Why does my partner pay $2400 a month child support for one kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The crazy thing is that when he has more kids, each won’t get $2400. I make a similar amount and bring home 3k a paycheck (after maxing out retirement and my health insurance)

I know dh and I don’t spend that on our kids a month. We have the same house and cars we did prekids, so those costs would be the same regardless of kids.

Same with us. It costs us no more in housing or electricity as we'd have the house regardless.

Are you a single Mom? Without a child I could live in a 1 bedroom apartment. With a child we need two bedrooms. The cost goes up quite a bit.

No, you don’t “need” that. You want it.

So your argument is that OP should tell her BF “go to court and reduce your payment. I don’t care if your ex and child have to move into a 1 bedroom apartment or move away from your child’s school and friends.”

That is correct. Those are also not the only options. Sharing a larger space with a roommate is another option.

Omg is this the omnipresent poster who is always roused by larger child support news? Every time someone mentions they get over $500 in child support some poster comes in to say that’s too much bla blah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP it is none of your damn business. He has a responsibility to the child he brought into this world, not the person who's keeping his dick occupied.

This was kind of crude, but for anyone who has been there and done that, very on-point!

OP is crude for literally wanting to take candy from a baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2400/month is literally less than 20% of his income. You sound heartless.

Remember Dad pays taxes on his income, and probably provides the health care and more. Mom gets all that money tax free. $2400 is more than most people spend on their kids. Is more than some people earn in a month. Its a lot of money. We spend a lot on our child and don't even come close to that if you average it out over a year (except maybe if you include college savings).

-.+100 the file support we paid for one was much more than the amount we paid for two in our house ( including health insurance, share of utilities and food etc, not just direct kid costs). All while the ex lies about where money and activities came from and never went back to work. I could go on with more... 🙄

We had all kinds of drama. Ex demanded we pay for her health insurance even though kid had always been on Dad's since birth but she didn't want to use it. Dad was ordered to provide insurance. She ended up dropping her insurance and putting him on medicaid as we got a call from medicaid demanding we reimburse them (which we refused as we had insurance for him and they should have done their homework). She'd demand he pay extra for activities and then the kids wouldn't participate. We finally caught on and said tell us where to send the money (company or school) and we'll send it directly and tell us where we buy the uniform/shoes or what ever was needed and sizes and we'll ship it directly to the house. But, hey, no one here wants to hear the other side. And, the braces... we agreed to pay 1/2 per the court order after insurance directly to the orthotist and she refused to use the child support money to pay her half so kid never got them till an adult. They should make people who get child support file yearly like they do with guardianship or social security rep. payee to prove the money is spend on the individual receiving it.

As a parent, the food costs are nominal for an extra kid. Our housing and utility costs are the same. Our big expenses are private lessons and sports and camps (but all of those are optional and I could pick much cheaper ways of doing it). Even so, its not $2000+ a month even with a sleep away camp for a week.

Bologna.

How is it bologna? We bought a house before we had a child. So, same cost as before as we needed a place to live. We see no difference in utility bills. And, food isn't that much and mine are older. So, what other expense are there except activities? Those are optional. And, clothing but I shop clearance so usually the cost is minimal. And, transportation? We have the same cars and would regardless of a child. Many inflate the cost of kids.

It is bologna that "food costs are nominal for an extra kid" (the part I bolded.) If you truly believe that food costs for a kid are "nominal" you must have never had custody of a kid over the age of 8 or 9. This was a topic of discussion on a different thread on DCUM a few days ago--about how much preteens and teens eat, especially if they are athletes.

NP. MAYBE kid eats an extra $400 a month.

I think $2400 a month is crazy. DH makes 150k. That's what our mortgage costs! Our kids are in daycare, so clearly the 3 of them are more than $2400, but we tightened our belts for a few years. I can't imagine if DH were sending $2400 off to a stepkid, we wouldn't be able to afford much of anything. I guess it just gives dads incentive to get full custody.

