Debate?

I posted this debate in another community that I am involved in and received some great feedback. I think that it would be fun to talk about it here and see what others think!

My question is... What do you think after a divorce should the husband be responsible for paying- in terms of child support?  What do you think the child support should be determined on?

Our situation as an example- My husband has two children from a previous marriage and he is currently required to pay a total of 1200/month with child support and health care costs included. Currently he brings home 3200/month. We have one son together. They based his CS on the fact that when they were married he brought in 78% of the income and she brought in 22% of the income. So he is required to pay 78% of child care costs, medical bills, and any other misc. stuff on top of the CS. She works two days a week at Party City for 5 hours at a time. I personally think he was screwed.  According to the child support enforcement website for Colorado he should be paying 627/month plus healthcare costs.

We have a lawyer currently looking at our situation. We obtained them in April and they have tried to get his ex to setup a mediation with my husband. She refused and continued to push the date out. About a month ago our lawyer called and advised us to fill out this form and send it the child support enforcement agency. This could take 3-6 months. All the while we had a retainer of 2500 in the beginning with only 425.00 and NOTHING was done. I don't understand why they didn't have us complete this form at the beginning before taking all of our money (my husbands grandma's money).

I personally think things should be more 50/50. I want to add that his ex lives in a beautiful 400,000 house and drives an Audi. No big deal but she isn't hurting for money. We are struggling financially and nobody seems to want to help. Oh, and I work full time as a quality assurance specialist! I don't want anyone to think I am not pitching in. My frusteration is, if we were to pay all of the bills we have 50/50 my money would technically be going to pay for some of the child support.

What do you think?

I think to determine if the 78/22 split is fair, you have to look into why they're getting divorced, especially in states where no-fault divorce isn't an option (e.g., NY).  I mean, if my spouse had an affair, bolted with a drug dealer, and then filed for divorce and custody, I'd be a little peeved if this split is what ended up being the court order.  Of course, then there would be the counter-allegation that I didn't pay enough attention to her or whatnot.

Original Post by splitrail:

Hannah - No offense intended, but it would appear that the only debate going on is between you and the reality of the situation.  In my experience, reality has the upper hand.

 You're right. I take no offense.

Original Post by tincognito:

I don't know. My step-dad paided his ex wife so much money that he couldn't afford to rent an apartment and had to live out of someone else's house while his ex wife got to keep her house and not have to work.

What the HECK was the point of her divorcing him, then, if she was just going to eat all this money?

Personally, I think the whole thing is a CLUSTERF***. The way men are treated in this country when it comes to children are ridiculous. Many of them take no responsibility at all and therefore it leads to the idea that none of them will take responsibility. Which screws over the men who actually care about their children, want to see them, and would spend money on them anyway without being forced.

For a man to get custody, at least in Georgia, the woman basically has to have a joint weed/prostitution business out of her house and beat the kids with her rolling pin. Even then, the woman might still win.

It makes me so mad.

I don't understand why men aren't allowed, at least in your husband's case where he cares and taking into consideration that he must live close enough and this is possible, to have the kids one week and women the next? Kid's aren't 90% hers and 10% his. They're 50%/50%.

 At first we had a very hard time. We lived in my father in-laws basement for a good 6 months. All the while she has a beautiful 400,00 dollar house. She comes from a wealthy family and from what I hear, is used to getting whatever she wants without having to work for it.

As far as the men who don't pay... That is what totally pisses me off. My husband cares, he wants to pay and see his kids. He understands they are his responsibility. All he wants is for her to take a little responsibility too. She left him for another man-the man she is with now. She wanted the divorce and at first my husband had the kids. She didn't decide to take them until her mother, who is a professional divorcee, told her she would get money. 5 months later when the divorce goes to court she wants the kids. Guess what, the judge awarded her custody. They could care less that my husband had them. Then there are the men who could give two s*** about their kids and I don't see the courts going after them.

