Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 paulpa
Joined: 2/12/2011
Msg: 556
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!Page 31 of 33    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33)
when... I know a few girls who marry and wait until they can get the most out of it when they break up, then they do it again with other men, it is like a black widow, without killing the man... just leaving him broke. This one lady is middle aged now, never had a job, but is rich.
 browneyesboo
Joined: 5/19/2005
Msg: 557
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/2/2011 3:15:32 PM
The whole issue of child support is very confusing to me.
While I do agree the father should be active in support of
his kids, I don't get the monthly stipend usually assigned,
nor do I get the formula used to come to the agreed amount.

My kids were older when I was divorced, but one lived with me,
and my expenses with her there were not noticiably higher. Sure
we spent more on groceries than a single person, but on the other
hand I'd be still be spending the same for heat, electricity, cable,
phone, etc. I'm not sure what other expenses
the custodial parent experiences regarding housing and groceries.

I do see the need for money for clothing and
dance lessons, swim lessons, etc. whatever. And of course if there are out of
pocket medical expenses not covered by insurance. But you don't
spend the same amount every month. I mean I didn't buy my kids
new clothes and shoes every month. Seems like the easier thing to
do would be when they spent time with dad, he took them out shopping
for something they might need, maybe paid for the swimming and mom
paid for the dance lessons.

I honestly don't get it. Unless there is alimony involved (which I don't
get at all) I don't see why someone should get money every month
simply because their kids live with them. Why wouldn't you share the
expenses as they came up? Give some money every week for groceries,
invite the kid out and pay for the entertainment.
When you pay child support, do you
get to deduct the days or weeks in the case of summer vacation that
the kids stay with you, or does the other parent have to start paying?

I think the child support system right now is archaic and dates back to when
women didn't work and stayed home taking care of kids. I also think a lot
of times the "child support" is used for expenses that have nothing at all to
do with the child.

Of course this is only my opinion based on the screwing my brother got
from his ex wife, and based on the forms I had to fill out when I got divorced.
One of my daughters lived with my ex because she was in school and the other
lived with me. Neither one of us asked for money from the other, and when
the girls needed something it was never an issue between us. Maybe the difference
was we had a civil divorce and knew we were both responsible for the kids.

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but I'm okei with that. I've often thought (for
the most part) guys really get screwed in divorces. No doubt there are really
bad stories out there (and I'm sure they'll come flying on the screen any moment),
but something wrong when a couple gets divorced and the dad has to file
bankruptcy and move back home with his parents so he can afford to pay his
ex wife so she can live in the family home.

I'm outta here for the day, so flame away. I'll try to remember to check back!






 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 558
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/2/2011 7:35:30 PM
No flame here, but browneyesboo, cs has no correlation to the family home, it is merely a percentage of income; the percentage that has been figured, actuarially (is that a word?), to be attributed to the continued maintenance of children. It is, of course, assumed, that one would continue to spend the same percentage of income on expenses attributed to their children as they did prior to a failed relationship. If we're being honest, human nature seems to indicate that most (men & women) are quick to deny their children the same things they chose for them once they have decided to split, instead choosing selfishness. Of course, in this case, not having children yet, the parties discussed really have no idea how it feels to explain to a child that they can no longer take dance lessons since mommy or daddy now has to go out socially, or buy present or dinners , whatever the case may be. If you ask me, this is at the heart of much of the cs debate that rages on in these forums. Raising children involves sacrifice, and it seems evident that those who are willing to sacrifice for their children become less willing when they themselves want some free time during which they would spend their money on themselves. I certainly recognize the detrimental (often monumental!) financial effects of a breakup, but they are shared by both parties, far more often than not. If you are willing & able to have your children enrolled in the best schools, live in the best neighborhood, wear the designer toddler clothing, why should it be the kids who have to make the sacrifice? Perhaps it might be best to think this out prior to actually bringing your children up in a world that may one day fall out from under them so that you can continue a lifestyle you enjoy. Forgo the Mercedes, the 3000 sq foot home, whatever, and get in touch with what is really important. Let's face it; it is more likely than not that you will end up divorced. Wouldn't it be better to prepare by living more modestly than to prepare legally to force to your children to do so?
 packard77
Joined: 11/5/2010
Msg: 559
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/23/2011 8:31:01 AM

human nature seems to indicate that most (men & women) are quick to deny their children the same things they chose for them once they have decided to split, instead choosing selfishness


..... explain to a child that they can no longer take dance lessons since mommy or daddy now has to go out socially, or buy present or dinners

These statements can't be any further from the truth. Its not about selfishness. Its about the new reality!!! The separated parties now have to foot alone previously joint- bills. Utilities, Rent/Mortgage, Car Payments, etc etc... hence at the end of the day, after all the "necessities of life" are paid for, there is not enough money for the kids to attend dance classes, flute lessons, camping trips, or live the posh life they used to live.

