Too many times do we see situations arising when men ditch out on their duties as fathers. The child support laws hold them as accountable as possible. Two people make a child and two people should raise the child.
If you cant support your family in the correct manner, you should not be having children.
While it is true that there are abuses in the system, for the most part the laws when properly applied are fair. The real issue is that the child is provided for and this is best done by having both parents involved in its upbringing, and giving of their time and talent to raising the child. When support is improperly biased toward one gender the child suffers and is the loser in the end.
Let me guess - you got someone pregnant, and because she won't do what YOU want her to do and have an abortion, you're having a temper tantrum because you just realized there are consequences for your actions. No one forced you to sleep with her without protection.I believe a man should have an option to sign away rights, at the childs birth or before. I do not believe a man should have to pay for a baby he does not want. Women can notify a man when a kid is 10 years old, hey this is your kid. By law that man will be 10 years behind in child support. Ridiculous!
My assessment has in it a 'relevant dependent child' amount. This is what they determine is my financial cost of supporting the children that live with me.
My 3 youngest are all under 6 and are my MOST dependent children. My assessment says they're combined cost is $11k Pre-tax.
My eldest is 17, and has an income. Her assessment says her cost of living is $14k POST-Tax (with my share being $7500). Pre-tax that is MORE than the self support amount they determine to be my cost of living.
How is it that the children living with me are determined to cost me $2400 each, when the child not living with me determined to cost $7500.
The child support agency discriminates against children who live with their parents. The system already financially rewards a parent who denies access to a child, and also punishes the parents of the children NOT from a broken relationship.
If the cost of dependent children living with me is a STATIC amount, and not dependent on my income, then the cost of the child NOT living with me should also be the SAME static amount. And the static amount does not change with the child's age, so that isn't the reason for the differing cost calculated.
How can the courts get involved in a financial family issue? It's something that should be involved with the parents and the child, no one else . All child support enforcement does is put fathərş and mothers in jail and take money from the encarcerated loved ones. Those who are fortunate enough to have family who van and will help. You can't take money from someone who doesn't have especially if you take away his/her license and lock him/ her up. It's not right.
Its not just a mans fault a women gets pregnant she also made the decision to not use protection. But yet when it comes to abortion the man has no say what so ever " its her body her choice" is what they say. If she decides to have the baby he has no choice on whether or not he wants to be in the child's life he's not asking to kill the baby he just might want to sign his rights away. Still has to hand over more then half his check plus 1/2 child care carry medical plus pay the bill after ins pays. And in most cases does not get to see his kids hardly at all. If she decides not to have the baby there is not a damn thing he can do about it. Women are always complaining there not treated equal to a man and there are all these laws about a person not getting a job because of there sex but when it comes to child support most women think they need to pay more and its based of the amount they get paid not what a child needs. I have watched my husband fight to see his kids for 10 years paying high amounts of child support. I have worked two jobs at times to stay caught up on just regular bills and pay attorneys and so has he. We never have exta money like she does to do trips or fun stuff with the kids when he does get them. She has never followed there court ordered agreement and now she took the kids to Cali told him it was a vacation because her step dad was dying of cancer. She said some things that didn't add up so he check some stuff out and as of last year she is not at her job and she moved out of her apt last month not telling him anything like she is supposed to. What I don't get is why we have to take her back to court if she completely ignored the judge and laws. If he would have don't that there would be a warrent for his arrest. I have also been the one receiving child support I never once told the father he couldn't see his son he only had to pay 200 a month nothing else I carried med and paid daycare and took him to see his grandma on father side and her and I still talk and have a good relationship I have not recieved any support in years and won't due to a bad decision he made. But when he is able to pay if the state forces it , it will be after my son is grown and that money will go into his account not mine. Some women our rediculas and vendictive and the courts need to stop giving them more then needed and treat fathers the same. And equal visitaion
As the father of two wonderful children that I love, adore and see quite often (not as much as I want), I find that the current child support laws create an "incentive" for a woman to seek out a divorce.
My ex and I both had to great jobs, a large home, two brand new cars, trips and a very nice life. Well she decided that a good life wasn't enough and left me for an older man with "real" money. So she left our home, took my 2 children and moved 70 miles away. Still fair?