That's strange that custody flipped so dramatically in court.  Out here, judges seem to get overjoyed when fathers want to spend time with their kids.

Original Post by dnrothx:

That's strange that custody flipped so dramatically in court.  Out here, judges seem to get overjoyed when fathers want to spend time with their kids.

 Here, the mother is always favored and usually gets custody. She would have to beat her kids with proof or do drugs for the courts to award the father custody.

Original Post by hkellick:

Well..

On the other hand of this debate was MY Family. My father and mother divorced. My father paid $600 a month per child (until the child was 18 and out of the house). My father was a pharmacist and my mom was a housewife (once a teacher) who jumped into substitute teaching once the separation happened.

We NEEDED that $1800 a month for the first few years to stay afloat.

I read your situation and it sounds like they calculated things as fairly as possible. He bought in 78% of the money. She got the kids, thus.. he pays 78% of the fees. Honestly, this sounds fair.

I'm sorry, but I guess I think things are, in general, fine as they are. Are there situations where the system is abused and being taken advantage of? Clearly. There usually are. But in most cases, I think you'd find that Divorced Mom NEEDS the money to stay afloat, that she isn't a wealthy heiress or whatever.

Good luck.

 I know that she needs money to take care of the boys. Obviously she isn't hurting if she and her boyfriend can buy a 400,000 dollar house and drive nice cars. She didn't have that with my husband. They lived in a 70's duplex. I know, I lived there for a couple years. She drove a Honda. She is also capable of working more than two days a week, 5 hours at a time. The boys are in school during the day. What the h*** is she doing during the day? I still think things should be 50/50. They are each others kids.

EDIT:  Never mind.  Misread OP.

Original Post by dnrothx:

Here are NY's child support rules, which seem more fair to me:

The court uses a standard guideline to calculate what the noncustodial parent will pay, based on the noncustodial parent's adjusted gross income and on the number of children involved. The court first determines the noncustodial parent's gross income, and then makes certain deductions (including Medicare, Social Security, and New York City or Yonkers tax) to establish the noncustodial parent's adjusted gross income. The court then multiplies the adjusted gross income by the standard guideline percentage for the number of children. These percentages are as follows:

• 17% for one child
• 25% for two children
• 29% for three children
• 31% for four children
• at least 35% for five or more children.

Then the noncustodial parent's share of child care, medical, and educational expenses is added to the income percentage amount. The combined amount, percentage of income plus share of expenses, is the basic child support amount.

 That does seem more fair to me. According to the Colorado child support calculator we should be paying about 220 less a month total. Still covering the insurance costs. What I think is unfair is that they base the CS on your gross income. You are not bringing home that much! I wish they would base it off of your net income. If you figure my husband pays a total of 1200/month and brings home anywhere from 2600-2800 (he is a tow truck driver and it differs). That leaves only 1400-1600 left over. That is crap!

I agree it should be based on net, but what if the case is like savings, 401K and 401K loans, car payments, FSA that is taken out of your check should that be part of your net? People could then have a lot more taken out of gross to hide net if they wanted too. Would that be fair? Not arguing with the fact that it is out of whack just looking at the other side.

Original Post by stinky1:

I agree it should be based on net, but what if the case is like savings, 401K and 401K loans, car payments, FSA that is taken out of your check should that be part of your net? People could then have a lot more taken out of gross to hide net if they wanted too. Would that be fair? Not arguing with the fact that it is out of whack just looking at the other side.

 Good point. I guess I never thought of it that way because my husband doesn't have anything taken out of his check.

Moral of the story. Try your damndest to not have kids if you plan to divorce or make damn sure you plan to stay married for life if you do. It is too painful, frustrating, and confusing on all accounts. The people who are truly affected are the kids.

Original Post by hannahriedel:

Moral of the story. Try your damndest to not have kids if you plan to divorce or make damn sure you plan to stay married for life if you do. It is too painful, frustrating, and confusing on all accounts. The people who are truly affected are the kids.