Wouldn't it be better to prepare by living more modestly than to prepare legally to force to your children to do so?
It really doesn't matter how modestly you lived before the break-up. Its rather, if your ex is willing to continue "living modestly" as before when he/she knows that, with the backing of the courts, they can force you to pay for a new not-so-modest lifestyle because you can afford it. How many times have we heard the courts awarding ridiculous amounts (eg $12K, $33K, $56K) per month for a child when we all know very well that they didn't use to spend that much on them when they were married. If fact, how on earth do you spend that much money of a kid(s) per month?

Anytime someone complains about CS, some people jump to the conclusion that the person does not want to care for the kids. About time we stop that stupid line of reasoning!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 560
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/23/2011 5:40:23 PM

I'm not bitter. I'm simply speaking the cold hard truth... the truth that the child support tables are not based on the cost of supporting a child, but in fact are modeled after a fantasy world where the kids benefit from the income of both parents as if they were still together... hence... "re-balancing of lifestyles" between the two parties. Even says so on the government website.
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/fcy-fea/sup-pen/index.html

And that lifestyle re-balancing means it's not child support anymore. It means that it's child support with some spousal support mixed in... plus expenses like child care added on top of that... plus then the courts will add spousal support on top of that.

In this day of "equality" between men and women, if child support truly was child support, it would be based on the costs directly attributable to the kids. It should be up to each adult parent to work and provide any 'lifestyle' beyond that.

But that's not the reality in Canada... or the USA for that matter.

After all, if women are "equal", then why can't they work the same as I have for the past 15+ years?


I wholeheartedly agree that reality is specific to the individual; I also agree that child support tables are basically fair. That's the reality; basically & general apply when it comes to statute. Everyone's situation is different, but I do believe that the percentages of incomes set aside as attributable to the expense of one's children are fair & not unrealistic. It is not unrealistic to think that the sacrifice of a failed relationship should be borne to as small a degree as possible by children, instead falling on the shoulders of the adult parties. "Re-balancing of lifestyles" has to do with the lifestyles of the adults, and I feel quite comfortable stating that more often than not, lifestyles changes befall both parties of a failed relationships, whether one chooses to acknowledge that fact or not.

Women & men being equal doesn't have all that much to do with it, except for the fact that more women than men have custody, and that more women than men forgo work experience to stay home with their children. How could you expect anyone who has not worked in 15 years to be able to earn the same income as someone who has spent the last 15 yrs gaining work experience? Gender aside, but as a matter of reality? Also as a matter of reality, many women can & do work the same as they have the past 15 years.
 mrcs84
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 561
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/23/2011 5:57:27 PM

How could you expect anyone who has not worked in 15 years to be able to earn the same income as someone who has spent the last 15 yrs gaining work experience?

Well, if they had been working during the 11 years that the kid was in school, then they wouldn't have such a predicament. That 7 hours of free time a day could contribute to not only having work experience in the event of a break-up, but the added income allows for a better home-living. And between 3-4 people (assuming the kids are old enough to start doing a few chores), it's really not that hard to maintain a clean house.
 Capitano_Blaugh
Joined: 3/18/2008
Msg: 562
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/23/2011 6:10:54 PM

Well, if they had been working during the 11 years that the kid was in school, then they wouldn't have such a predicament. That 7 hours of free time a day could contribute to not only having work experience in the event of a break-up, but the added income allows for a better home-living.


You, you, you, cruel heartless bastidge...

... are you suggesting that mother go to work and kids may have to, like, make their own lunches and spend ALL day at school and have mother WORK? Mother needs to stay at home while they're in school just in case there's an emergency!

What a horrible little man you are.....

 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 563
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/23/2011 8:10:25 PM
Once children are in school, there may well not be a reason to be at home, but it can take several years before a youngest child is of school age, can't it? Those years impact earning ability. Additionally, children don't go to school in the summer. The flexibility to provide for one's children more often than not has a negative impact on earnings. Lest we forget it is more often than not, and whether one might like to admit or not, a decision made by two parties for one of them to stay at home.