Along with this, the judge hit me with $2200 a month child support, absolved her of the house payment responsibility, granted her legal fees for me to pay. Dragged this mess out for 3 years of useless court appearances and most of all...Treated me like I was a felon. I got berated after every accusation she made about me as if I was guilty of it.
So during this time, my ex was able to leave our house we own and rent a house for 3k a month, play the system and leave an 80k a year job on a psych, disappear whenever she wanted to Florida, dress to the 9's and live a fabulous life.
Me? I am fighting foreclosure, for every 2 dollars I take home after tax, I pay her approximately $1.75. I battled for custody...Of course the courts appointed the children an attorney and gave me that bill too (3 lawyers paying for)..And I lost because I ran out of funds.
So in short, I can barely support myself, my ex lives like a Queen and when I have my children I have to constantly explain that I do not have enough money for movies, amusement parks, vacations, puppies, etc..
Oh and the heartbreaker is when I hear these gems:
"We don't have to sleep on a couch when we are home"
"Why is the patio table in the dinning room?"
Kid #1 "But I really want this daddy, please!!!" Kid #2 "Don't worry, mommy will buy it we go home."
A) Maybe if child support was an actual percentage of what I take home rather than before taxes, I would save myself from losing everything
B) Maybe if child support were tax deductable, I could recoup some much needed money at the end of the year to support myself properly
C) Maybe if child support was based off of real numbers, my pay check would not be gone
D) Maybe if child support receivers were accountable to what they spend our hard earned money on, I could live again.
There you go NYS...Tell me how fair you really are?
Child support, while good in concept and theory, is a system filled with large flaws and inequities.
Most child support guidelines are based on a flat percentage of one parents income, or on economic data based on the differences in the purchase of alcohol, tobacco, and luxury items. These flaws create a large strain on non custodial parents who are trying to make ends meet, and provides incentive for custodial parents to not work, be vindictive, interfere with visitation and numerous other actions that are not within childrens best interest.
Child support guidelines for the most part, erroneously presume to account for the costs of the children within one household. While there are some fathers who choose to act inappropriately, and not be responsible towards their children, there are many who wish to be active and involved parents. This means that the children have two households. This results in the non custodial parent having to double pay for the costs of the children. Paying the custodial parent for the expenses in her home, and then pay again for any expenses involved with the children when they visit.
Companies that provide child support enforcement services, such as PSI, are also the same companies that provide the guideline recommendations to the states. The more money they collect, the more they are paid. Riches earned on the backs of fathers who have been beaten, abused, jailed, and impoverished. State governments do not care to correct this problem, as they themselves receive federal funding for child support. They also have the added benefit of legal fees that are collected from fathers who are in various stages of the system, and the receipt of federal funding for each inmate they have in a penal institution.
Ultimately, it results in vast amounts of post tax income being transferred to the custodial parent while impoverishing or placing the non custodial parent in hardship. Critics often point to the deadbeat dad crisis in our culture and speak of how many fathers are not involved with their children. Perhaps instead of using the term deadbeat dad, dead broke dad would be more accurate. After being raped by the system and denigrated to little more then an ATM machine, being given "visitation" as if they were some kind of baby sitter which often amounts to little more then weekend parenting, its little wonder why dads walk away sometimes. It's easy for custodial parents to scoff and say get over it and move on. They are the ones who have made out like bandits.
Until child support guidelines are based on the actual costs of the children, and credit is given to non custodial parents for any expenses they incur, the crisis our country and children face will continue.
There should be a number of factors to consider when determining child support...Income, cost of living where each reside, financial obligations (rent, electricity, car payment, insurance...Both health and auto) just to name a few.
I have NOT busted my ass in my career to get a higher paying job only to pay her more money and allow her to sit on her ass all day. Sorry, but she has the ability to work just as I do, she should do her part as well in supporting the kids.
Please don't take this the wrong way, I don't mind paying child support to support the kids. Too many women have the 'entitlement' mentality and think they can work 2 days a week or not at all and live off of the amount of child support they receive.
Also, most states stipulate the child support amount should be such to 'maintain the same standard of living at the time of divorce'. When is that ever taken into consideration?
Sorry, but the laws as they are, are not fair. As I mentioned earlier, additional factors should be taken into account , along with the 'standard of living at the time of divorce'.