 I agree, but not everyone goes into a marriage wanting to get divorce matter a fact I don't know of anyone who does it happens and I think they have made it too easy to get a divorce rather than trying to work it out. It is easier to get divorced that it is to get married (go figure). I never went into my marriages wanting out it just happened, first time married too young, had kids young.

Second time well lets just say she is bi-polar nuff said.

Third-time was a charm as they say. I was at one time paying for 4 kids child support. Down to two now and in about 6 months only one. I have no idea what a normal paycheck even looks like. I have been paying support for like 20 years now. I know my fault and I accept it, just never planned on it, but who does?

Original Post by stinky1:

Original Post by hannahriedel:

Moral of the story. Try your damndest to not have kids if you plan to divorce or make damn sure you plan to stay married for life if you do. It is too painful, frustrating, and confusing on all accounts. The people who are truly affected are the kids.

 I agree, but not everyone goes into a marriage wanting to get divorce matter a fact I don't know of anyone who does it happens and I think they have made it too easy to get a divorce rather than trying to work it out. It is easier to get divorced that it is to get married (go figure). I never went into my marriages wanting out it just happened, first time married too young, had kids young.

Second time well lets just say she is bi-polar nuff said.

Third-time was a charm as they say. I was at one time paying for 4 kids child support. Down to two now and in about 6 months only one. I have no idea what a normal paycheck even looks like. I have been paying support for like 20 years now. I know my fault and I accept it, just never planned on it, but who does?

 You're right. I do think that too many people give up too easily. Especially when kids are involved. But hey, had they not given up, I wouldn't have met my husband and had a beautiful son. It all works out in the end I guess!

I didn't see in your original post if the award was before or after the two of you were married and had your child together. Have you filed a modification to child support after your son was born? The child support should be calculated based on who brought in what percentage of the money, BUT circumstances change and therefore the support can be adjusted. I would put some REAL pressure on this attorney you have hired. How long has it been since you hired them and what have they done? Mediation can be ordered by a judge. She will have no choice but to go to mediation and if she doesn't she should have serious repercussions. Contempt of Court being one. If a modification has been done have you appealed to the Circuit court or state court level? If you have and the award is still the same. I'm sorry to say that this amount IS his share and those children should be taken care of by him. Is he paying alimony too, has no bearing on the child support I'm just curious.

Original Post by r4eboxer:

I didn't see in your original post if the award was before or after the two of you were married and had your child together. Have you filed a modification to child support after your son was born? The child support should be calculated based on who brought in what percentage of the money, BUT circumstances change and therefore the support can be adjusted. I would put some REAL pressure on this attorney you have hired. How long has it been since you hired them and what have they done? Mediation can be ordered by a judge. She will have no choice but to go to mediation and if she doesn't she should have serious repercussions. Contempt of Court being one. If a modification has been done have you appealed to the Circuit court or state court level? If you have and the award is still the same. I'm sorry to say that this amount IS his share and those children should be taken care of by him. Is he paying alimony too, has no bearing on the child support I'm just curious.

 The award was before we were married and had a child. I met him a year after his divorce. The freaking lawyer hasn't done a darn thing. Just took our money. We had a 2500 retainer and have had them since April. There is now 425.00 left and they told us to send in this form and wait the 3-6 months to see. I went online and there is a request to modify child support form that I think the lawyers should have completed but I don't think they did. I am considering doing it myself and paying the filing fee. We haven't appealed anyone and I am not sure how to do that. The lawyer basically told us that nothing could be done because the ex refused to set a date for mediation. What is so frustrating is that my husband and  I don't know legal jargon and it seems the lawyer was BS'ing us. Who knows!!!