Simple - he wouldn’t be able to afford you

No, what it should do is give dads the incentive to not have more children they can't afford because they aren't able to walk away from supporting the children they already helped to create. Sorry, but those days are over. It should also give any woman that is thinking about starting a family with a man that has children with another woman the incentive to think long and hard about whether this is the man for her. I know it burns your britches that you can't have everything of his and he is helping to support another household but that is the LAW. Bitching and moaning here on DCUM doesn't and won't change the fact that the child OP is complaining about is receiving 2400 a month in child support. Its the LAW and what the courts and public policy have deemed said child is entitled to receive. Get over it or get the hell out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s hurtful is when you have bio kids getting way way less than a step kid because there’s not enough money left over. Total difference in living situation between siblings.

I just don’t really get child support between two people who have 50/50 custody and make similar amounts. Why is it even needed?

Well, because they are ALL the biological kids of the father (in this case).

You are looking at it as "step-kids" getting less than "bio kids" but actually these kids all have an equal claim to their father's care, and his financial support. It is also true that the kids who are born first are treated differently by the courts. If the second marriage also ends in divorce, then child support on the "second batch" is determined after the "first batch" is removed, which tends to lesson the child support for the "second batch."

Basically, if you (general you) don't like it that your new partner is paying child support, then don't have kids with them. If you choose to partner with someone who already has children, then recognize that those kids have just as much claim to their father's resources as your "bio kids."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point is for many of us it doesn't cost anything additional to have kids living in our home. You don't need a larger residence. We have a 1000 square foot house and do just fine in it. You want a larger house. There is want vs. need. If you as Mom choose to have a nicer lifestyle than you can afford, you shouldn't expect Dad to pay for it. I choose to spend my money on my child so they have a nicer lifestyle than I do. Its all about priorities. You may need to live in a 3000 square foot house paid for by your ex but reality is 1000 is just fine.

And for many of you, it does!

Want and need is meaningless.

Child support is pegged to income, not to some mythical "want vs. need". It's not about how much a child need. It's about the fact that the state has decreed that your child is entitled to a certain percentage of your income, whatever that income is. If a non-custodial parent makes a million dollars, the child will get a percentage of that. If that parent makes 80K, the child will get a percentage of that. These two children eat the same # of calories a day and can be fed for the same amount, yet their child support numbers will be vastly different. Want and need does not come into it.

Beyond all that, a child has a right to support by both parents. I can’t see why a loving parent would want their child to have LESS at the other parent’s home.

Same, but I understand why shitty stepmoms do.

Oh, bugger off.

There are plenty of shitty Kim’s out there who don’t give dad a say and then expect the stepmom to just keep her mouth shut when $ that should be going into their household/future is being chucked down the drain by the ex’s poor decision making/life choices.

And there you have it, in a nutshell.

"This money should be mine and instead it is going to somebody else. Waaahhhh."

The stepmom can keep her mouth shut or not. It doesn't matter. She's not the party to the child support action. She has to make do with whatever is left.

Did you actually read what I wrote?

This is about toxic mothers who think they get to have all of the say AND are entitled to the max amount of money they can squeeze from the dad.

I get that the law is the law. And if there is an ability to truly coparent, then I have no issue. But if mom obstructs the dad’s ability to express his opinio/weigh in on matters, then I think he has every right to mitigate the amount of financial hemorrhaging he is subject to - within the law.

And, in our particular situation, my opinion most definitely matters to DH. We have very difficult discussions about these matters - and he actually cares about how these decisions affect our future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2400/month is literally less than 20% of his income. You sound heartless.

Remember Dad pays taxes on his income, and probably provides the health care and more. Mom gets all that money tax free. $2400 is more than most people spend on their kids. Is more than some people earn in a month. Its a lot of money. We spend a lot on our child and don't even come close to that if you average it out over a year (except maybe if you include college savings).

