Child support question - reduction or stays the same with new child claim?

[Anonymous]

OP- Let's face some facts you LOVE drama. Your situation is completely full of drama and you elect to be in it. You keep coming back to this board to clarify yourself and show that you are intelligent and above the criticism (continuing the drama). You also want to justify the actions of your "boy"friend (see a problem with that part) to make all these people who don't know him, you, her or all the details understand, offer advice or even sympathize with your situation (DRAMA). I am reading this and I am reminded of the Jerry Springer shows with the "guest" yelling "You don't know me" to the audience.

To answer your original question call an attorney or read the thread about child support being reduced.

I know you will respond because here is a chance to continue the drama.

[Anonymous]

If you don't want your child to half a relationship with their half sibling that is your choice (for now), but to act like their "only" half siblings therefore not even real family is utter bull. My mom was married before my dad. I have two older half siblings from that marriage. I am just as much a sibling to them as they are to each other. I can't imagine having gone through life without them. I would never forgive my parents for taking part of my family away from me.

[Anonymous]

Definately the OP's choice to keep her child away from this carazy lady and all this drama but one day wether she likes it or not, this other kid might come looking for their sibling and there is nothing she can do then.

I thought this whole thing sounded familiar. Check out THIS thread from this site - I think this is the "other" side of the story.......

http://forum.freeadvice.com/child-support-98/sorta-complicated-support-issue-579967.html

[Anonymous]

wowww............they need their own reality show......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, such judgmental people. I came here for advice, not to be judged. And like I said, there is a LOT more to this woman and her family. If you knew ALL the details, you'd agree to stay far away from them. HALF sibling or not, I do not want my child exposed to any of them. Period. Yes, we all feel sorry for her child, and it is a difficult situation, especially if it IS his child, but if he were to become involved it would mean constant harassment, 'we need this', 'we need that' - from her and her family, and the conditions put on him to see his child would be complete chaos in his life and that of the child.

That is his decision, not mine. Whether I agree with him or not, is not up to me. It's his. And I have to support whatever he chooses to do.

Her family being nice and friendly? All they see him is a big fat paycheck. He actually was willing to to allow her husband to adopt the child as his own, which her husband wants. She said nope, she wants the money. So it's not about the child's best interest to her and her family, it's the money. He had even said, if it is his child and the new husband wants to adopt the child, he would be willing to make a lump sum support payment before agreeing to give up his rights, so it's not like he's trying to get out of 'paying' anything. But nope, she wants a weekly check.

And why am I worried about this chic? She involved me by continually contacting me and harassing me. I dont' like drama, I don't like trash, and I don't like either in my life and I especially don't like my daughter's support being threatened. And I am very aware her child is entitled to support, however my child is also entitled to continue the support received and for this woman to tell me she will get it 'all' for her child is absurd. I don't have the time or patience to be in and out of court for the next 18 years having to defend what a court has already ordered for my child. My child is my first priority and I won't have her subjected to a bunch of bs, which this whole situation is.

anyway, for those of you who gave me decent advice and some good points to think about, I thank you. For those of you who are so judgmental, I hope you never find yourself in this position, because no one is a winner in any of this and hope you feel better with yourself.

Typical be made and worried about the other woman. Stay with him and keep posting the drama here. Summer evening drama shows are in reruns.
Or realize this guy is a loser. And a piss poor role model for all kids involved. Especially for a girl who will seek a man to be with who is just like her daddy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Definately the OP's choice to keep her child away from this carazy lady and all this drama but one day wether she likes it or not, this other kid might come looking for their sibling and there is nothing she can do then.

I thought this whole thing sounded familiar. Check out THIS thread from this site - I think this is the "other" side of the story.......

http://forum.freeadvice.com/child-support-98/sorta-complicated-support-issue-579967.html

WTF! 600 hundred a week. Snip his balls now. He can't afford those kids.

[Anonymous]

That link does sound like it could be the other mom. If nothing else I agree this could be a great premises to some summer reading.

[Anonymous]

Op, I understand that this is a hard situation for all involved, and at this stage you are better off distancing yourself from them. Being angry at the new baby, or the other woman is useless. It still takes 2 to make a baby, and it is not like the man made only 1 mistake, he is obviously not telling everything.
How is it that you even have a child support agreement with your man?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definately the OP's choice to keep her child away from this carazy lady and all this drama but one day wether she likes it or not, this other kid might come looking for their sibling and there is nothing she can do then.

I thought this whole thing sounded familiar. Check out THIS thread from this site - I think this is the "other" side of the story.......

http://forum.freeadvice.com/child-support-98/sorta-complicated-support-issue-579967.html

WTF! 600 hundred a week. Snip his balls now. He can't afford those kids.