I do not think it is fair that child support is based on salary before taxes...Its like they are including money that is not even there. Some of these men barely survive and exercise their visitations and are expected "to do things" like movies, bowling, dinner etc (as kids need fun and stimulation). They are used to the high life living with mom getting a lot of extra income (especially if she makes more and has a live-in spouse) and doing "fun" things and activities that cost money!
Also when figuring out child support the law does not take into consideration that a dad has to have a roof, hydro, food and a bedroom for their child...If they have a boy and a girl they need a bedroom each so now they are looking for at least a 3 bedroom apartment or house...Maybe they need child support!
I'm a mother and I allowed my children to live with their father because I have no job, no house... He has everything. Houses (plural), cars, money and a mother that watches the kids for free. I've always been a stay at home mom, might I add. I did recently have a job. I have my kids 50% of the time. Which doesn't count for anything since I don't have them over night. I get unemployment, which they won't accept as income but sure as hell will take the money out of it. When I do get a job, if I make more than before I have to PAY more cause in the eyes of the law I would be giving my kids more. NO! I would be making more so that I can afford my new expense!
My fiancee and I have one child together and he pays child support for a son that he never gets to see. We recently did our taxes and I should have been smarter than to allow him to use our child tax credit, even though he made more money than I did last year. We were going to use that money to get our car fixed and get out of debt, you know, move forward with our lives. But no, we're crippled for the next six years. Somehow the ex is going on a cruise with her boy this year. Hope they enjoy it while we're over here thinking a trip to the grocery store is a vacation.
As a grandmother who loves her grandchild more than anything in this world, I firmly believe and see the effect on my grandson's life because of the unfair child support system. When the non custodial parent is paying so much into child support that he really can no longer provide for himself or maintain the child with the standard of living the child is receiving on the custodial side. I watch my son as he tries to keep his own spirit upbeat around my grandson and do everything he possibly can do to please his son with no funds for them to go anywhere or do anything. It is limited to teaching him how to ride a bike, create things with his hands, nature.Anything and everything he can possibly do to please him that is as low cost as possible. The ex wife is taking my grandson on elaborate vacations everywhere. The court does not require accountability for her supposed half on these child support requirements, such as monthly child expenditure receipts and bank savings for college statements. If the court system was a true system of justice it should set up a realistic monetary figure of what exactly it costs to raise a child, split that figure in half,charge each parent accordingly. All documentation to show that these expenses are going where they are supposed to for the child should be provided by the custodial parent monthly. The income or wealth of either parent should have no bearing on child support. The child will live in style of life each parent is accustomed to and rightfully acquired through his or her own effort when he is with that parent. It is up to the court which income and lifestyle is in the best interest of the child. In the case where the income of either parent can not meet up with the established figure for raising a child properly, then the government should provide the additional money needed. Something has to change soon. As it stands now, this system is destroying the family unit and the well being of many of our children and grandchildren.
First why is the one receiving support not required to prove its being used on the child! Sorry someone worked hard for that money and deserves to know where its going. Second why do those paying support not get to claim there children on tax returns. Completely unfair.
Child support is wrong for the same reason slavery is wrong- because one person is forced to work for the benefit of another person with the threat of serious consequences if they do not.
I am a women however I believe that the system is wrong from the moment they give full custody of the child to the mother. Most often that happens, men is lucky if the get join custody. With less percentage of time with the kid/s, the father has to pay child support. Because they end up with less money to pay for the living expenses, they have to work more, and making more money gives mother the chance to ask for more, for the kid they claim, but truth is nobody knows how they spend the money, the court doesn't care about that, they never ask for receipts of clothes, food, school supplies, etc... Mother fights father so he doesn't get more time with kid, because she knows more time with father means less money on her pocket. The system allows that, and doesn't think on the kid. Kids needs both mother and father equally. If the father wasn't a good husband, it doesn't mean his a bad father. I've seen it in many cases, where the father is pushed out of the kid life indirectly, and the fight becomes expensive, and stressful, and at the end, the kids is the one loosing more. Those years that he/she didn't enjoy next to the father are gone. The money is gone.
All support only goes one direction even with shared 50/50 time. As if the Calculated amounts are not exaggerated enough, Apparently, the children are free when they live with the joint custodial parent. The children never even closely cost me $2500 month before divorce. And when you figure they are only with the other parent 2 weeks of the month, apparently, this translates into the state assuming these kids now cost $5k/month...Unless of course like I mentioned, they are free when they are with me.