-.+100 the file support we paid for one was much more than the amount we paid for two in our house ( including health insurance, share of utilities and food etc, not just direct kid costs). All while the ex lies about where money and activities came from and never went back to work. I could go on with more... 🙄

We had all kinds of drama. Ex demanded we pay for her health insurance even though kid had always been on Dad's since birth but she didn't want to use it. Dad was ordered to provide insurance. She ended up dropping her insurance and putting him on medicaid as we got a call from medicaid demanding we reimburse them (which we refused as we had insurance for him and they should have done their homework). She'd demand he pay extra for activities and then the kids wouldn't participate. We finally caught on and said tell us where to send the money (company or school) and we'll send it directly and tell us where we buy the uniform/shoes or what ever was needed and sizes and we'll ship it directly to the house. But, hey, no one here wants to hear the other side. And, the braces... we agreed to pay 1/2 per the court order after insurance directly to the orthotist and she refused to use the child support money to pay her half so kid never got them till an adult. They should make people who get child support file yearly like they do with guardianship or social security rep. payee to prove the money is spend on the individual receiving it.

As a parent, the food costs are nominal for an extra kid. Our housing and utility costs are the same. Our big expenses are private lessons and sports and camps (but all of those are optional and I could pick much cheaper ways of doing it). Even so, its not $2000+ a month even with a sleep away camp for a week.

Bologna.

How is it bologna? We bought a house before we had a child. So, same cost as before as we needed a place to live. We see no difference in utility bills. And, food isn't that much and mine are older. So, what other expense are there except activities? Those are optional. And, clothing but I shop clearance so usually the cost is minimal. And, transportation? We have the same cars and would regardless of a child. Many inflate the cost of kids.

It is bologna that "food costs are nominal for an extra kid" (the part I bolded.) If you truly believe that food costs for a kid are "nominal" you must have never had custody of a kid over the age of 8 or 9. This was a topic of discussion on a different thread on DCUM a few days ago--about how much preteens and teens eat, especially if they are athletes.

NP. MAYBE kid eats an extra $400 a month.

I think $2400 a month is crazy. DH makes 150k. That's what our mortgage costs! Our kids are in daycare, so clearly the 3 of them are more than $2400, but we tightened our belts for a few years. I can't imagine if DH were sending $2400 off to a stepkid, we wouldn't be able to afford much of anything. I guess it just gives dads incentive to get full custody.

Simple - he wouldn’t be able to afford you

No, what it should do is give dads the incentive to not have more children they can't afford because they aren't able to walk away from supporting the children they already helped to create. Sorry, but those days are over. It should also give any woman that is thinking about starting a family with a man that has children with another woman the incentive to think long and hard about whether this is the man for her. I know it burns your britches that you can't have everything of his and he is helping to support another household but that is the LAW. Bitching and moaning here on DCUM doesn't and won't change the fact that the child OP is complaining about is receiving 2400 a month in child support. Its the LAW and what the courts and public policy have deemed said child is entitled to receive. Get over it or get the hell out.

Oh, sure. It should do all those things to the dad and any potential future spouse.

But make the BM think twice before stepping out in her marriage - regardless of the children SHE helped to create?? Noooo problem!!! She’ll just take him to the cleaners and get a crap ton of his money to maintain her lifestyle.

Total bs. I get that there were/are deadbeat dads out there and that there needed to be some protections put in place against such situations. But if you think women haven’t figured out how to manipulate a system that is already skewed in their favor, you are sorely mistaken.

[Anonymous]

For the PP who had the ex not paying for Ortho and kid had to wait until adulthood to get braces- way to let your pride overrule good parenting. No reason why you and DH (dad) couldn’t take kid to Ortho on your custody time- sounds like the one weekend a month you had DC didn’t leave room for proper oral treatment. Shame on you. Letting anger at Ex’s overrule the care of a child is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s hurtful is when you have bio kids getting way way less than a step kid because there’s not enough money left over. Total difference in living situation between siblings.

I just don’t really get child support between two people who have 50/50 custody and make similar amounts. Why is it even needed?

that’s a consequence of divorce and remarriage you have to live with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point is for many of us it doesn't cost anything additional to have kids living in our home. You don't need a larger residence. We have a 1000 square foot house and do just fine in it. You want a larger house. There is want vs. need. If you as Mom choose to have a nicer lifestyle than you can afford, you shouldn't expect Dad to pay for it. I choose to spend my money on my child so they have a nicer lifestyle than I do. Its all about priorities. You may need to live in a 3000 square foot house paid for by your ex but reality is 1000 is just fine.

