|
|
|
|
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 3:23:07 PM | After talking to allot of CP's and NCP's I've been noticing the way in which both groups view child support seems to be dramatically different. And it's something I thought that might be worth discussing as we seem to have a multitude of both groups in here.
I find CP's view child support as money that is supposed to come from the NCP to assist in expense of the house in which the child lives. Not a wrong assumption, just something that I have noticed.
And I find NCP's on the other hand view child support as money that is supposed to go into the direct care of the child. And not the general revenue of the home. Again not a wrong assumption, just something I noticed.
Thought I would get the input of people in here as to what they think is the more appropriate method of thinking. No wrong answers on this one. As both points of view have their valid points, and their drawbacks. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 3:26:56 PM | Yay! Spider's openning another can of worms!
(I'm going to go away for a bit now, let my glee subside a bit, and formulate my first brilliant response to the question asked.)
 | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 3:34:23 PM | scruldbrug...u are hilarious ...
Spider is good for starting some confrontations....makes for alot of fun | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 4:03:51 PM |
scruldbrug...u are hilarious ...
Yes, I am....
I got into a battle with my ex over this very thing last year. She decided she didn't want to work. Because I have the kids 50% of the time, I told her that because we, together, have a Child Raising Corporation where the two of us are partners, I ought to have a reasonable expectation that she, the other partner, ought to do her very best to bring as much to the table, financially, as she is capable of providing.
She responded: " I'm an independent woman and I don't need you for a single thing!"
So, I withheld a half month's support and put it into a separate account. I was interested to see her reaction since I had taken what she said to me literally. Why wouldn't I?
Well, Holy Dinah! I was immediately threatened with legal action. My ex explained that the money I sent her each month had NOTHING to do with her, it was only for the kids, despite the fact that they are with me half the time.
From that little encounter, I discovered that my ex has a remarkable accounting system that magically allocates any money I send her directly to the kids. It has nothing to do with her and she doesn't benefit in any way from it.
So, I now stand corrected, which was corroborated by the lawyer I went to see. He told me that I was a frigging idiot (using Lawyer-Speak, of course), for having the audacity to think that there was any fairness in the way CS is determined. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 4:11:43 PM | For me being the CP I cant talk for NCP's but for me:
A) child support is for things for the child for ex: clothing, diaper's (depending on age) maybe a new toy, ummm things that consist of "for them"
b) if after getting everything that the child needs there is money left over then ok fine spend some for paying bills (ex: rent, food) things like that because then most of the money has gone towards the things that you need for the child that you are sharing the amount for. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 4:14:04 PM | I really think this is a moot point. If I spend $30 on a new outfit, who is to say where that $30 came from. If I paid all of the months bills, including some clothing, food, etc... for the child- and then used the $30 out of CS to buy the new outfit-- am I wrongly spending the money? No, I'm being smart... paying all my expenses and budgeting for the "must haves" before I spend on the "extras". It just means in timing it was "your" money, but at the end of the day, it all goes into one account and is essentially "reimbursing" me for the money I spent on our child. Child support comes sporadically for some, its not always there the moment the child needs something, doesnt mean it doesnt benefit the child.
Now, I am not advocating a mom spending child support on herself, if there is a regular surplus, she should be putting the money away for education or other needs of the child(ren). But honestly, its bean counting in my opinion.
At the end of the day, you have to pay it, and the court doesnt care how it's spent. So long as your child is being well taken care of and given everything they need- why debate things you cannot change. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 4:43:19 PM |
ay! Spider's openning another can of worms!
LOL, thanks for the compliment I think... Well been reading some of the responses to the questions asked. Interesting so far. scruldbrug; I like your example with your EX there. I honestly probably would of done the same thing. Only make sense.
Here is another query to throw into the wind. What about a mom/dad who has multiple children with multiple partners... Say 1 parent is paying support, the other is not. Should that persons child receive more perks then the other? Or should it just be expected they will get treated equally with the money provided?
