Child support amounts are out of control

Here are some good resources on father’s rights:

http://ancpr.com/ Alliance for Non-Custodial Parents Rights

http://www.acfc.org American Coalition for Fathers and Children

http://www.fatherhoodcoalition.org/ The Fatherhood Coalition

http://www.dadsdivorce.com/ DadsDivorce.com

http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/ Fathers and Families

http://www.fathersrights.org/ Fathers Rights Foundation/Fathers And Dads For Equal Custody Rights

http://www.fathersrightsinc.com/ Father’s Rights

Fathers' rights movement - Wikipedia Wikipedia - Father’s rights movement

Forum.FreeAdvice.com Family Law Forums

http://GlennSacks.com Glenn Sacks - a men’s and fathers’ issues columnist, radio commentator, and blogger

http://www.fathers4kids.com/html/Home.htm National Fathers Resource Center

http://deltabravo.net/forum/ SPARC, the Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center Forum

http://www.winningcustody.com/ Winning Custody - A Father’s Guide on How to Win

WTF, I married a woman with two kids and I can tell you I pay a fucking lot more than the biological father will ever pay. The biological father should always pay his fair share support.

Now fair is a difficult concept for those who are angry at their ex’s.

I think that this is less a case of Child Support Run Amuck! and more a case of Childcare Is Godawful Expensive in Montgomery County Maryland!

From strictly running the numbers it costs more than $3000 a month for the total childcare cost. The State of Maryland has determined that it costs about $800 something a month per child for basic living expenses. So for two children it would be $1600 a month. This would make the total cost $4600 a month and when you divide it in half between two parents, you get $2300.00, just like your attorney advised you.

That’s just an estimate, mind you, I know that the are healthcare insurance costs in there as well and may be other costs as well.

On the plus side, once your children are in regular school, your child support should drop significantly.

Up where I am (Kanukistan), we have a formula. When support payors freak, I sit down with them and go through the actual expenses of child rearing for their family’s particular circumstances. Most often, it comes out that the table figures are the same or less than the actual figures, which helps the support payors swallow a very bitter pill.

I don’t have and stats handy, but I have come across stats that indicate that although the standard of living of both parties decreases after separation, the standard of living of the support recipient drops more than the standard of living than the support payor. When one party or the other drops below the poverty line after separation, it is most often the party with custody of the children It really just comes down to both parties having to tighten their belts because there are now two homes to maintain rather than one, and raising children is very expensive.

One aspect that sometimes is unbalanced is when the children spend a lot of time at both parties’ residences, but not enough time at the secondary residence to trigger support flowing both ways. The support tables up here were based on a primary residence being supported, with the children only having occasional and short stays at the support payor’s residence (e.g. every other weekend and an evening or overnight during the week). What they do not take into consideration is that often the support payor has the children for longer periods, and therefore requires a home suitable for the children rather than a bachelor pad.

So even on the weekend visits they don’t spend the night? This sounds like you haven’t made a space in your house for your children. Is that correct?

In my state, child support is set at 25% for the first child and 5% for each additional child.

It seems that staying married costs about 100%.

As does the title of custodial parent.

I’m not saying there are no exceptions, we’ve heard examples on this very board of parents who use child support for their own luxuries instead of for the child. Worse, yet, some use it to support thier own addictions.

But a custodial parent can never say “Sorry, no Doctor’s visit for you, I’ve already given my x% for your welfare this month.”

Since it isn’t “feasible” for you to raise your kids half the time, then essentially, you’re paying for the ex to do so. If you want to step up and have your kids exactly half the time, then you would both be paying for the children as you had them and no other money would need to exchange hands. The formula seems to be against you only because you don’t want the inconvenience of being a parent and would rather have your kids visit you.

I was wondering how long it would take to get to the “blame the OP” stage.

It seems like child raising costs are out of control.

Using an inflation calculator the $20,000/year for day care would have cost my parents when I was that age around $2,643. The $18,000 for pre school would have cost them $2,379.

Yeah, my parents never would have paid that.

I also find it unlikely that a $200,000 household income is “average” for the D.C. area. Considering I don’t live all that far from the DC area, and given the numbers I’ve seen (19% of DC area residents are under the poverty line, median individual income of $56,000) I think we’re in a situation where your moderate affluence has lead you to dramatically expand your costs beyond that which most people of lesser means would see.

I can certainly bet you that the 19% of DC area residents who live below the poverty line aren’t sending their kids to $20k/year day care or $18k/ year private preschools.

I understand that $200k household income actually “doesn’t go that far” in DC, but I go up to DC a lot and there is a lot of extreme poverty in the DC area. The problem seems to be that you and your wife both were living a lifestyle that just wasn’t really that wise at your income level.

It’s unfortunate that people’s extended families have mostly deteriorated as a strength. When I was a kid I lived close to two sets of living grand parents, and both of my parents were children of large families. My father had 5 siblings and my mother had four siblings. Additionally there were many friends in the community. My mother didn’t work outside of the home so obviously the issue of day care or preschool never presented itself. However my mother was often watching her sister’s kids or a neighbor’s kids. Sometimes I’d be taken to an aunt or a grandparent or a neighbor’s house. No one sent their kid to paid-daycare or paid preschool back then.

However, I understand that these days people grow up and move away from their roots and set up shop in totally different regions. I also understand most neighborhoods no longer have any sense of community whatsoever. Unfortunately that has direct economic consequences in this case.

Maybe that is part of the reason those 19% of impoverished DC area residents are able to survive with kids. I’m betting a lot of them are from the DC area and probably have extensive familial networks helping them out.