And for many of you, it does!

Want and need is meaningless.

Child support is pegged to income, not to some mythical "want vs. need". It's not about how much a child need. It's about the fact that the state has decreed that your child is entitled to a certain percentage of your income, whatever that income is. If a non-custodial parent makes a million dollars, the child will get a percentage of that. If that parent makes 80K, the child will get a percentage of that. These two children eat the same # of calories a day and can be fed for the same amount, yet their child support numbers will be vastly different. Want and need does not come into it.

Beyond all that, a child has a right to support by both parents. I can’t see why a loving parent would want their child to have LESS at the other parent’s home.

Same, but I understand why shitty stepmoms do.

Oh, bugger off.

There are plenty of shitty Kim’s out there who don’t give dad a say and then expect the stepmom to just keep her mouth shut when $ that should be going into their household/future is being chucked down the drain by the ex’s poor decision making/life choices.

And there you have it, in a nutshell.

"This money should be mine and instead it is going to somebody else. Waaahhhh."

The stepmom can keep her mouth shut or not. It doesn't matter. She's not the party to the child support action. She has to make do with whatever is left.

Did you actually read what I wrote?

This is about toxic mothers who think they get to have all of the say AND are entitled to the max amount of money they can squeeze from the dad.

I get that the law is the law. And if there is an ability to truly coparent, then I have no issue. But if mom obstructs the dad’s ability to express his opinio/weigh in on matters, then I think he has every right to mitigate the amount of financial hemorrhaging he is subject to - within the law.

And, in our particular situation, my opinion most definitely matters to DH. We have very difficult discussions about these matters - and he actually cares about how these decisions affect our future.

so your husband had decided to reduce the amout he supports his kids to punish his ex wife. is that right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point is for many of us it doesn't cost anything additional to have kids living in our home. You don't need a larger residence. We have a 1000 square foot house and do just fine in it. You want a larger house. There is want vs. need. If you as Mom choose to have a nicer lifestyle than you can afford, you shouldn't expect Dad to pay for it. I choose to spend my money on my child so they have a nicer lifestyle than I do. Its all about priorities. You may need to live in a 3000 square foot house paid for by your ex but reality is 1000 is just fine.

And for many of you, it does!

Want and need is meaningless.

Child support is pegged to income, not to some mythical "want vs. need". It's not about how much a child need. It's about the fact that the state has decreed that your child is entitled to a certain percentage of your income, whatever that income is. If a non-custodial parent makes a million dollars, the child will get a percentage of that. If that parent makes 80K, the child will get a percentage of that. These two children eat the same # of calories a day and can be fed for the same amount, yet their child support numbers will be vastly different. Want and need does not come into it.

Beyond all that, a child has a right to support by both parents. I can’t see why a loving parent would want their child to have LESS at the other parent’s home.

Same, but I understand why shitty stepmoms do.

Oh, bugger off.

There are plenty of shitty Kim’s out there who don’t give dad a say and then expect the stepmom to just keep her mouth shut when $ that should be going into their household/future is being chucked down the drain by the ex’s poor decision making/life choices.

And there you have it, in a nutshell.

"This money should be mine and instead it is going to somebody else. Waaahhhh."

The stepmom can keep her mouth shut or not. It doesn't matter. She's not the party to the child support action. She has to make do with whatever is left.

Did you actually read what I wrote?

This is about toxic mothers who think they get to have all of the say AND are entitled to the max amount of money they can squeeze from the dad.

I get that the law is the law. And if there is an ability to truly coparent, then I have no issue. But if mom obstructs the dad’s ability to express his opinio/weigh in on matters, then I think he has every right to mitigate the amount of financial hemorrhaging he is subject to - within the law.

And, in our particular situation, my opinion most definitely matters to DH. We have very difficult discussions about these matters - and he actually cares about how these decisions affect our future.

