The courts are notoriously unwilling to give custody to the father, that seems unlikely to work.
Maybe I am misreading your OP but do BOTH you and your ex make $100k a year, or just you? Because here in Washington State both incomes are used to determine child support and it is pro-rated depending upon your income. So if you both are making $100k a year, it would seem you both would pay equal amounts of child support. In your case paying that amount to your ex with her supplying the other half. So if you made 70k and she made 30k, then you would contribue 70% of the total and she would contribute 30%. Doesn’t it work that way in Maryland?
If only ‘you’ have the income then it will fall more on your shoulders. However if you will be paying alimony to you ex, that would be considered income for her and her percentage would take that income into account.
True, although less true than it used to be. I would also say that if your primary reason for seeking custody is to avoid paying child support, you probably shouldn’t get custody.
That sounds like the exact oppposite of what you said earlier.
Alas, the genesis of the song, “It’s Cheaper to Keep Her”
Based on your post I’m doubting that’s an option, sorry. FWIW, my brother went through the same thing (in MD also, up in FredNeck). You are right, there’s a formula and they had to make a really good case to deviate from it (which they did, btw - I had to testify in some lawyer’s office how much he spends on his kid’s hockey gear and other stuff. Of course, he had a guilty conscience wife who basically was responsble for the split, so she went along. YMMV)
While I realize that it often seems unfair to the non-custodial parent; every custodial parent I know give 98 - 100% of their income for the care of the kids. Yes, they happen also to live in the house they provide for the children, but most of us would gladly live cheaper if we could. None of us in a recent gathering (maybe 11 of us?) had any money at all going toward retirement. It’s just not feasible.
You have the luxury of knowing exactly how much money you will have to give to the care of the children each month. We have to come up with whatever is necessary, whenever it’s necessary, and do the vast majority of the work, which is no small amount. You sound like you do more than most, and good on you for it. But seriously, it’s nothing at all compared to the sacrifices that a single custodial parent makes.
You will definietly be in an untenable situation
Shouldn’t be an issue, if you and the mother both live in the same area (or in areas with the same cost of living). If the cost of living in your area is high, then that also means that it takes more money to support the kids, so you should be paying more because of that.
If you are talking to me, I was not trying to say he should seek custody to get out of child support. I was trying to say that he should do the right thing and seek custody. I would have felt a lot more sympathy if he had been complaining about not getting custody as well as the child support, but him seeking custody was never mentioned in the OP or his responses to date. The typical laments you here in a divorce are very gender divided. She complains about raising the kids on her own and fighting to get the kids their support. He complains about how much the courts/state/lawyers are sucking out of him.
I don’t know **Edward **or his situation. All I know is what he posted here. It looks like both parents work jobs of similar levels (she even makes more), yet he never mentions joint custody, much less full physical custody.
Look, I am happily married, but financially I am in a very similar situation to Edward, pre-divorce. I live on the other coast (San Fran peninsula), but my wife and I make about the same, pay about the same for child care (less this year due to part time help from Grandma, but we will pay even more next year with both in pre-school), and we even live in similar townhouse (1600 sq feet, thankfully, but that cost us $775k three years ago).
I hope to go happily senile with my wife, but if the worst happens I would be fighting for my kids from the get go. And I know that both of us would have to struggle to live at the same level we had before the divorce.
Sorry about the extrapolations I made. Totally unfair. I know the cost of living in the DC area is completely out of hand.
I just wonder about this last bit: are you sure about that? Did your lawyer advise you that staying in MD would be more beneficial?
In fact… what has your attorney said about all this?
Exactly. I see zero mention of any kind of intent to pursue a shared parenting agreement, which, given the relative equality of incomes, would likely result in a minimal ordered support amount, if she didn’t end up paying you to pick up half the cost of health insurance.
Dude, the sprog will be 5 next year and kindergarden age, Public school, screw the private school. Ex wants the sprog in private school, she can pay it herself.
The health care is taken out of the support already, so if they moved I would pay more.
We also have joint custody, the children spend the majority of the nights with her, which is how the courts calculate costs. It’s not feasible for me to keep them at this time over night. I have the children twice a week and every other weekend so I see and do a lot with the children, it’s the nights that are what count.
Yes, both my wife and I make basically the same amount of money, her more actually with a bonus.
In any case I didn’t want this to be all about me, I used me because I had the numbers. I fail to see how anyone, male or female, can live just like they do now with half of what they make gone.
