Anonymous wrote:True. Going back and forth is terrible. Loved when we had mom as home base and saw dad regularly every other weekend or so and a few weeks in summer.

That's how our custody arrangement is. I think it's great for DD. She LOVES to see her dad, it's just awesome, total vacation time. And it's good for me to know she is HAPPY! I think she will have good memories of us both.

Anonymous wrote:Kids have different levels of resiliency, of course, but I think the most important thing is to see parents get along and respect each other. It sounds like you're on track for that.

I was 6yo when my parents divorced. Post-divorce wasn't contentious, but I was always aware that their marriage - had it continued - would have been miserable for everyone.

And I grew up really proud that my mom was able to make a new life for us.

You sound like an awesome kid and they sound like they did the best they could.

Anonymous wrote:This is all negotiated. Expenses are different from child support. Parties agree to split based on their circumstances. For instance, if one party came into the marriage with higher net worth, they may pay all expenses. If one party took time off to care for the children, the other party might cover expenses while the party gets his/her footing. A cooker cutter approach isn't practical.

Are you in the middle of a divorce?

My experience, as a divorced mother and as an observer of other divorced parents, is that both parties to varying degrees feel screwed by the financial aspects of divorce!

I think parents paying child support would be surprised if they actually did this calculation of all eligible expenses divided by the two parties.

Do you really think 2 parents who are divorcing are all making decisions based on the best interests of the kids? I think not.

The child's interests are supposed to be central, and the consensus is that two involved parents with frequent and regular contact, when possible, is optimal. (It doesn't have to mean perfect 50-50, either. But every other weekend is not terribly involved.) The lawyer didn't say it was better for the parent to do 50-50 for the child's sake but to save money. Saving money is not in the law. The "the best interest of the child" is.

I hope that's clear.

What's not the law?

8:13 Interesting. Saving money, not serving the best interest of the child? That's not the law.

In response to OP's question - I think how a kid handles this has a lot to do with age and each child's unique personality. My stepson's parents divorced when he was 2.5 years old. They live in the same school district and have joint custody. Because this is all he's over known he handles the two homes situation very well. Having said that a few things that make it work - both dad and mom are highly involved in his life. Dad is equally loving and affectionate and engaged as mom. Both parents are highly organized. It is not the child's responsibility to figure out things like does the soccer uniform need to be with him the weekend he's at dad's. The parents co-parent so that the child can be a kid and things move seamlessly between homes. He struggles sometimes with transitions but overall I don't think at this point (age 7) he could choose which house he'd prefer to be in. Kids need both their parents. Maybe when he's older but right now it works. One other thing - I think things over time will change depending on what stage of life he's in and what changes in his life (half-siblings, new step dad etc., friends etc.) so what works today may or may not tomorrow. One other thing is he gets a lot of support at school both in lunch groups for kids of divorce and with friends who have similar arrangements.

Oh. Well hey, thanks for visiting.

Anonymous wrote:This is all negotiated. Expenses are different from child support. Parties agree to split based on their circumstances. For instance, if one party came into the marriage with higher net worth, they may pay all expenses. If one party took time off to care for the children, the other party might cover expenses while the party gets his/her footing. A cooker cutter approach isn't practical.

Are you in the middle of a divorce?

My experience, as a divorced mother and as an observer of other divorced parents, is that both parties to varying degrees feel screwed by the financial aspects of divorce!

I'm sure they do..I'm not divorced, I read this forum to be properly scared into not divorcing. Thank you for explaining.

This is all negotiated. Expenses are different from child support. Parties agree to split based on their circumstances. For instance, if one party came into the marriage with higher net worth, they may pay all expenses. If one party took time off to care for the children, the other party might cover expenses while the party gets his/her footing. A cooker cutter approach isn't practical.

Are you in the middle of a divorce?

My experience, as a divorced mother and as an observer of other divorced parents, is that both parties to varying degrees feel screwed by the financial aspects of divorce!

Anonymous wrote:The child support calculation looks at time spent at each parent's, income and certain expenses, i.e., childcare and health insurance and expenses. So if the schedule is 50-50 and each parent makes the same salary, there might not be any child support!

Is that clear?

As they look at expenses like childcare and medical, do they make sure that they are split between mom and dad equitably? If so, in my opinion, that's basically your child support. I just wanted to be clear if the 50/50 time split/no child support arrangement doesn't mean that only one parent gets stuck with non-divisible expenses like childcare, medical etc. I am sure you will agree that in the equal time/equal salary arrangement that would be unfair.

The child support calculation looks at time spent at each parent's, income and certain expenses, i.e., childcare and health insurance and expenses. So if the schedule is 50-50 and each parent makes the same salary, there might not be any child support!

Is that clear?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sucks from a kids' perspective. Would you want a job where you travelled constantly and had no home base?

It is an idea promoted by Father's Rights groups to avoid child support. It is a huge industry now but even a lot of THEIR kids beg for a home base.

The best thing for kids is the same arrangement that was in place prior to the split of the parents and regular time with both. My kids are so angry about it. One says he feels homeless.

See, this is something I just don't get. Kids come with all kinds of expenses, you don't just get a bill by the end of the day (so that you can make an argument that if he spends 50% of his time with Dad, Dad shouldn't pay child support.) There is one housing bill. There is one medical insurance bill. One daycare bill. One activities bill. How does that get reduced? it doesn't, it still needs to be paid in full. So the costs associated with the needs of the child would still need to be split somehow. What is the basis for this argument?

because mom and dad both have to pay housing expenses, and thus it is shared - and each gets to choose how much to spend.

I wanted 50/50 custody of my children because they need to be around me in order to learn things they can't learn from their mother as well as learn things from a male perspective. and its not about being able to have talks with them, its about consistent frequently modeling more than anything. every other weekend is not going to make that possible.

sometimes kids need things they dont like. and eegads, sometimes the kids things the mothers dont like too.

I have no problem with the 50/50 split and I think kids need both mom and dad in their life. What I don't understand is how child support gets reduced when the split is 50/50. Suppose your kids are with you half the time. Presumably, they are in the same preschool every day, it's not like mom pays for one preschool half the month and you pay for a different one, correct? One medical insurance - because it's not like mom pays during the time they are with her and dad during the time they are with him. So one parent will still need to chip into the monthly costs incurred by the child. I don't see how they can be severed completely with the 50/50 split.

I know a few friends that went for 50/50 because their lawyers said it is standard these days and they wouldn't have to pay their ex child support. They both said they would be fine with just every other weekend but they would save money by doing 50/50.