The courts aren't going to penalize the kid because the adults can't get their sh*t together. If it bothers you that much, get joint legal custody and take her to court if decisions aren't being made together. But the court isn't going to reduce the amount of child support because you don't like how the money is spent. However, I suspect what you really want is to have a say in what decisions are made about your dh's child with his first wife. Sorry, but you don't get to have any input into decisions made between your dh and his first wife about their kid. As others have said, you should never have had children with this man if it bothers you this much. Be mad at yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point is for many of us it doesn't cost anything additional to have kids living in our home. You don't need a larger residence. We have a 1000 square foot house and do just fine in it. You want a larger house. There is want vs. need. If you as Mom choose to have a nicer lifestyle than you can afford, you shouldn't expect Dad to pay for it. I choose to spend my money on my child so they have a nicer lifestyle than I do. Its all about priorities. You may need to live in a 3000 square foot house paid for by your ex but reality is 1000 is just fine.

And for many of you, it does!

Want and need is meaningless.

Child support is pegged to income, not to some mythical "want vs. need". It's not about how much a child need. It's about the fact that the state has decreed that your child is entitled to a certain percentage of your income, whatever that income is. If a non-custodial parent makes a million dollars, the child will get a percentage of that. If that parent makes 80K, the child will get a percentage of that. These two children eat the same # of calories a day and can be fed for the same amount, yet their child support numbers will be vastly different. Want and need does not come into it.

Beyond all that, a child has a right to support by both parents. I can’t see why a loving parent would want their child to have LESS at the other parent’s home.

Same, but I understand why shitty stepmoms do.

Oh, bugger off.

There are plenty of shitty Kim’s out there who don’t give dad a say and then expect the stepmom to just keep her mouth shut when $ that should be going into their household/future is being chucked down the drain by the ex’s poor decision making/life choices.

And there you have it, in a nutshell.

"This money should be mine and instead it is going to somebody else. Waaahhhh."

The stepmom can keep her mouth shut or not. It doesn't matter. She's not the party to the child support action. She has to make do with whatever is left.

Did you actually read what I wrote?

This is about toxic mothers who think they get to have all of the say AND are entitled to the max amount of money they can squeeze from the dad.

I get that the law is the law. And if there is an ability to truly coparent, then I have no issue. But if mom obstructs the dad’s ability to express his opinio/weigh in on matters, then I think he has every right to mitigate the amount of financial hemorrhaging he is subject to - within the law.

And, in our particular situation, my opinion most definitely matters to DH. We have very difficult discussions about these matters - and he actually cares about how these decisions affect our future.

so your husband had decided to reduce the amout he supports his kids to punish his ex wife. is that right?

Nope.

He’s paying exactly what the calculator says he should pay.

But you can bet that we have conversations about what financial support looks like once cs is over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point is for many of us it doesn't cost anything additional to have kids living in our home. You don't need a larger residence. We have a 1000 square foot house and do just fine in it. You want a larger house. There is want vs. need. If you as Mom choose to have a nicer lifestyle than you can afford, you shouldn't expect Dad to pay for it. I choose to spend my money on my child so they have a nicer lifestyle than I do. Its all about priorities. You may need to live in a 3000 square foot house paid for by your ex but reality is 1000 is just fine.

And for many of you, it does!

Want and need is meaningless.

Child support is pegged to income, not to some mythical "want vs. need". It's not about how much a child need. It's about the fact that the state has decreed that your child is entitled to a certain percentage of your income, whatever that income is. If a non-custodial parent makes a million dollars, the child will get a percentage of that. If that parent makes 80K, the child will get a percentage of that. These two children eat the same # of calories a day and can be fed for the same amount, yet their child support numbers will be vastly different. Want and need does not come into it.

Beyond all that, a child has a right to support by both parents. I can’t see why a loving parent would want their child to have LESS at the other parent’s home.

Same, but I understand why shitty stepmoms do.

Oh, bugger off.

There are plenty of shitty Kim’s out there who don’t give dad a say and then expect the stepmom to just keep her mouth shut when $ that should be going into their household/future is being chucked down the drain by the ex’s poor decision making/life choices.

