I know about fukked up lawsthanks for the review.
But if I recall, there is no law stating that she has to take any funds from him. they are her kids too.
She's so tired of dealing with him and wants him in jail(were he can't make money)why doesn't she just rid herself of anything connected to him.
Take your cape off and answer that buddy.
I think we all know logic isnt mandatory when defending a woman in a family court.
Well if she has custody and she let the dude take the kids for a get-a-way but then they obviously have an agreement to meet at a certain place to return said kids and he didn't fulfill the agreement and her personally knowing how he is (I'm no lawyer) but I would think she would have the right to ask for that.
2) just because she wants him in jail for breaking a disagreement doesn't mean that he still doesn't have to be responsible for helping in the supporting of the kids until they are 18. I don't get why Allen just didn't bring the kids back and come back and see them another day? why couldn't he just follow the instructions?
I don't get where your "caping" comments come from to me this is pretty logical thinking and in the end I don't know them personally to know what's fully going on other then what the article says. Why are you judging her when you don't know the extent and "caping" for Allen?