Every father should support their child according to their ability, no matter what.

[BlueIris]

157. .

Why is this so hard for people to understand?

Oh, right, misogyny.

[Fire1]

155. I. Don't. Care. n/t

[blues90]

159. I cannot believe THIS topic gets 12,000 views

Who the hell gives a shit . Let these freaks dry up and die off instead of breathing life into them as IF they mean anything at all in the grand scheme of things.