I have seen cases of a moms being pissed because the Grandparents of 1 child wanted to give their grandchild a bunch of new clothes, and even take them away on vacation... But nothing to do with the child they are not related to...
I have also seen mom's fight with dad's who want to take their child away to Disneyland, but not the other child.. And the mom even going as far to prevent him through the courts. If you think the question doesn't hold merit, for some people it does.
I know 1 guy who has 50/50 custody of his child. Mom decided to have another one with another man. As result her income dropped. So he was required to start paying CS.. Even though it was her choice... He was royally ticked about it... because it was something he had no say over. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 4:56:28 PM |
At the end of the day, you have to pay it, and the court doesnt care how it's spent. So long as your child is being well taken care of and given everything they need- why debate things you cannot change.
And, I guess that's where most NCP's have a problem.
Personally, it's the attitude of ENTITLEMENT that bothers me most. I have no problem whatever supporting my kids. I do that and have done that since before they were born. I will continue to do that.
However, I have a real problem supporting my ex in any way shape or form. As she said, " I'm totally independent and I don't need you for anything!".
Why can't I rely on that as the truth? Because she feels ENTITLED to have access to my money.
So, if there is an extra $30 left after you pay for kid stuff, why not give it back to the guy who sent it to you? Maybe he needs a new outfit too and had to go out with the new squeeze in old jeans because he couldn't afford to buy a new pair...
I'd love to see CP's switch places to see how much they like paying money. See, I understand how it feels on both sides of the fence. I have my kids half the time AND I pay what I think is a significant amount in support each month.
And, please, I DO understand that some of you do it all on your own and the ex gives you nothing and avoids paying. I don't agree with that way of doing things either. I have no problem giving someone a pat on the back for going above and beyond. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 4:57:30 PM | It can definetly become a gray area in regards to treating the kids equally. In an ideal world, there wouldnt be multiple children born out of wedlock, but it happens. I dont think the original dad should be forced to increase his support amount, but I can see where in all practicality some of that money would end up contributing to the needs of the other child(ren)-- rent, food, etc. It may be unfair, but life is unfair. I think for most cases, CS isnt spent as much on "perks" so the equity should be rather fair. But yes, the mom may end up taking both kids to the circus with the CS money... and thus the non-bio child does benefit.
That being said, I dont think the mom can demand same treatment for the non-bio child. While it may be tough, and unfair at some times, its really not the responsibility of the non-bio family. Thats just something the mom needs to have considered, and ultimately must deal with in having chosen to have children with different fathers.
Its one more reason for me to be extremely careful about not having anymore children until I can be as sure as can be about the stability of my furture relationship! LOL.
edit:
I understand your point completely scruldbrug and I agree that in some cases it can be very unfair. In my case, my ex doesnt pay at all, so i am in the pool of women you referenced. I guess, as a single mom who provides 100% for my child, I feel I contribute way more than said child support amount would be anyways- in time, housing, support, recreational activities, personal sacrafice, etc. Now thats not always true in all cases, and I think thats why these debates get so heated, because every situation is different. Every parent has varying degrees of commitment to supporting their children, people are more or less financially responsible, motivated to be independent, improve their lives, etc.
I dont think that any parent- custodial or non, should have to live on nothing. Ultimately there should be some equity in that the kids are taken care of and there is income left for a little extras on both ends. But thats living in an ideal world, and it doesnt always work that way. Which means one or the other has to suffer. Typically, the one who works harder, unfortunately. I dont think that the NCP should suffer and sacrafice so CP can go live a lavish cushy life- thatd be absurd. But I also dont think being a single parent and recieving child support means you can never do anything for yourself. Its all about moderation and living within your means, earning those things for yourself.
Ultimately the bigger issue here is quality of character. I am in college ft, will graduate in dec 2008 with a degree and 3.5 yrs of experience in my field. Upon recieving my degree my income will triple (honestly) and take me out of poverty. I'm making sure that my limited earning potential is temporary and that in the long run I wont "need" the support. (although needing it doesnt mean much, because I still dont see a dime). And I am one of people who does not utilize food/cash assistance, so I have a serious commitment to doing things for myself.