Original Post by hannahriedel:

Original Post by r4eboxer:

I didn't see in your original post if the award was before or after the two of you were married and had your child together. Have you filed a modification to child support after your son was born? The child support should be calculated based on who brought in what percentage of the money, BUT circumstances change and therefore the support can be adjusted. I would put some REAL pressure on this attorney you have hired. How long has it been since you hired them and what have they done? Mediation can be ordered by a judge. She will have no choice but to go to mediation and if she doesn't she should have serious repercussions. Contempt of Court being one. If a modification has been done have you appealed to the Circuit court or state court level? If you have and the award is still the same. I'm sorry to say that this amount IS his share and those children should be taken care of by him. Is he paying alimony too, has no bearing on the child support I'm just curious.

 The award was before we were married and had a child. I met him a year after his divorce. The freaking lawyer hasn't done a darn thing. Just took our money. We had a 2500 retainer and have had them since April. There is now 425.00 left and they told us to send in this form and wait the 3-6 months to see. I went online and there is a request to modify child support form that I think the lawyers should have completed but I don't think they did. I am considering doing it myself and paying the filing fee. We haven't appealed anyone and I am not sure how to do that. The lawyer basically told us that nothing could be done because the ex refused to set a date for mediation. What is so frusterating is that my husband and  I don't know legal jargon and it seems the lawyer was BS'ing us. Who knows!!!

Yes your being BS'd. It is a simple modification form and you can fill it out yourself. You don't need an attorney. Fire that attorney and try to get your money back. Good gracious, file an expedited modification for temporary relief. You should get a hearing within 30 days and you'll get a reduced amount of child support. temporarily, then you will be given a hearing date to get all the other facts admitted. Ask that the judge ORDER mediation at the temp. relief hearing. The fact that your husband has a new family AND another child will reduce that award quite a bit. I don't know where you are but the caseload of the Family Court will dictate the time frame of the expedited temp relief. Call the family court phone number and ask what the wait is for expedited relief. Go today and file it. You can fill out a paupers affidavit for the filing fees but I doubt you will qualify.

edit: you will be filing Pro Se, meaning without an attorney

Not sure if laws are the same everywhere, but in OH you can only file for a review every 3 years or if income on either side has changed 30% either higher or lower, but getting that income information is hard to get. Even with an attorney they cannot file unless one of those have been met, I think...don't hold me to it, but I think that is how it works here.

I would think that it would be important for things to stay as normal as possible for the children.  Kids, particularly young ones, need consistency.  They need to have a routine that they can count on. Now all of a sudden their world becomes disrupted.  Daddy is gone and he isn't there to tuck them in, give kisses, help with baths, or whatever.  Suppose Mommy  is a stay-at-home mom.  Now they get hit with the fact that Mommy, who's been with them all the time since they were born, has to go out and get a job.  That's another disruption.  Instead of their mother, now they have to be in day care.  As much as I agree that people should pull their own weight, I think that has to be measured against the best interest of the children.  They've already had their world pulled out from under them once, is it really necessary to do it again?  If the mother re-marries, that, unfortunately has very little bearing.  The new husband isn't responsible for her children from the previous marriage/relationship, at least not legally, perhaps morally but you can't argue that in court.  No, I think that a formula such as the one you mentioned, where they determine the monthly cost of child rearing and factor in the percentage each contributed during the marriage and use that as the figure is fair.  I'm not saying that I think a woman should get a free ride just because she is a mother.  I just think that keeping things as normal as possible for the children during such a stressful time is the most important thing.  What's best for the children is what should be done.  JMO

^ yep, I hate seeing some of the cases I get. Some parents are soo unbelievably bad when it comes to a divorce. It's like they completely forget about the kids. All parents are required to take a parenting class when they file, but rarely does it do any good. Bad thing about the way child support is calculated is that is most of the time isn't enough for either person. It's really so much better for the parents to really really try to resolve their "irreconcilable difference" for the kids sake.

stinky: I would just assume that your court system is totally over run with cases. Laws are different in other states, an additional family and child should be circumstances for a review IMHO. The formula does take a percentage of income into consideration here.

boxer-

You are probably right about the family addition didn't think about that. Probably would change the income level enough for a review. I am sure that would be justified.