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

[Anonymous]

Sure love it when a stepmonster shows her ugly face.

[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.

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.

And by the way, this is coming from a child of divorce whose mother spent child support terribly and I did have a worse standard of living at my mom's house because of it. Both my dad and stepmom were concerned about it, but my dad was concerned about our wellbeing, and my stepmom just talked about about other things she would rather be doing with the money my mom misspent, like home upgrades.

Cheers to all the stepmoms out there who genuinely care more about the wellbeing of their stepchildren than the money spent on them.

[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.

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.

And by the way, this is coming from a child of divorce whose mother spent child support terribly and I did have a worse standard of living at my mom's house because of it. Both my dad and stepmom were concerned about it, but my dad was concerned about our wellbeing, and my stepmom just talked about about other things she would rather be doing with the money my mom misspent, like home upgrades.

Cheers to all the stepmoms out there who genuinely care more about the wellbeing of their stepchildren than the money spent on them.

+1, its very disappointing that there is no accountability in child support spending. It really sucks when you do care about kids and they come with shoes with holes in them, clothing too small and don't have appropriate clothing. And, the kids tell you this is the good stuff. Or, when you send them back with all new clothing (and the old) and they tell you the new stuff disappeared as mom got funny about it. Or, your gifts that are mailed don't go to the child even though they are delivered from the house.

(But, we never talked about it with the child. New clothing would be on the bed waiting for him as if I took him there would be lots of drama via Mom).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Its not about it being too much but there should be accountability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Its not about it being too much but there should be accountability.

Hmm, no, it looks to me like that poster takes issue with the amount.

[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.

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.

If that were the case you wouldn't be complaining that his first wife does what the hell she wants with "your" money. I hope her kids get every need and extra to compensate for their crappy father and stepmonster. LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.”

The courts don’t want to deal with NCP who pays a couple hundred a month LATE every time and then wants to argue that mom bought Luvs rather than the generic diapers when he finally sent the previous month’s check.

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.

Its not about it being too much but there should be accountability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Its not about it being too much but there should be accountability.

DP. If there is actual neglect going on, that can be taken up with the courts independent of child support. But too many people think they should get the micromanage every penny spent by the parent to whom they are paying child support, and that's simply not how it works.

[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.

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.

And by the way, this is coming from a child of divorce whose mother spent child support terribly and I did have a worse standard of living at my mom's house because of it. Both my dad and stepmom were concerned about it, but my dad was concerned about our wellbeing, and my stepmom just talked about about other things she would rather be doing with the money my mom misspent, like home upgrades.

Cheers to all the stepmoms out there who genuinely care more about the wellbeing of their stepchildren than the money spent on them.

+1, its very disappointing that there is no accountability in child support spending. It really sucks when you do care about kids and they come with shoes with holes in them, clothing too small and don't have appropriate clothing. And, the kids tell you this is the good stuff. Or, when you send them back with all new clothing (and the old) and they tell you the new stuff disappeared as mom got funny about it. Or, your gifts that are mailed don't go to the child even though they are delivered from the house.

(But, we never talked about it with the child. New clothing would be on the bed waiting for him as if I took him there would be lots of drama via Mom).

PP here, and I think I disagree that there should be "accountability" in child support spending. At some point, there is nothing you can do to make your ex a better parent. Should there also be accountability in how their custodial time is used? Accountability in how nutritious their food is? How much they are supporting the kids in school? It would be great if we could make sure that everybody is doing the right thing, but I can't imagine the acrimony and drama this would cause on a practical level.

Also, what if the mom is misspending the money? Would she get less money? That seems to be what a lot of people want, but that doesn't necessarily help the child at all. You might say "well the other parent will just buy everything they need and send it to them" but when you're not there, you don't always know exactly what is needed and when. (Although my parents did come to a kind of arrangement like that; my dad paid for our summer camps and dance lessons and docked it from child support.)

Anyway, it's super awful when parents don't do what they are supposed to do, but just taking money away from people when kids are involved isn't necessarily the best way to go about it. But I could probably be persuaded otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be glad he supports his child. If this bothers you even a little, this isn’t your scene.

Stepmom here.

Stepmom here, as well - and I’d say it depends.

DH’s ex is completely toxic and overbearing. He never got any say in how his kids were raised when they were married and it didn’t change after the divorce. Her ability to actually co-parent is zero.

In this instance, he is doing the honorable and stand up thing and paying his calculated cs - as well as extras for which he gets no actual/effective say.

When they turn 18, he’s done, and I 100% agree with that stance.