And you are right, I have no idea what its like to have to write a check out for CS every month. But I do know every bit about sacraficing for my child, and at the end of the day- thats what it is. I think the real issue is control. There is distrust in the way the money is spent, which is understandable in many cases... but what is the answer? I'm all for a good debate, but I like to find solutions instead of just complaining. (not saying anyone here is doing that). Its unfair for many of you guys and girls, NCPs and CP's. The system is imperfect- how do we fix it? | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 5:49:42 PM | As result her income dropped. So he was required to start paying CS.. Even though it was her choice...
In the US, the Federal government requires each state to have compulsory guidelines. Having worked i CS before these were in existance, I can tell you they make it more equitable than when it was up to the whim and mood of the Judge. However, the Feds dont tell the states what formula to use. The most prevalent one, and the one I like least looks at CP and NCP income and produces situations like the above... If CP income decreases, how does the logically lead to NCP having a greater ability to pay? IF CP gets huge wage increase, how does that logically lead to NCP owing less? The formulas I think are most fair look at NCP income and call for % based upon # of children. As CP income rises and falls, NCP obligation remains the same - only an increase or decrease in NCP income justifies changing NCP obligation. Guidelines produced relative stability in CS awards UNTIL the emergent of the shared parenting that is so prevalent today. I can understand the frustration of an NCP who has 50/50 custody/parenting (is that person rightfully called an NCP at that point) who must also maintain a bedroom for child etc.
On the other hand, I don't agree with the question posed. Aside from the lady above saying she spent $30 of CS, doesnt most peoples money get merged into their checking account? DO CPs take all their cash and put it inoto budgeting envelopes: 'so much for rent, so much for food..etc' none of the CPs I have dated.
If the cP uses child support for rent or food - isnt that 'for the child'? | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 6:09:07 PM |
I can understand the frustration of an NCP who has 50/50 custody/parenting (is that person rightfully called an NCP at that point) who must also maintain a bedroom for child etc.
This is precisely where I have a problem in my personal situation.
As it's set up, my ex can choose not to work and that will result in me having to pay her more. Nothing will have changed as far as living expenses goes, but she will, simply have made a choice not to work.
On the other hand, if I were to choose not to work, the judge would say that because I have shown that I can earn $X in one year, I will continue to pay that no matter what choices I make.
There is all sorts of case law that's available on this. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 6:11:51 PM | And I 100% agree that is wrong. If you have 50/50 then neither should pay the other. You both have your equal obligation to the kids... what you choose to do for yourself is your own choice.
It's definetly a flawed case law, become high profile, work the system. I'm a bit of a political nut... as much as people hate politics- its a powerful tool. Its unfortunate that there even needs to be a child support enforcement agency, sick sad world. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 6:58:12 PM | Spiderham: Didn't you come up with a formula in another thread that said amounts that may be relevant as for CS payments going into bills and etc.? (something like 25% of utilities and rent for home of CP, 50% daycare and clothing expenses some % or other of grocery and etc.? Correct me if I have that wrong.)
Myself, on the rare occasion that I actually receive support I put it directly into my son's RESP, and leave my usual contribution to his RESP out for fun extras for the family. I mostly do it for future court purposes as solid proof of where the $$ are going, since I am no longer visibly paying for daycare (my partner does that for us now.)
I think it should be accounted for in % of bills and etc. I know for darned sure that I pay a lot more in heat in winters having my son than I would without him. Without him I'd not need to heat the house above 50 degrees - I like that temperature just fine, but will not subject my kid to it. Moot point now that I am using wood. Pay more in life insurance, than if no child, Pay more for just about everything that I can think of. Daycare was $800 per month for me, as I did not qualify for most subsidies, and figured I'd do without being taxed on that new Harper cash help.