Again I’m not complaining about paying support, I’ve already set up my paycheck to do it, what I’m worried about is that the percentage is just way too high. I think they need to review everything, cost of living in your area, salary and things like that, not just plug it into a formula and say it works for them it’ll work for you.
She will be going to school next year, as I said that part is paid for. And just for the record the other party can do some things and say I’d have to pay on top of what’s paid. Like today, tuition went up by $800 a year because she wants to drop her off early. Well I have to pay half of that even though it doesn’t do anything for me and it was all her choice.
Think its bad now?
Wait till she gets a “live in” boyfriend. He will (no doubt) contibute to her upkeep-but this income makes no difference in what YOU have to pay.
You will soon be supporting 4 people, not three!:mad:
It is good that you have joint custody, although that does make things harder financially. Basically what you and your wife have done is taken a big chunk of your expenses (housing and utilities) and doubled them. Just looking at my situation, which is similar to what yours used to be, if we did that we would both have to stop all savings for retirement and college and start draining our savings to survive if we did that.
Are you saying they don’t take any of that into account now? I can see it being relevant in cases where the parents cost of living are significantly different, but not as big a factor if you are living in the same general area.
Are you going to be dropping off or picking up your kids on the days they don’t stay with you? Since your wife works, I would assume she needs to drop off earlier, pick up later, or cut her work hours.
Bottom line, we really don’t have enough data to say if your payments are correct. If you sum up all expenditures, more will be spent at her place than yours because the kids are there. Unless you were both living way below your means before this, your lifestyle would have taken a hit even without the kids.
The unfair part is that the courts have to assume that you will only pay what you are ordered to. Which puts you in the position of resenting buy things for your kids spontaneously. I imagine it sucks a lot, although I am sure it is not the worst part of your current situation. I don’t wish divorce on anyone.
My brother pays child supprt. The mother is married and doesn’t work to any noticeable degree. Her husband’s income doesn’t count. So she’s ‘technically’ broke, leaving my brother to have to pay a lion’s share. And when the mother and her husband’s twins are born, their upkeep will be taken out of the mother’s (nonexistent) pay, raising the amount my brother will have to pay because it is assumed that a chunk of the mother’s attests that is currently assessed as contributing to my brother’s kid will instead go to the twins, requiring my brother to pay even more to make up the difference. All completely ignoring that there’s actually a husband there covering all this with the largest income of the group.
As a result of all this, my brother can’t afford a place of his own, and has to live with my parents. It’s criminal, literally, in my opinion, aside from the minor quibble that it’s the law.
No, the State formula applies no matter where in the state you live. There are parts on the eastern shore and in the west of the state it is possible to make the same money, but property there is much much cheaper. Day care is also much cheaper in other places. So while we do live in the same place, if I lived way out there and made the same I could live a lot better as rent could be had for $500 a month. That’s pretty much my point, I can live here, someone else lives there, make the same money, they will be able to live, I can’t. And no moving 2-3 hours away is not possible.
The differences in cost of living, just within the state are huge. I think it’s wrong to just go with the average and not look at other things. I don’t believe that it costs that much to raise children. We were able to pay the $36K+ for just child care and still have money to save and go on vacations. Now, even though we pay twice as much, one person can’t do anything. I can not speak for her as I don’t know her situation, but out of her pay check we had a few thousand a month to spend. Now I’ll most likely be in debt.
How much, exactly, were you saving and spending on vacation? Because it’s costing you almost $2000 a month to live on your own–$1400 just for rent, before you ever turn on a light switch, take a shower, or eat a bite, much less furnish your own place. I mean, damn, I don’t know many people who could throw an extra 2 grand a month at something and not have to make some cuts somewhere.
Consider the opposite case: If your brother’s ex was still single, but your brother was remarried – should his wife’s income count towards calculating his contribution?
This.
At least fight for 50% physical custody. You said it wasn’t feasible for the girls to stay with you overnight. Well you really need to make it feasible. It is very important that you fight for this now at the beginning, and not later on. It’s harder to change the living situation the more time goes by.
I feel your pain. My boyfriend is in a very similar situation, which I have written about here before. The system is undeniably set up in favor of the mother. Like you, my BF is paying over 50% of his earnings to his ex-wife.
The difference in his case is that his ex is unemployed, so he has to pay a higher amount. It’s strange that in your case you are having to pay such a high amount when your ex is employed and making the same amount as you.
Please talk to your attorney and get this resolved. Do you want to live poor for the next 15 years? You don’t have to. It will be a fight, and yes you may lose due to the biased system, but don’t give up!