We have SD about 50% of the time and he only pays 100 in CS. I think that's fair. He pays half of school costs and they take turns paying for field trips, etc. He pays for all extra activities and she pays for daycare (she gets severely reduced daycare as she is low income). We have to feed and clothe SD just as much as she does. We also provide health care, but BM's broke ass gets the medical card (illegally! she doesn't report her husband's income!) so she just uses the card. We keep the health insurance anyway so she can't try to bring it up in court one day.

~*~When you kiss ass, your breath smells like sh*t~*~

I don't think that the guidelines are fair. They're definitely geared more towards the mother and don't take some factors into account that they should. It's much too regimented and I think there need to be serious reforms to the support process. BF doesn't have to pay child support b/c they're both the custodial parent & the physical time is 50/50. That doesn't mean that she doesn't blackmail him by threatening to take him to court if he doesn't give her money. That's definitely not fair!

"There are two things over which you have complete dominion, authority, and control over - your mind and your mouth".

I think CS is a crock of shit. Now having said that, it is circumstantial. Here are situations where I think it is fair:

1) Payor only has his kids eowe (4 overnights a month), which means other parent truly is supporting them most of the time
2) Payor doesn't care to see them more - I say this because if the ncp would really like more time and it is feasible and the only reason he only has eowe is because the cp doesn't want him to, then I don't think he should have to pay for her vindictiveness.
3) Children are not of school age and CP stays home with them every day

In our case we are forced to pay even though we have 50/50 custody just because my dh worked his ass off to be successful and Wingnut sat on her lazy ass and can't make more than $13 per hour. The courts see this as a way to "equalize the standard of living in both homes for the children". I think that is absurd. Kids should learn that hard work=privileges that people who are lazy don't have.

We pay $900 a month. Wingnut feeds her kid 16 meals a month and has her for 6 overnights a month and 132 waking hours a month. We have feed her 64 meals a month, have her 24 overnights and 160 waking hours. We have all almost all of the school waking hours, which means we are responsible for most homework. It is socialism at its finest. And all we hear all day long is "mommy bought me, mommy bought me, mommy bought me". Of course mommy can buy her stuff, she has all our money and she doesn't have to buy you food!

"God is great, beer is good, and people are crazy" and you can't change crazy!!

I often find that CS is not fair.

Before I get into why I think it's not fair, I'll first say that I have no problem with the NCP financially supporting their child. But I think that both parents have that responsibility, unless, say, the BM was a SAHM before the divorce and she and her ex agreed that she'd continue to be a SAHM post-divorce.

My DH had to pay $1500 a month for two kids when they lived with BM. Now that they live with us she has to pay $200 a month. She doesn't pay that. Her parents do.

My parents got divorced when I was young and my mother worked very hard to support the both of us. She worked as a doctor's receptionist and a music teacher at a music studio. Mom and Dad sold the house and Mom and I moved into a smaller apartment that was affordable. Mom worked very hard to make ends meet. My dad voluntarily gave her money, but it was more like $300 a month, so it was a lot more reasonable.

Not really in our situation. DH pays $800 per child plus expenses -- but BM's lawyer wrote into the "expenses" category lots of things that are normally covered under basic support, so essentially he's paying twice for lots of things. (DH didn't get a lawyer during the divorce -- WTF???)

The other thing that BITES in our situation is this: DH has two daughters. One is adopted, and has behavioral difficulties as well as other issues. About a year after the divorce was final, BM decided to send YSD to a group home to live (couldn't deal with her anymore -- which I attribute in part to the fact that BM is psycho herself). But of course, she expected DH to continue paying her $800/month plus expenses for a child that wasn't even living under her roof! He did this for a few months, and then one day he got a letter from the county saying, You need to pay US the child support amount for YSD. So, he started making those payments to the county instead of BM. She, of course, blew a gasket, and actually consulted a lawyer about getting DH to pay BOTH the county and HER -- because, in her words, "My mortgage didn't go down when YSD went away." Wow, greedy much???!!!

So, as it stands now, DH pays $800/mo to BM for OSD, and $800/mo to the county for YSD. On the one hand, YAY for not paying BM for YSD! However, it COMPLETELY chaps my a** that HE is required to pay $800/mo to them, when she does not pay one freaking nickle -- where is the justice in that? Makes me nuts.

BB

You are not second best, you are not second class. Do not ever let anyone make you feel that way. - 2BLoved

DH gets SD 1st, 3rd and 5th weekends, holidays and 5 weeks in summer. The amount was fair when BM was making little income.... But know that we know she lies and puts her net minus insurance while DH uses gross.... i don't think it is all that fair.