As far as how much it costs to raise a child, the percentage of income works because that is subjective. I am 100% confident that it costs Tom Cruise far more to raise his child than it cost me or my ex to raise ours. That was his choice, however, and he should be held accountable to the implicit contract brought about by draping his child with diamonds. No one should be held less accountable to providing for their children the lifestyle they chose for them. Do you think that $2,500.00 affects Tom the one who earns a million annually to the extent that $2,500.00/ month would affect me, really? It's all relative.
 Capitano_Blaugh
Joined: 3/18/2008
Msg: 564
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/23/2011 8:38:17 PM

Lest we forget it is more often than not, and whether one might like to admit or not, a decision made by two parties for one of them to stay at home.


You know, every time I hear, or read, this bit of drivel, I just can't help but think about how the women who say this have obviously NEVER lived with a female spouse.

There really is NEVER any discussion about who's going to stay home with the kids. Women invariably have a veto on this vote.....

.. I know you're trying your bestest to make it sound like men have a choice, but, seriously, how many women have you EVER met who DON'T want to stay home for the first year, at least, after a kid's born?

Come on, be honest.



 valenciacityx
Joined: 3/10/2009
Msg: 565
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/23/2011 10:11:16 PM
snipped and cut, I can without reservations say, it aint mine, every single time.... and if you had one while with me, there is no clearer evidence of your infidelity.
(curb - kick - done)

Lloyds was actually looking at running a 'marriage' insurance policy.... they couldnt get the numbers to work that it was profitable and that men would still enroll in it..... maybe Obama can fix that one too ;)
 mysterywoman999
Joined: 3/13/2011
Msg: 566
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/24/2011 2:49:58 PM

There really is NEVER any discussion about who's going to stay home with the kids. Women invariably have a veto on this vote.....

.. I know you're trying your bestest to make it sound like men have a choice, but, seriously, how many women have you EVER met who DON'T want to stay home for the first year, at least, after a kid's born?

Come on, be honest.


I wanted to stay home with my little ones, but I can't say what other women want. My ex felt even more strongly than I did that I should stay home with our kiddies. He was raised by two hard working parents who were never home, and he hated that.

Maybe most women DO want to stay home for at least some time, but maybe a majority of men who can afford it would also much rather have their children cared for by their mother, rather than see their children in full time day care.
 mysterywoman999
Joined: 3/13/2011
Msg: 567
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/24/2011 2:53:10 PM

Wonder what they would say about the tiny bit of $200 a month some parents receive from the non custodial parent in a month?


CS is based on income. One would know that if one's spouse only earned a $30000 per year, he/she should not expect to receive much in the way of CS in the event of a divorce. There is no logical basis for any complaint.
 Smarts and Heart
Joined: 12/15/2009
Msg: 568
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/24/2011 6:27:24 PM
You are a liar. You know how I know you're a liar? Two reasons:
1. The listings on realtor.ca that show many 3 bedroom places. In my own area in southwest Toronto, I see nine 3br houses listed for less than $350,000. And if I include condos and townhouses, then there are 74 properties listed. And my area is far from being the cheapest. But it's also far from being the most expensive.
2. The fact that I paid $359,000 for my 3 bedroom detached house in 2008. And since then, prices did NOT move up that much.


I don't lie, but obviously you don't comprehend what you read very well!
I was refering to YOUR home which you say, is a 3 bedroom DETACHED property; not a semi, townhouse, Condo, or a tear down fixer upper. I stand by the fact that a decent DETACHED home, on an average lot, under $450,000 in Toronto doesn't exist, in this market! In 2008 we had a small recession when the prices dropped 10-15% which may have been when you bought. In the past 3 years the prices have made a tremendous recovery over and beyond! Your house is most definitly worth $450,000+. Fact not fiction.
Check Realtor.ca .....AGAIN WE'RE TALKING "DETACHED".

( For your personal info, in your area, SW TO, a 2 bedroom, less than 800 sq ft 40's, post war, detached bungalow, with basement leaks, crumbling brick work, asbestos wrapped ducting, original boiler and rads, no garage, near the Ontario food terminal area, listed for $400,000 in March 2011, had multiple (3)offers over list and the owner still held out for more sending them all back!( One of those offers was mine, on behalf of a client) I can go on and on!
That's the danger of being an amateur, looking through Realtor.ca and not decifering what those facts really mean. If you really believe your 3 bedroom detached home house isn't worth much more than $385,000 I have a client buyer who may be willing to buy your home for $425,000, cash deal with a 2 week closing! That's 10%+ more than what you think your house is worth! )

If a parent doesn't have custody of kids, they have a choice of living in a 1 bedroom dwelling, a basement apartment, or anywhere else of their choice. But when you have physical custody of children you decisions are based on them.