OP - I think this situation depends. Are you guys in it for the long haul? How old are the kids? What are the laws in your state? And, most importantly - does he get equal say in the parenting realm?

If yes to the latter and he is paying what is deemed “fair” by the state, you need to step back and let this play out. If there are toxic dynamics at play AND you guys are planning a future together, I would say voice your concerns and start having the hard discussions about how this situation will impact your future.

The day the youngest turned 18 was amazing. Once they turn 18, you define the relationship and money. No more having to go through mom and the games. Allow him to be done at 18. I encouraged the relationship to continue and it was a huge mistake. It was all about money and Mom kept calling and demanding without producing bills/statements as to the need so we could pay directly. Eventually we learned to say no. Funny, after we started saying no and setting clear boundaries she became much nicer. But, she destroyed the relationships and the kids are paying the price now given how their lives have turned out, especially in terms of their own relationships.

[Anonymous]

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.

And, there are a lot of stepmoms who support Dad and who take great care of the kids. Mom's get jealous. Sounds like you are a jealous one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be glad he supports his child. If this bothers you even a little, this isn’t your scene.

Stepmom here.

Stepmom here, as well - and I’d say it depends.

DH’s ex is completely toxic and overbearing. He never got any say in how his kids were raised when they were married and it didn’t change after the divorce. Her ability to actually co-parent is zero.

In this instance, he is doing the honorable and stand up thing and paying his calculated cs - as well as extras for which he gets no actual/effective say.

When they turn 18, he’s done, and I 100% agree with that stance.

OP - I think this situation depends. Are you guys in it for the long haul? How old are the kids? What are the laws in your state? And, most importantly - does he get equal say in the parenting realm?

If yes to the latter and he is paying what is deemed “fair” by the state, you need to step back and let this play out. If there are toxic dynamics at play AND you guys are planning a future together, I would say voice your concerns and start having the hard discussions about how this situation will impact your future.

The day the youngest turned 18 was amazing. Once they turn 18, you define the relationship and money. No more having to go through mom and the games. Allow him to be done at 18. I encouraged the relationship to continue and it was a huge mistake. It was all about money and Mom kept calling and demanding without producing bills/statements as to the need so we could pay directly. Eventually we learned to say no. Funny, after we started saying no and setting clear boundaries she became much nicer. But, she destroyed the relationships and the kids are paying the price now given how their lives have turned out, especially in terms of their own relationships.

This times a billion.

And all of you biomoms out there who want to call us stepmomsters should take heed whilst you’re busy alienating your kids from their dad.

Mom wanted to call ALL the shots when they were underage? She can reap what she sowed when they are grown. Period.

[Anonymous]

Not divorced but is this is a normal amount? Or does this mean that the ex wife makes a lot less? Is Child support even owed if you and your Dh make similar income?

[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.

so no support for college because you don’t like their mom? that’s cold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be glad he supports his child. If this bothers you even a little, this isn’t your scene.

Stepmom here.

Stepmom here, as well - and I’d say it depends.

DH’s ex is completely toxic and overbearing. He never got any say in how his kids were raised when they were married and it didn’t change after the divorce. Her ability to actually co-parent is zero.

In this instance, he is doing the honorable and stand up thing and paying his calculated cs - as well as extras for which he gets no actual/effective say.

When they turn 18, he’s done, and I 100% agree with that stance.

OP - I think this situation depends. Are you guys in it for the long haul? How old are the kids? What are the laws in your state? And, most importantly - does he get equal say in the parenting realm?

If yes to the latter and he is paying what is deemed “fair” by the state, you need to step back and let this play out. If there are toxic dynamics at play AND you guys are planning a future together, I would say voice your concerns and start having the hard discussions about how this situation will impact your future.

The day the youngest turned 18 was amazing. Once they turn 18, you define the relationship and money. No more having to go through mom and the games. Allow him to be done at 18. I encouraged the relationship to continue and it was a huge mistake. It was all about money and Mom kept calling and demanding without producing bills/statements as to the need so we could pay directly. Eventually we learned to say no. Funny, after we started saying no and setting clear boundaries she became much nicer. But, she destroyed the relationships and the kids are paying the price now given how their lives have turned out, especially in terms of their own relationships.

This times a billion.

And all of you biomoms out there who want to call us stepmomsters should take heed whilst you’re busy alienating your kids from their dad.

Mom wanted to call ALL the shots when they were underage? She can reap what she sowed when they are grown. Period.

I don’t think you’re making a good case for stepmothers here ...