So yeah, I guess it should go for the whole home. However I do not think it should be counted on reliably as the CP's regular income. I also think that it depends on % of custody and visitation, or ratio. 50% custody - I hem and haw on that one. However, it is the care of the child in question, and if CP makes very little due to lack of education or opportunity, then the higher earner should help out in that home for the basic necessities. That is just my take though. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:11:13 PM |
Spiderham: Didn't you come up with a formula in another thread that said amounts that may be relevant as for CS payments going into bills and etc.? (something like 25% of utilities and rent for home of CP, 50% daycare and clothing expenses some % or other of grocery and etc.? Correct me if I have that wrong.)
Yes I did mention such a formula. My entire thought process was that you take the number of people in home. Then divide that by the number of children the NCP is responsible for. So say you have 5 people in a home, but the NCP is the father of only 2 of the children you then only calculate from 40% of the total expenses. And then even further only half of that, or 20% is what the NCP should be held responsible for... And also within reason.
Anything above that should be a choice given to the NCP to if he/she would like to spend on their child. And further this amount should never exceed more then 25-30% of the NCP's take home income.
This type of formula would ensure that the NCP always keeps a bare min of 70% of his/her take home pay. And also ensure they are simply not being gouged for things from the CP for things they might want to agree with. | |
|
anj73
|
Joined: 3/12/2007
Msg: 15 | |
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:17:57 PM | I think child support ends up being support for whoever lives with the child as well. ( will edit this to add....at least in my situation and others that I know)
That is just the way it works. Yes, the non paying parent does get benefit of the support as well, as it also provides for a roof over their head along with their child, etc...Just the way it is. Is it fair? who knows...but children should not have to live in poverty just because there parents could not keep their marriage together.
But, I do agree if each parent has the children 50% of time, then the cs should be a minumum amount and based on if there is a huge difference in the parents income.
| |
|
Jen4u
|
Joined: 7/16/2004
Msg: 16 | |
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:20:57 PM | | I am very passionate about this very subject. Go online and read the definition of what child support is for. It is for the care and household needs of the children. That includes household bills such as water, rent, lights, etc. A NCP must help the CP maintain a home and household for the child or children. Child support even takes into account for entertainment such as movie rental and what not. Trust me, i have researched this in depth as I have had this held over my head by my ex on many occasions. What I receive in child support goes directly to child care costs, and doesn't even cover that. But as I remind my ex, it doesn't matter what I use it for, I provide a home, feed, clothe, and keep my kids in extrs curricular activities. I get really angry with people who say that child support should go directly to the children and should be used only for them. I didn't choose to be divorced, he chose to leave. It is his responsiblity to help me provide a home for my children regardless of whether he lives in it or not. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:21:37 PM |
I think child support ends up being support for whoever lives with teh child as well
I agree, in cases where the CP is underemployed, or has a limited earning potential. If a CP is working at a decent job and living comfortably on their own income, they arent dependent on CS like someone who is making minimum wage or low income would be.
Just wanted to point out the difference. Not all CPs (or single moms) are on welfare or minimum wage earnes. Some do work very hard and earn things for themselves. | |
|
anj73
|
Joined: 3/12/2007
Msg: 18 | |
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:22:57 PM | "I didn't choose to be divorced, he chose to leave. It is his responsiblity to help me provide a home for my children regardless of whether he lives in it or not."
Could not have said it better myself!!!  | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:32:03 PM | ^^^I tend to neglect to remember about children of different parents in the home and etc., as it is not my situation, nor will likely be. Percentages are great. Flip my scenario around with the same percentage of earnings taken from me I'd be paying triple of what I am supposed to receive now, and you could be darned sure it would more than cover my son's expenses. I'd be paying roughly $1100/month at the same % of what my ex pays of his income. Fair enough. Unless there is an arrears situation, I do not think someone should be paying more than 25% of their annual income. If yes to arrears, then the NCP is SOL in my opinion. Responsibility of the NCP should not change just because the CP's situation has financially blossomed or busted.
Although if my situation busts, I would go after arrears with a little more dedication. As of yet I am (Knock on wood) without the need of that financial contribution, and the arrears situation helps me out if ever it becomes necessary to fight in court about the rights of my child. Before the flaming of Limestone starts, I am already aware of the self-serving agenda that poses. I do have my reasons.