It says he pays the max. So if he makes 600 a week he's paying 300 a week. No judge is gonna award anymore support over that.
If he gets a good lawyer they'll argue he has to have money to live. Even with 300 left a week before taxes, I dont know where
he gonna live but they cant take his whole pay.

but i agree snip him now!!

[Anonymous]

If he is paying the max then he must be making a lot of money and can afford to pay the max for 2 kids
Or a judge could question how it is that he is actually living with the mother of his 1st child and see it as a scam to get out of paying for the 2nd

[Anonymous]

Never experienced this personally, but I always thought the deal was that whatever support there is to be had is always shared equally by the children no matter who came first or whether the children both have the same mom. I mean, if you are in an intact family and another baby comes along, the kids share in whatever resources there are. In this case, wouldn't each child get half of whatever support amount the judge decides the father can pay?

ITA that half-siblings or not, the OP does not have to expose herself or her DC to the second family. I would, however, seriously rethink the decision to continue in a relationship with the father.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Never experienced this personally, but I always thought the deal was that whatever support there is to be had is always shared equally by the children no matter who came first or whether the children both have the same mom. I mean, if you are in an intact family and another baby comes along, the kids share in whatever resources there are. In this case, wouldn't each child get half of whatever support amount the judge decides the father can pay?

ITA that half-siblings or not, the OP does not have to expose herself or her DC to the second family. I would, however, seriously rethink the decision to continue in a relationship with the father.

No. In this area it's based on the calculator and the ladies put their numbers into.
So if baby mama 1 is contributing more to baby 1 and 2 less to 2 I could see where 2 would be entitled to more money from sperminator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never experienced this personally, but I always thought the deal was that whatever support there is to be had is always shared equally by the children no matter who came first or whether the children both have the same mom. I mean, if you are in an intact family and another baby comes along, the kids share in whatever resources there are. In this case, wouldn't each child get half of whatever support amount the judge decides the father can pay?

ITA that half-siblings or not, the OP does not have to expose herself or her DC to the second family. I would, however, seriously rethink the decision to continue in a relationship with the father.

No. In this area it's based on the calculator and the ladies put their numbers into.
So if baby mama 1 is contributing more to baby 1 and 2 less to 2 I could see where 2 would be entitled to more money from sperminator.

Wow! Seriously? That means one mom could actually be forced to subsidize the other, even though she had nothing to do with the second child coming into the world?? Harsh. It seems to me that both children should have equal claim on the assets they have in common, which are the father's, and that it shouldn't really matter what the mothers are bringing to the table. If one mother has more to offer her child than the other, why should that matter?

[Anonymous]

A big part is based on need, childs need

But in this case the man in already earning enough to be able to pay the max for 1. So not bad at all

If the 2nd mama is poorer, then her kids needs will have to be met by the fathers income. He cannot run away just because the current 'mother' says it was just an affair that lasted for 30 mins. We really do not even know that. But what else is the man going to say?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never experienced this personally, but I always thought the deal was that whatever support there is to be had is always shared equally by the children no matter who came first or whether the children both have the same mom. I mean, if you are in an intact family and another baby comes along, the kids share in whatever resources there are. In this case, wouldn't each child get half of whatever support amount the judge decides the father can pay?

ITA that half-siblings or not, the OP does not have to expose herself or her DC to the second family. I would, however, seriously rethink the decision to continue in a relationship with the father.

No. In this area it's based on the calculator and the ladies put their numbers into.
So if baby mama 1 is contributing more to baby 1 and 2 less to 2 I could see where 2 would be entitled to more money from sperminator.

Wow! Seriously? That means one mom could actually be forced to subsidize the other, even though she had nothing to do with the second child coming into the world?? Harsh. It seems to me that both children should have equal claim on the assets they have in common, which are the father's, and that it shouldn't really matter what the mothers are bringing to the table. If one mother has more to offer her child than the other, why should that matter?

So if momma#1 goes to work everyday and contributes to her child, and momma#2 just likes to not work and sit at home making babies, momma#1's support gets adjusted so that momma#2 gets more?
That doesn't make sense. Each family should be treated differently. Each support case is different. If it wasn't treated as such, there would be one support amount that everyone would pay or get.
I know people who make more money than I do and are able to do more with their children then me with mine, and I also know people who make less than I do and aren't able to do with theirs what I do with mine. Why should this be any different?

I agree the OP has no obligation to expose herself or her child to this other family, nor does the momma#2 have any recourse to "making" her child have "visitation" with the other. The father sounds like he can hardly handle the child he does have and doesn't have the capacity or patience to deal with a second child. Maybe it actually would be in the best interest of this second child for him not to come around if it is in fact his child.