Your grocery bills may have gone down "considerably" because there are 3 fewer people eating at home and if you're totally honest, your eating "out" expenses probably have gone up as a single person.

As for $150 for clothing for 2 children....$75 dollars averaged a month for each child...roughly $900 a year for Winter coats, Jackets, Sweaters, Pants, Shirts, Underwear, Boots, Running shoes, Socks, etc for a GROWING child being unreasonable.....I really don't think so!

Child support is based on the income of the non-custodial parent. In Ontario $1200 a month payment for 2 children is based on roughly an $85,000 income. That doesn't seem out of line for 2 children. Anyone who thinks that that constitutes subsidized spousal support, truly isn't living in any major North American city I know of.

Just as an aside....no, I never received this kind of child support from my ex. I "know" exactly what it costs to provide for a child. The majority of women out there bear the brunt of child rearing and support, not men. That's also a fact that can be supported by facts and figures.

To the responsible men and women who ungrugingly,do support their children, you'll reap the benefits in the long run. Well cared for children are our future.
 Smarts and Heart
Joined: 12/15/2009
Msg: 569
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/24/2011 6:48:40 PM
Yes, there is nothing like facts to clear the air. For instance, a $100K income yields about $48K net, or about $4K per month. So $2400/month in child support results in a net to the payer of about $1600/month. So, the payer can't, according to your figures, actually afford to live in the same city as the 2 kids.


If you want to stick to facts, with an income of $100,000 you'd end up paying under $1300 for 2 children, in Quebec, and around $1400 in Ontario so I don't know where you get the $2400 ?

On $100,000 annual income in Ontario taxes would be about $29,000, leaving a net income of $71,000, $5900 a month, minus $1400 for child support, leaving $4500 a month.

It never fails to amaze me how much exaggeration and fabrication is involved in stating child support amounts! It tells me that perhaps it's individuals who have never paid, that are making these comments.
 packard77
Joined: 11/5/2010
Msg: 570
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/25/2011 8:18:01 PM
putifina: ..wow... thats a lot of personal information on here. Poor guy..!! He has no way of defending himself.
 mysterywoman999
Joined: 3/13/2011
Msg: 571
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 4/25/2011 8:38:04 PM

I keep wondering what's going to happen as the trend continues that women are going to be the main money-makers in marriages/relationships....


Well Capitano, I can answer that. They will act the same way any guy would because emotionally speaking, men and women aren't that different


When I first separated from my ex, he paid support based on his income. If he complained about it, or thought it was unjust, he never expressed that to me or our children. When one of our kids wanted to try living with him, we simply looked up the amount I would pay for the child based on my income and I paid it. He makes way more money than I do, so the amounts paid by him and me were not really close, but I would never, ever have tried to get out of paying it. So I agree that women and men often act very similarly.

The child support tables are a necessary evil. There is no way the courts can be deciding how much a NCP should be paying on a case by case basis. Different families have different standards and different views on what they would want to provide to their children, so the government has to step in and set a standard based on income of the NCP. Obviously, the rates are the same all over ON, even though the cost of living varies greatly. A CP parent receiving $1200 per month for two children in Fort Erie could easily cover rent of a decent house where each kid could have his/her own room, and yard just using CS, whereas in Burlington it might not be doable. That's life. There is no point breaking down what it costs to live where, because the federal support tables call for a set amount in each province. Nobody cares if you want to feed your kids spaghetti every night and dress them in used clothing from goodwill, even though you make a decent living. You are not allowed to pay less just because you are cheap.
 Smarts and Heart
Joined: 12/15/2009
Msg: 572
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 5/6/2011 9:39:58 AM
Suuurrre you do. I had my property appraised last year by a couple of agents who I know are professionals and have sold many properties in the area.



Well if I'm an "amateur" who found a decent place and can still find decent places for well under 400K, it doesn't say much about *your* real estate searching abilities, does it?
No way was it a sub 800sq ft bungalow with asbestos next to the Ontario Food Terminal. Those go for under 300K.


"Talk to the deaf" and "The blind will see".