And there you have it, in a nutshell.

"This money should be mine and instead it is going to somebody else. Waaahhhh."

The stepmom can keep her mouth shut or not. It doesn't matter. She's not the party to the child support action. She has to make do with whatever is left.

Did you actually read what I wrote?

This is about toxic mothers who think they get to have all of the say AND are entitled to the max amount of money they can squeeze from the dad.

I get that the law is the law. And if there is an ability to truly coparent, then I have no issue. But if mom obstructs the dad’s ability to express his opinio/weigh in on matters, then I think he has every right to mitigate the amount of financial hemorrhaging he is subject to - within the law.

And, in our particular situation, my opinion most definitely matters to DH. We have very difficult discussions about these matters - and he actually cares about how these decisions affect our future.

The courts aren't going to penalize the kid because the adults can't get their sh*t together. If it bothers you that much, get joint legal custody and take her to court if decisions aren't being made together. But the court isn't going to reduce the amount of child support because you don't like how the money is spent. However, I suspect what you really want is to have a say in what decisions are made about your dh's child with his first wife. Sorry, but you don't get to have any input into decisions made between your dh and his first wife about their kid. As others have said, you should never have had children with this man if it bothers you this much. Be mad at yourself.

They do have joint legal. And 50/50. And yet, she has managed to manipulate her way to having everything be the way she wants it. Frankly, it isn’t worth the time or money to go back to court at this point. He pays what he pays, for now. And once that’s done, the gravy train is over.

And, whether you like it or not, I do have input and influence. We have frank conversations about expenses and how they impact OUR life, as well. Just like any intelligent, functional couple would have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point is for many of us it doesn't cost anything additional to have kids living in our home. You don't need a larger residence. We have a 1000 square foot house and do just fine in it. You want a larger house. There is want vs. need. If you as Mom choose to have a nicer lifestyle than you can afford, you shouldn't expect Dad to pay for it. I choose to spend my money on my child so they have a nicer lifestyle than I do. Its all about priorities. You may need to live in a 3000 square foot house paid for by your ex but reality is 1000 is just fine.

And for many of you, it does!

Want and need is meaningless.

Child support is pegged to income, not to some mythical "want vs. need". It's not about how much a child need. It's about the fact that the state has decreed that your child is entitled to a certain percentage of your income, whatever that income is. If a non-custodial parent makes a million dollars, the child will get a percentage of that. If that parent makes 80K, the child will get a percentage of that. These two children eat the same # of calories a day and can be fed for the same amount, yet their child support numbers will be vastly different. Want and need does not come into it.

Beyond all that, a child has a right to support by both parents. I can’t see why a loving parent would want their child to have LESS at the other parent’s home.

Same, but I understand why shitty stepmoms do.

Oh, bugger off.

There are plenty of shitty Kim’s out there who don’t give dad a say and then expect the stepmom to just keep her mouth shut when $ that should be going into their household/future is being chucked down the drain by the ex’s poor decision making/life choices.

And there you have it, in a nutshell.

"This money should be mine and instead it is going to somebody else. Waaahhhh."

The stepmom can keep her mouth shut or not. It doesn't matter. She's not the party to the child support action. She has to make do with whatever is left.

Did you actually read what I wrote?

This is about toxic mothers who think they get to have all of the say AND are entitled to the max amount of money they can squeeze from the dad.

I get that the law is the law. And if there is an ability to truly coparent, then I have no issue. But if mom obstructs the dad’s ability to express his opinio/weigh in on matters, then I think he has every right to mitigate the amount of financial hemorrhaging he is subject to - within the law.

And, in our particular situation, my opinion most definitely matters to DH. We have very difficult discussions about these matters - and he actually cares about how these decisions affect our future.

