It would be awfully nice if the courts could set some expectation (like they are starting to do more re alimony) that both parents will be gainfully employed as time goes on.  Sure.. when you might have young kids, it might be more difficult as a primary single parent to work a demanding full time job (not that it can't be done.. but it is harder without child care support etc).

However, as the kids get older.. certainly in High School and beyond.. the excuse that the custodial parent can only muster a part time job at minimum wage? I call BS on THAT!  They may not have worked full time while married.. and it might be tough to ramp up to that immediately.. but certainly within several years and/or the kids being in HS they should be expected to be employed.. and if they are trained in a trade they should at least be imputed at the base salary for that field.. not the fry cook part time rate.  So.. for a few years we will bust one parent open..give the other parent time to sharpen skills.. or learn a trade.. let the kids get to the point that they don't need a parent there all the time.. then your CS will start assuming that you could be earning to a higher level.. even if you are choosing not to because you are lazy... or married another sucker willing to pull up your slack.

I agree. The system is outdated and now serves the laziest or most conniving and shady among us. I always worked and earned to the best of my ability. I got awarded no CS. SO's BM2 never worked when they were married. Awarded max CS. Now she works off the books for cash. Hasn't been caught because it's for businesses of family and friends. God knows how she hides her money, but wjen she was married to SO she had hoarded $90k in various accounts by the time they split. Doesn't keep her own kids but will take them now and then but always drop them off with her mother. Mom's address is her "government" address, and legally she is single, so, on paper they do stay with her some. In reality she lives with her "husband" (they tell everyone they are married), a guy who makes good money and pays for everything. Drives a $75k car. Carries $2000 purses. Collects government benefits. There are some real pieces of sh!t out there and the system backs them up at the expense of hardworking people.

But for North Korea both kids did age out and child support ended.  And she never paid into social security. She and her husband both lie and say they make no money.  They are both getting older now and have zero retirement! I mean zero.  And they don't get money from social security either.  So maybe the laziness will catch up with her in  the retirement years.

How long before YSS ages out for CS? I'd say that would be a happy day,  but ET will probably guilt OSS into supporting her. I hope your DH prepares him to say no.  Or maybe she'll find a sugar daddy. . . 

I feel this SOOOO hard. DH is military. He get's a housing allowance based on locality. It's so that he can afford to have a home in the area we are stationed in. Right now he get's about $2100/month. Cool, that is great. If we wind up with orders next year to say SanDiego it would go up to about $3200. 

Why on earth would BM be entitled to more money just because the housing costs us more? She is still living in a podunk no stoplight town where you can buy a home for 40K. The kid doesn't magically cost more. Nothing else has changed but she sure as hell will demand more. On the flip side if we wind up at some other bases we could lose a few hundred dollars but we of course wouldn't get credit for the loss of income because that would be imputed against him that he made a certain amount before! 

Right now we tell SS everything fun that we do is paid by me. That isn't true but if that money hungry bit** even smells that DH has something she will go after it! SP's income isn't counted in our states.

Yeah it blows, and I have seen an actual court document where the judge stated "The CS will be 1000.00 for the child seeing as the father's income can be offset by his spouse who works full time."

Im mad for all of our DH's.

Isnt it about time for the fairness pendulem to swing, yet?

Someone in another group said that with 50/50, child support somehow seems like alimony.

Toxic Troll is pretty much taking the $$$ for her own benefit, we know this.

I just wish that judges and the system were fair. Updated. 

SO has been pushing off his promotion track because he doesn't want to be stuck at that level forever.  I don't blame him. 

BM has a masters (that he paid for) and works in a specialized field where they are almost always immune to economic downturns.  BM was never supported in her quest to be a SAHM despite all of her efforts.  SO put his foot down on that.  He was the one to disproportionately stay home with the kids (even to this day) for sick days, school closures, etc.  So BM hasn't experienced any employment gaps due to her sacred mother status.

Right now during the pandemic our state is basically on a work from home if its feasible order.  All three of us adults (BM, SO, myself) are not only capable but employer forced to work from home - the buildings are closed.  BM has taken it upon herself to voluntarily reduce her hours because she can't possibly work and be up skids butts at the same time.

She argued with SO that remote schooling should be 100% at her house so she can stay home and take advantage of certain unemployment benefits.  She did a bang up job at the end of last school year so that was a big fat no from SO.