Ask your professionals to do a search on 2 bedroom bungalows SOLD and LISTED, and or TERMINATED/SUSPENDED in the W07 area, around the Ontario Food terminal, in the last 6 months.

Right at this moment there are 16 active listings for bungalows and the lowest priced one is a 2 bedroom all wood siding bungalow, on a 25' lot with an unfinished basement, listed at $399,900 and that's the lowest priced bungalow in the area. It's on Open House this Sunday, ask one of your "professional" for the address and take a look, it might open your eyes to what the market is doing out in your area! (Sorry I can't post the address on a public forum, it's not my listing)
The lowest priced 2-story detached 3 bedroom house in the w07 area is $599,000 at this moment with 20 listed above that.
My proof is right there; statistics and recorded sales and listings don't lie. I can't make these up.

The only arguements you use are based on your "Real Estate" experiences of 20 years ago with some unscrupulous agent, or it could be that all offers fell apart due to various reasons. I'm happy to say that RECO and OREA have cracked down on such activities. All offers have to be registered before an agent can state that there are multiple offers. Lying can cost them their license and a steep penalty to the brokerage. Every multiple offer situation I've been on, all the agents are in the same office, and go in one at a time to present their offer. We can see how many are there.

A purchaser always has the right to decide whether they want to put in an offer or how high they're willing to go. It's just that supply and demand determines what the market is doing at any moment of time.

Whenever you're ready to really sell your home let me know. Your "professionals" may end up costing you a bundle. Your home is possibly worth $450,000! Go out to Open Houses on the week-end. It's one of the best ways to give you an idea of your position in the market.

As for taking care of your kids, congratulations; it's commendable of you, and you're right everyone's "costs" can vary but "child support " tables are based on averages, not the exceptions.

My experiences with the cost of raising my kids falls within that average.
 Laha Math
Joined: 7/15/2010
Msg: 573
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 5/8/2011 4:33:45 PM
"He is British and she is Canadian". In Ontario child support is not between husband and wife but between parents and taxpayer. If a parent cannot and the other will not support the children the government steps in and forces payment. A woman cannot, for example, ask a man to father a child and absolve him in writing of any obligation to support the child. The government says if you father a child you are responsible for support if required. So in that sense it overrides any prenuptial contract.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 574
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 5/13/2011 9:10:37 PM
While the dollar by dollar diatribe hgas gotten ridiculous:

Hockey is too expensive. I have my kids play soccer and other more reasonably priced activities.


Yet somehow, your math doesn't work. I would not likely be very far off to say that if you buy soccer cleats, shin guards & proper socks, not to mention mouthpieces, your own math would dictate that you spend about 40% of your cited clothing expenses on soccer gear alone. Somehow I doubt your numbers just as much as you doubt the home prices posted, just as anyone with a brain (or a calculator) knows better then to believe that is costs more or even the same to feed two people as to feed one. This has gotten silly & petty.

Look, having one's children the majority of the time increases expenses as a mater of fact, and period. Can we move on?
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 575
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 5/13/2011 9:19:21 PM

Yikes! There's some scary azz stuff mentioned in this thread. Almost wish I hadn't of read it. Man, is child support really based off a percentage of income? I would think the individual states could probably figure out some 'cost of raising a kid' number. The percentage method seems like it could easily be abused by scammers.


Would you really want the state to decide how you should raise your kids? How could one possibly compare the expenses of raising a child in the lifestyle of those who choose, say, Beverly Hills over Fontana? Percentage of income seems to promote maintaining a lifestyle for the children that has been chosen, not by them, but by their parents.
 packard77
Joined: 11/5/2010
Msg: 576
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 5/15/2011 1:33:53 PM

if a family that hasn't divorced can raise 2-5 kids to adults on a combined family income of around $3K/month.....I have trouble seeing how a custodial parent could need $5K/month per kid. Example: If parent 1 has an income of $50K and has custody of 2 kids and parent 2 has an income of $50M....I just don't think 10% of $5M should be ordered to go to parent 1.