Last time they went to court it was justified for a decrease from $800.00 but since SD is in private school and does other things...... he just left the amount the same.

I have no problem with the amount DH pays - i just pray the money is actually utilized for SD. SD really likes her school and we love the chrisitan atmosphere - so it makes it worth paying the extra.

********She doesn't have to love me or even like me - it doesn't change a dang thing..... So get over it and move on BM!************

Nope Not far - We pay more in Child Support for SD(4) than it costs to clothe, feed, and house my INFANT SON.

So I agree, It's ridiculous.

Well in our case, when BM told DH to come and pick
up SD that she has had enough of her. DH doesn't take
BM to court to get ANY child support. Soooo BM has
paid DH not a cent since she moved in with us in 2005.
DH paid BM $400.00 EVERY month when SD was living with
her BM.

Your situation is exactly like mine, but we don't pay CS. I've written checks out for CS for a guy who works up here (it came out of his check) it was supposed to support 4 kids that he never saw and I didn't think it was enough at all.

I hate when parents have to pay CS and they see the kids just as much as the parent receiving the CS. I also hate when the parent receiving spends it all on themselves.

I knew a lady that had 2 kids and they had no contact with their BD, her child support would go on a debit card and she split the money in half and gave it to her kids. I thought that was cool. She said "it's CHILD support, not Mommy needs a vacation and new clothes fund"

I think if it is worked out well it can be fair. My exH gives me child support for my two kids. I was a stay home mom and married for many years and as a result, my initial earning potential was low, while he makes six figures. He pays a good amount but it is relative, and he only has them four nights a month. I walked away from the marriage with almost nothing since my ex was irresponsible with money and we sold our home when the market was very depressed. I also have worked very hard to support myself and my kids, gone back to school, I've worked two jobs at times to make ends meet, work in a profession that requires a degree...

Enter my BF. His wife got knocked up and they got married. They only stayed together three years at which point she got involved with another man. They have 50/50 custody. She has only ever made minimum wage or slightly more, and doesn't feel she has to work full time. Almost the entired year last year she "took time off from work". As someone who has struggled financially, not working FT tells me she doesn't need to work. When I was dirt poor I was working two jobs. Mind you, she has half the month to herself, which she could be working or going back to school to better herself. She got money from the divorce and instead of going back to school (as she bragged to everyone she was going to) she sat on her ass and surfed the Internet.

It goes straight up my ass because money has been a huge bone of contention between my BF and me. He hasn't been able to contribute much to this household d/t CS and additional SD/BM expenses.

We joked about me being pregnant a few weeks ago and he said that well, you know, the primary financial consideration goes to the first child. I didn't say anything to him but poison probably would have come out of my mouth if I did.

One last thing, SD is a spoiled child and gets things my kids never get...

No i do not think most child support is fair. I have a child and get no child support from my ex but i can tell you that it does not cost 1400 a month to take care of a kid and thats what my BF pays. Its crazy i think the courts need to get their shit straight.

Agree

No I don't really think it's fair. Do they even consider how much the BM makes or is it just a percentage of the man's income? We have the kids about 1/3 of the time so we still feed them, have clothes here for them, buy them personal supplies, pay for friends' birthday presents, some school supplies, etc. My DH carries the insurance for the boys and we are expected to pay 1/2 of summer camps, braces, etc. We are by no means struggling and want to help out but at the same time, we wonit be able to do for our BS things we'd like because we don't have the money while she can drive her Lexus and have her very large house and buy a condo in another state??? How fair is that? Does she really need the money in that case? And the worse part is that when it goes down to one kid, it doesn't even drop in half. It gets reduced by 25%?

Don't EVEN get me started on this one - lol. The CS system in this country (especially in NY) is so antiquated & unfair to the Dads (or I should clarify, unfair to the "breadwinner", which is usually the Dads - but not always!). It reminds me of other types of dysfunctional, collapsed systems in this country (i.e. welfare, disability, etc...). CS is supposed to serve an intended purpose, but its effect, most of the time, is to create lazy, unappreciative, dependent, unemployed BM's that feel that it's just easier to sit back & collect a check instead of going out, working for it, and teaching their child the value of a dollar, work ethic, etc... Not to get on a "soap box" here, because I know every situation is different.