In the case of my ex, during our custody trial he actually actively refused to respond to texts or emails to approve certain things (medical procedures, activities, etc). So he willingly signed an agreement stating that if he doesn't respond he forfeits his right to have a say. Some men don't want to participate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point is for many of us it doesn't cost anything additional to have kids living in our home. You don't need a larger residence. We have a 1000 square foot house and do just fine in it. You want a larger house. There is want vs. need. If you as Mom choose to have a nicer lifestyle than you can afford, you shouldn't expect Dad to pay for it. I choose to spend my money on my child so they have a nicer lifestyle than I do. Its all about priorities. You may need to live in a 3000 square foot house paid for by your ex but reality is 1000 is just fine.

And for many of you, it does!

Want and need is meaningless.

Child support is pegged to income, not to some mythical "want vs. need". It's not about how much a child need. It's about the fact that the state has decreed that your child is entitled to a certain percentage of your income, whatever that income is. If a non-custodial parent makes a million dollars, the child will get a percentage of that. If that parent makes 80K, the child will get a percentage of that. These two children eat the same # of calories a day and can be fed for the same amount, yet their child support numbers will be vastly different. Want and need does not come into it.

Beyond all that, a child has a right to support by both parents. I can’t see why a loving parent would want their child to have LESS at the other parent’s home.

Same, but I understand why shitty stepmoms do.

Oh, bugger off.

There are plenty of shitty Kim’s out there who don’t give dad a say and then expect the stepmom to just keep her mouth shut when $ that should be going into their household/future is being chucked down the drain by the ex’s poor decision making/life choices.

Bugger off? Look, if you aren't a shitty stepmom who actively wants their stepchild to have less than they have in your home, then I wasn't talking to you and you have nothing to worry about. If you want to defend those stepmoms, well, that's an issue you should work on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The point is for many of us it doesn't cost anything additional to have kids living in our home. You don't need a larger residence. We have a 1000 square foot house and do just fine in it. You want a larger house. There is want vs. need. If you as Mom choose to have a nicer lifestyle than you can afford, you shouldn't expect Dad to pay for it. I choose to spend my money on my child so they have a nicer lifestyle than I do. Its all about priorities. You may need to live in a 3000 square foot house paid for by your ex but reality is 1000 is just fine.

And for many of you, it does!

Want and need is meaningless.

Child support is pegged to income, not to some mythical "want vs. need". It's not about how much a child need. It's about the fact that the state has decreed that your child is entitled to a certain percentage of your income, whatever that income is. If a non-custodial parent makes a million dollars, the child will get a percentage of that. If that parent makes 80K, the child will get a percentage of that. These two children eat the same # of calories a day and can be fed for the same amount, yet their child support numbers will be vastly different. Want and need does not come into it.

Beyond all that, a child has a right to support by both parents. I can’t see why a loving parent would want their child to have LESS at the other parent’s home.

Same, but I understand why shitty stepmoms do.

Oh, bugger off.

There are plenty of shitty Kim’s out there who don’t give dad a say and then expect the stepmom to just keep her mouth shut when $ that should be going into their household/future is being chucked down the drain by the ex’s poor decision making/life choices.

And there you have it, in a nutshell.

"This money should be mine and instead it is going to somebody else. Waaahhhh."

The stepmom can keep her mouth shut or not. It doesn't matter. She's not the party to the child support action. She has to make do with whatever is left.

Did you actually read what I wrote?

This is about toxic mothers who think they get to have all of the say AND are entitled to the max amount of money they can squeeze from the dad.

I get that the law is the law. And if there is an ability to truly coparent, then I have no issue. But if mom obstructs the dad’s ability to express his opinio/weigh in on matters, then I think he has every right to mitigate the amount of financial hemorrhaging he is subject to - within the law.

And, in our particular situation, my opinion most definitely matters to DH. We have very difficult discussions about these matters - and he actually cares about how these decisions affect our future.

so your husband had decided to reduce the amout he supports his kids to punish his ex wife. is that right?

Nope.

He’s paying exactly what the calculator says he should pay.

But you can bet that we have conversations about what financial support looks like once cs is over.

DP. Do you really think his ex expects continued financial support for herself after the kids have aged out of child support? That's just silly.

If you are talking about things like screwing the kids out of college funds to spite their mother, then you're just hurting the kids, not their mother, which reflects very poorly on you.