I can also say that when I was a kid I shared a room with two siblings and it was a small room. There was a bunk bed on one wall and a single on the other wall. There was one dresser in between the beds at the back wall that held all three of our clothes in addition to a single small closet. The space in between the beds was narrow enough that only one person at a time could easily walk through it.

My parents bedroom fit a queen bed with a wardrobe, my dad’s dresser, and a decent sized closet but it was still relatively small.

Of course, we spent virtually no time in our room. Bedrooms were for sleeping in, and nothing else.

It isn’t about “blame”. The reality is that child support is determined by the amount of time each parent has the child. If the OP doesn’t want to put in the time to parent, then he has to pay someone else to do it. His financial liability is in direct proportion to his choices regarding the time put in raising his children.

If he parents his children half the time then the financial decisions as to what to spend the money on belongs directly to him and not to the other parent. He isn’t a victim, he is making a choice and doesn’t particularly care for the results of that choice.

I don’t believe there is enough information from this thread to glean that he “doesn’t want the inconvenience of being a parent”. It sounds like you are jumping to conclusions.

This was all I was really getting at, only you said it much more succinctly.

Still wondering what the lawyer’s advice has been – in a general way. The specifics are none of my business.

I really wasn’t going to even bother responding, but now I will. Just so you know the courts do NOT take into account the amount of time spent with the children, only the nights. Period. I could be with them every day until 8 when they go to bed and it counts for nothing.

But since you want to know the real answer, I have to be out the door no later then 6:45, if I’m later then that I miss my train to work, if I do that then I’m late to work and I can’t leave until 5, which means I don’t get home until 6, which means I don’t get to pick up my children until 6:15, that’s 45 minutes after school closes, which would mean paying an extra $45 every day. So instead of having my kids stay with me they say with her, she takes them to school, I pick them up from school so she doesn’t have to come home until 6:30 herself. I have time with my kids 4 nights a week.

I would keep the kids some nights, but it will not work out at this time. But I spend plenty of time with my children thank you very much. And with the exception of them being here in the morning the time hasn’t really changed.

And just a cite for average income in Montgomery county, MD, at $94000, which is what I make.

And for House prices. Of which my house is also middle of the road.

I still resent having people say I make too much money or can’t make good financial decisions. The difference is totally different here then a lot of mid America and I know is. Again, anyone take 50% of your pay and try and live where you do.

But again I’m not going to get sucked into this being about me. As I said I’ll make it work, no matter what it is. I’m going to bow out of the thread though if it just continues this way.

I have problems with both of these…

Strassia - I really find the use of the term “man up” offensive here. Am I somehow less of a man because I didn’t fight for physical custody of my son? I knew it was not possible for him to live with me - I rarely get home before 8 pm from work, I travel overseas for a couple of months a year, and I work most weekends that he is not with me. I made the decision not to foght for custody based on what was best for my son, my ex-wife, and myself.

nyctea scandiaca - seeking custody should be done if it is in the best interests of the child, not to make a point or to reduce expenditures. Otherwise you are using the children for your own benefit.

That’s household income. Your former household income would be roughly 200k, which is pretty high. I live in DC, so I know the costs of things around here. Even so, I think you are paying a lot in daycare expenses. I would suggest finding a different place to send your kids. Maybe even a retired day care provider, or something like that. You should attempt to impress upon your wife and her representatives that a divorce has consequences. I think cutting back in general is a good idea, and the best place to do so is with your daycare expenses. If not, at least the schools in MD are good.

Is the time you spend with your kids figured into the payments? If you spend 4 nights a week with them, it seems like they spend a decent chunk of their time with you. Ideally, that should count for something.

As an aside, what area of Montgomery County are you in?

I meant it to be, not exactly offensive, but close. It is a gendered term to highlight what is usually a gendered issue. When a household splits, it is usually in a very predictable way. This is not a direct reflection on you or any other specific individual, but tell me, how would you expect the following blanks to be filled:

“_____ took the kids and left me.”
“_____ walked out and left me and the kids”
“_____ isn’t paying child support and rarely has time to see the kids”
“I can’t believe I’m paying child support after ____ shacked up with ___”

I know there are specific anecdotes where each statement could be made about either gender, but the current socially accepted default is the women takes most of the responsibility for the children. The courts reflect it, employers reflect it, and media reflect it. But it doesn’t have to be this way. I know sometimes there are specific reasons for one parent or the other to have custody, but when those specific reasons mean the women has to take primary responsibility 80% of the time, it is telling us that there is more than random chance driving the trend.

Taking gender out of it, child care is expensive and if you are not primary or at least 50/50 custodial then they court will make sure you pay your share. This certainly sucks if you legally your kids are supposed to spend 10% of the time with you, but actually care for them considerably more, but what are they supposed to do? Give you both time clocks to keep track of how much time the kids are with each week? Have each parent submit expense reports detail how much each spends on food, clothes, and pro rating utilities and rent?

[quote=Notchimine;12895003 . . . If the OP doesn’t want to put in the time to parent, then he has to pay someone else to do it. . .[/quote]

No. The OP produced children, who must now be provided for, and he therefore must provide his part of that support. This is not a payment to or for the other parent.

Yes.

If you want to try and confuse me, start mentioning cases where the person is being supported by persons who are not legally joined to them at the hip. Like, say, if the mother was living with her parents (like, uh, my brother is with mine). In that case I would say that the parents’ income should not be counted in either case. But marriage? It’s all going into the same pot, legally speaking.