I also took this a step further...and I started to research the laws (statutes & case law) in NY to figure out a way to CORRECT the unfairness - especially in my BF's 50/50 joint custody situation where he shells out $1,500/mo. for BM to sit on her lazy a** & do nothing. So I hit the internet & started researching...

What I've found is that IF MORE PEOPLE (especially our BF's/DH's) would ban together, become more ACTIVE with their plights, pressure the legislators in their area...do EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING they can to fight these laws and for change...it might actually happen and not be just a dream. But most of these people (my BF for example) are so busy working around the clock to pay the insane amount of CS to the BM that they have little or no TIME to do this.

Unfortunately, our DH's/BF's need to FIND THE TIME to fight for what's right in their state/our country. I know that I would fight tooth and nail, if my BF's situation were mine, because his situation is like legalized embezzlement...IMO

What does the "state" think is going to happen to these women when CS ends? They go on welfare and become a drain on all of us because they have no skills and no employment history. This is my issue with alimony too. Unless the BM is going to use it for tuition to better herself, what is the point? All it does is prolong the inevitable. Once Wingnut's alimony ends, she literally will not have enough money for basic needs even though she works full time. Not that I feel sorry for her, but really why isn't anyone in the "system" looking at this situation and saying "why should x support you for 4-7 years if you aren't going to do anything to help yourself? get used to your new lifestyle now.

"God is great, beer is good, and people are crazy" and you can't change crazy!!

No and if we were not still in the middle of a court mess I would say more.

"The second mouse always gets the cheese"

No, they are not fair...even in our case that DH no longer sees the child, it is impossible for someone to tell me they spend 1K a month on a child...I don't spend that much and we have therapies for our son to pay...It is definitely geared towards the BMs in most instances...of course, it is related to "income", but again, no 100USD is not enough to pay for all a child needs in a month if that is what you receive based on a father's income...but when you get past 250-300 a month, when TWO PARENTS are supposed to support that child, which then becomes between 500-600 and UP a month, NO CHILD needs that much money...so, it's all a matter of the income of the father and normally with men who have half-way decent jobs, they definitely are on the short end of the stick.

My XH and I have equal custody. He was never required to give me CS but he does to keep me living in an area that is oober expensive. DH and I would be willing to forgo all CS to move out of the Joneses neighborhood. Its flipping stupid. Now I've shot myself in the foot because the kids have been raised for so long in the same area it would be a mark against me to leave even if its 2 miles away.

I think the more you have the children, the more you should get. If you have 50/50, and its actually 50/50, no one should have to pay. Full Custody, you should get more. The system is failing my family at the moment, so I don't even want to get into this, lol.

"If I turn into another, Dig me up from under what is covering the better part of me" -Incubus

Jenjen, I have to agree that on many levels CS isn't fair. I like formula you came up with. It makes alot of sense. And more BMs would want a 50/50 situation.

I also think that a legal financial advisor should be involved in the CS process too. Someone who would has the knowlege of the real cost to raise kids AND not at the expense of putting a parent in the poor house. With that being said, there should be a child budget plan. I think parents need to openingly discuss a HOW MUCH (not yelling) it should cost raising their children.

What I see happen so much is the vast different ideas on what each parent thinks they should spend on raising a child. One is thinking modest living, braces, and a senior trip to Vancover. WHile the other is thinking designener clothes, nose jobs, personal trainers, and private school.

How could it possibly be fair? Unless the two families live in a duplex and pay only the costs associated with their half and their residents it can't possibly be fair.

I rationalize CS along the lines that it is designed to force responsibility on both parents. Unfortunately it cannot be equitable. The family with more time with the kid often bears much higher costs than the lower parenting time family.

In our case my Wife has full legal and physical custody and BioDad has 7wks of visitation per year (5wks Summer, 1wk Winter, 1wk Spring). BioDad is responsible for $380/mo (for the past 7yrs) in CS (though he has never paid a dime, SpermGrandMa pays it for him). $380/Mo is a joke as far raising a kid in the areas we have lived. Before the last CS mod CS was only $133/Mo for 9yrs.

The true joke factor is that in the CS calculator my wife is assigned 65% of the financial burden (she is a CPA) of supporting our Son (my SS) and because of my income BioDad gets an additional $1000/Mo reduction in his income for CS calculation purposes. The dipshits in the black robes explained this by rationalizing that BioDad should not be punished by having to subsidize an "artificial" life style for the Kid because Mom and StepDad make a significant family income. The pathetically funny part is that I was unemployed at the time due to a corporate down sizing in the Semiconductor industry. The Judge counted my total earning potential in the decision while counting only BioDad's actual income Vs his earning potential. BioDad remains a chronically and purposely underemployed plumber because he thinks his CS will not go up. Unfortunately he was right as far as his manipulations of the Judges.