That is exactly what most of the guys here are saying!! There should be a cap on CS here in North America as in most European countries. CS doesnt make sense after a certain amount. Moreso the custodial parent doesnt have to account for it to the paying parent. Its just pure robbery to ask someone to pay over and above what is required to raise the child(ren) just because she/he makes so and amount of money.
 kikusz
Joined: 4/7/2009
Msg: 577
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 5/17/2011 9:06:29 PM
yeah...she went for his guts...2700..how much did he actually make in NET?
assuming 2200/2300 and shelling out 1250...about half his $$ leaving him with 1000 bucks/month.
Best way for him to red rid of it...marry someone else, even if just some slut just to give her legal status in the country or some shit..
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 578
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 5/23/2011 8:45:06 PM

Ireally don't believe a kid costs more than a few hundred dollars a month to raise to a healthy adult---food, shelter, clothing, heathcare, dental. Maybe a couple hundred more if it is still young and requires daycare or some basic sports gear when a little older. If special needs kids---then yes thousands. But maybe my thinking is warped, because if a family that hasn't divorced can raise 2-5 kids to adults on a combined family income of around $3K/month.....I have trouble seeing how a custodial parent could need $5K/month per kid. Example: If parent 1 has an income of $50K and has custody of 2 kids and parent 2 has an income of $50M....I just don't think 10% or $5M should be ordered to go to parent 1.


One might agree that it MAY not cost more than that to raise a child, but certainly one decides how much it costs to raise THEIR child, no? Never mind the fact that only some families can raise 2-5 kids on the amounts you cite, as it depends to a great extent upon where one resides, parents who choose to spend 10K/month per child spend that amount, regardless of what is "necessary", no? Say, for example, you make $200K/yr., your ex spouse has no income, you put your kids in private school, sign them up for piano lessons, dance classes & hockey. Should those kids have to give up all that simply because you decide that you no longer want to be with your partner, their other parent? Does that seem fair to the kids? Isn't that what cs is all about; the parents continuing to provide for the children the lifestyle THEY CHOSE for them? The 10% isn't for the parent, it is for the continuum of lifestyle of the child. Whether bitterness (sorry, but I find evidence of same in the statement that the 10% goes "to the parent") clouds our view or not, it seems to make sense, as it seems more than simply plausible that the cp spends 10% of their 50k on child related expense as well. It's not about how much income, it's about the percentage of income., and it is decided by the choices of the parents involved, not all parents of all children. FYI, here in NY, even the most reasonable daycare for one child is in excess of 10% of 50K/yr., substantially so.

Frankly, I am fully aware, as you should be, that a parent who makes 5M is well equipped and very likely to win custody, should they desire, over the parent who earns 50K; facts are facts. While I argue the fairness of the percentage of income in cs calculations, I am far from an advocate of the judicial system where the one with the most cash for a lawyer prevails.

The contention, and the basis for cs is that one spends approx. a specific percentage of their income on their children. If you make more, you spend more. We may not agree on what amount should be spent on children, but do you really think that the offspring of those who make millions live the same lifestyle as your kids? Would you advocate shared income for the masses, or are children the only ones who should bear the brunt of poor choices made by adults? It seems to me that the problem is that it suddenly becomes less expensive to raise children when one does not reap the benefits of the relationship that caused the children to be born to begin with. Not picking on you specifically, but intended to be a general comment made from experience. Sad commentary on society if you ask me.
 wildman_1966
Joined: 8/3/2009
Msg: 579
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 5/24/2011 2:25:10 PM
A guy with the financial resources that he has should be talking to an attorney to get a professional opinion. Taking advice from anybody else would be irresponsible.

You are asking a legal question. It needs to be answered by a legal professional.

Is this guy cheap? Or is he just naive? Get a lawyer and PAY for advice.

Chris
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 580
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 5/24/2011 7:05:49 PM
I would like to agree with you, and in principle I do, but the fact is that there are far too many parents who let their anger at their ex allow them to punish their kids. They tell long winded half truths surrounding their circumstances, but the bottom line is that it is much easier to financially abandon one's children when you are living somewhere else. As I said, it is a sad commentary on society, but it seems to be the fact. The gainfully employed suddenly become unable to find a job, the workaholic suddenly finds them self "too busy" to put in the hours they once did, income is hidden. All at the expense of the children. Far different from "have to" as far as a lifestyle change for their children. Were it so simple as agreement between the two parents as to the "needs" & lifestyles of their children cs enforcement would never had come into effect.

On the bright side, I do see that the majority of parents do co parent, at least somewhat successfully, they do recognize that their personal failures are not meant to be a cost to their children. These people, of course, are not involved in court proceedings, so we simply don't hear as much from them. If all parents did the right thing, there would be reason at all for the involvement of the state. CS enforcement, as I see it, is a reaction.
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  >