Edit: First paragraph directed to previous post of Spiderham, second paragraph just me spouting for a bit o' fun. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:33:30 PM | "I didn't choose to be divorced, he chose to leave. It is his responsiblity to help me provide a home for my children regardless of whether he lives in it or not."
I like it... my ex chose to leave with her new guy. Her choice she should have no advantage.... er... no, funnily enough, it doesn't seem to work that way....
.... I still have to pay.
Edit:
AND, I would have had to pay her spousal support as well..... I'm glad she was good enough not to push it when I told her I wouldn't pay that.... | |
|
beck11
|
Joined: 7/27/2005
Msg: 21 | |
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:46:56 PM | I would seek a second opinion from another lawyer if I were you. I do not know how different the laws would be between BC and Saskatchewan, but I do know they are based on the same federal laws and guidelines.
As I share custody, 50%, with my ex, our agreement was set up by the court to recognize that we each make a certain income, therefore we each pay "x" to the other party. For example, based on my income, I pay her $400.00 per month, and based on her income, she pays me $300.00 per month. Therefore, the net result is that I pay $100.00 per month. We also split the federal child tax benefit every month based on the fact that it provides for the child(ren) at both locations.
As for the unemployed problem, the court will recognize someone as being "under-employed" or not contributing up to thier potential (based on past earnings and employability) and will take that into consideration when determining support payments. I believe this will also relate to the pregnancy issue.
I talked to three different lawyers before proceeding through my separation and divorce. The first one seemed to share the thought process that is in this thread-it is going to cost you x dollars every month. The second I was not comfortable with because the questions I asked were not answered to a degree which made me comfortable. The third was more than happy to explain all of the posible scenarios and make suggestions on what would best fit my situation.
We now have an agreement that spells out all of the basics and is recalculated every year by simply plugging in some numbers from an income tax return.
I know lawyers can be expensive, but it my be worth checking out! | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:48:38 PM | In my opinion, once we are divorced, it is no longer my responsibility to financially support my ex. It is my responsibility to support MY child, and only MY CHILD.
Just like when you try to claim a home office on your taxes.. they take the square footage of the house that is actually being used for a home office, and divide that by the total amount of square footage in the house... THAT percentage is what you can claim as a home office... and electric, water, etc is divided by that percentage. You don't get to claim the whole house and all your utilities, because those aren't being directly used for the home office.
So, in the case of a child support system, you take the total expenses of a household and divide it by the total number of people in the household. That should give you the amount of expenses that it takes to support one person. Take that amount, and divide it by 2. THAT is the amount that should be paid in child support. Throw in a contingency of 10% to cover un-accounted for expenses, and your good.
It should never be calculated based on income. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 7:58:48 PM | | this is my first post....i just want to share my current situations regarding child support....my ex and I separated last year...since then he never payed child support, not a single penny, there is a court order him paying child support but he never did. Our children are young....one still in diapers, I singlehandedly supporting the children in their everyday lives, weekend activities, day cares, food, clothes, school field trips, medical bills, etc. I am working and I work hard to support the children and my self....question is...why court order doesnt really mean anything if the dad refuse to pay? he was fighting me in court for custody as he wanted to get full custody of the children...and our next court date is coming soon again. Isn't it that how ugly the separation is, children's comes first?....child support money is for the children. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 8:24:09 PM | | zzzmile: It's a sad truth that there are moms who misuse child support and dads who refuse to pay. And whether the majority or minority-- the paint us all with a bad stroke. Do right by way of your children, as they grow they will see the situation for what it is, and you wont ever have to say a word. | |
|
| Child Support OR Family Support
Posted: 3/27/2007 9:10:18 PM | S_C here:
I always thought part of child support (not that I've gotten a cent of it this year and maybe $300.00 tops last yr) was so that the child would have a home life close to what it would have been like if the parents had stayed together and that's why it's based on the NCP's income.
But feel free to correct me if I am wrong. | |
|
|
| Page 1 of 12
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 |
|
Home
login 