During that court hearing I did get a kick out of BioDad and SPermGrandMa's reaction when the Judge announced that BioDad would get his income reduced by $1000/mo because I made too much money and my Wife countered with a request for the SpermGrandParents income to be added to BioDad's for calculation of CS since BioDad lives in a property owned by the SGP's and pays no rent, the three younger half spawn live with and are raised by the SGP's, the SGP's pay BioDad's CS for our Son and BioDad remains purposely under employed in an attempt to keep his CS obligation down. We presented piles of evidence backing our claim and the judge actually spent several hours reviewing it during a recess. During the questioning on our motion BioDad could not come up with any documentation countering our motion and had no clue how much his rent was, how much he paid his parents for "daycare", where his three younger spawn went to school or who their teachers were, etc..... BioDad and SpermGrandMa asked why it mattered who paid for everything which sent the Judge off on a rant. Her Honor read them the riot act for about 20minutes then unfortunately said "I am going to do what I always do" and let the $1000/mo income reduction ruling stand and did not attach any of the SpermGrandParent's income for CS calculation purposes.

A year after that hearing we countered by sending a change of venue motion to BioDad to move the case to Williamson County TX rather the liberal cesspool of Oregon. BioDad freaked because in TX his CS would have tripled though his visitation would have increased by several weeks. He called my Wife and asked why she was changing venue. She told him that she was sick of dealing with the BullShit on visitation and reimbursement of uncovered Med expenses and that he needed to keep his mother under control. My Wife told him to shut up and do what he was told or she would change the case to TX since SS had been a TX resident for more than 5yrs. That pretty much pulled all of their teeth and they have pretty much done what they have been told since. We had no intention of actually changing venue because we would not expose our Son (my SS) to any more time with those idiots than he is already forced to spend with them regardless of how much money would have been gained. We just used the threat to drive home the final message that the SpermClan needed to shut up and do what they were told.

By the time SS is out of college BioDad will have paid ~$0.00 though SpermGrandMa will have paid ~$46,284.00. My Wife and I will be in for more than ~$350,000.00 That seems fair. :sick:

Dickhead gets off scot free and we are in for a third of a Mil+. I would feel for SpermGrandMa if she was not a toothless moron who facilitates her idiot son's endless quest to impregnate every womb in the Pac NW.

So, NO CS is not fair. It is not fair for the CPs who more often than not bear an overwhelming % of the cost of raising the kid and it is not fair to the NCPs who have no say in how the CS they pay is spent.

My opinion is that the whole system is designed primarily to keep the bottom 10%ers of the legal world who seem to gravitate to family law employed. This includes the dipshits in the black robes, the attorneys (with one notable exception that I am aware of),CS enforcement and the clerks who's only job qualification appears to be able to fog a mirror.

The system is not there to help the kids or either of the parents. It for sure does nothing for step parents or non joint children.

In our situation the only one's I feel sorry for are my SS's three younger also out-of-wedlock half sibs who do not have a snowball's chance in hell of turning out as anything but toothless dipshits like their father and SpermGrandParents.

Just my thoughts of course.

Best regards,

Success is rarely final. Failure is rarely fatal. It is character, courage and consistency of effort that count. Vince Lombardi (with some minor Rags modifications) To each according to their performance, screw Karl Marx. (Rags)

Agreee Ms. Freeze...

BM ruined the marriage in DH's case when she cheated (multiple times) and got prego when he said no. Now she wants it all.

Oh I've got a great one for you girls. (btw, I'm new. Been lurking for awhile!) My fiance is disabled. He's a triple amputee. Needless to say his income isn't huge. He and his psycho ex have 'joint' custody but he has custodial care. Now... psycho is supposed to see the kids eow, plus Wednesdays and half of the summer. Yeah... she averages seeing them about 24 hours every three months. What does this paragon of Motherly virtue pay for her THREE children? Ninety dollars a month. Do you think for a second if the roles were reversed he'd get away with that? HELL no. The system is totally biased against men in my opinion. Ninety dollars for three children is laughable and the state has to garnish her to get that out of her! It's truly sickening. And the men are often so grateful to get the kids away from the psycho women that they don't even argue over the support. I know mine didn't.