Since that didn't work, she decided she would claim said benefits anyway and declare it is because she cannot work due to child care being unavailable.  She has the kids 2 days a week plus every other weekend.  The kids were in outdoor camps all summer (1% case rate in the area) on her days and she has them in sports on her nights right now.  She also whined to SO that she might not have a job by the end of the year.  

I am dreading her inevitable unemployed status for 2021 and the battle that will ensue.  I mean, voluntarily reducing your hours and basically forcing your employer to pass your work to other employees just shows your employer that they don't need you.  Why would they keep paying you?

The CS battle that will ensue should be quite spectacular.  BM was not shy about her distaste for 50/50 being entirely due to the "loss" of money.  The court allowed her to negotiate time with kids for money.  WTF.  But I only have one income.  Good for you.  I don't have ANY dependents.  Ugh.

SO followed up her ridiculous phone call with a message in OFW re: school 100% at her house isn't necessary but also not a viable option if she thinks her voluntarily reduced hours are going to impact her ability to keep her job.  Despite all of the obvious, I have no doubt that when BM loses her job and she goes after SO to pay her for it the courts will overlook her stupidity.  

Its super messed up that a woman pulling in 6 figures between her salary and CS will not be held responsible for her share (state calculator says 40%) of financial obligations for her own damn kids.  If she ever made an effort maybe I'd feel differently.  I just don't see that changing for either of us.

once.  I demanded if they were going after my money then I would be seeking my own counsel and a foresic accountant to find her parents money (whom she was living with) and use that to offset as well. 

I have told DH repeatedly...the minute my income becomes part of the CS equation is the minute I file for divorce from him and he will need to find other housing arrangements. NO way will that orange teetthed overgrown rodent get any part of the money I worked long and hard to secure.  Just because she lifted her beaver tail and Dh went there is NOT my problem and not my responsibility.

Courts are a really sad place for most men. The system really needs to be revised and not allow BMs to rake some men of all their salary's. 
 

SO made a comment to me the other day about claiming skids. He still (for whatever reason) allows BM to claim skids. The always alternated 2/1. This coming year should be her year to claim two. I'll add, this makes my blood boil but, SO thinks SS17 might have to claim himself because of his wages. I have to look into more but, he said that if she gives him a hard time about him taking over claiming skids on his taxes (when she provides literally $0) he will threatened to take her to court for child support. I told him I'll be right there to help him pay. F her. Let's see what happens. 
 

She hopefully will know better but, who knows. 100% confidence though a judge would rule for SO. 
 

At DH's last mediation, BM tried her hardest to get hold of my income information, but he refused to provide it. We downloaded his official tax transcripts, which include what he paid and information on taxes taken out, without including my income or our complete tax return. This might not have flown in a full court review, but BM didn't provide her full income (she claimed she didn't have the paperwork, yet), so really, her lawyer couldn't push too much. She provided her joint tax return (I don't believe she and her DH are legally married, but they file as married, which I believe is fraud), which claimed that her DH made $26K for the year and spent $45K on his business (a convenient $20K loss for tax purposes). 

I will refuse to provide any income information to BM. She makes a lot more than DH...she may even make more than DH and I combined...she's just money-hungry. She's also a complete fraud. She is a CPA, but didn't even file taxes for the last three years she and my DH were married. She also underreported her income and deducted personal expenses from her business revenue, which is completely illegal. When DH went to the IRS to get an innocent spouse ruling, they wanted him to testify against her in a tax fraud case, but he refused. 

just ask a SM.

The US is a capitalist country, so the bottom line will always be $$$. This is why we aren't seeing more Family Law reform - fixing the system would put most of the pigs feeding from the trough out of business.

I find it pathetic that I - an unrelated, childfree woman - did more to support and rear BM2's youngest than she did. She had three kids by two different men, and never worked to help support any of them. It's the twenty-first century, and gender equality has made great strides almost everywhere OTHER than in family law.

The double standard is ridiculous. Every parent should be prepared to work to support their offspring. Yes, women do deserve some time off before/after birth, but they do not deserve a free ride for the rest of their lives. In fact, judges should be less inclined to award custody to individuals of ANY gender who can't demonstrate an ability to support their kids.

We already have a plan that if my income was to be counted into CS, we would be divorcing and I would be getting a cut of the "pie". My husband would become a formal tenant of mine so we could still live together.