Child Support

On 8 Apr 2005 13:12:22 -0700, "Emmily" wrote:

At the time child support was originally determined, I was a stay at
home mother. We have joint legal and physical custody. We started
off with my having primary physical, but he fought me in a very
unpleasant manner to get shared physical custody.

There really is no comparison between what he earns and what I now earn
- I am a part-time instructional aide, but will soon be a full-time
elementary teacher. Since he was ordered to pay for extra-curricular
activities, I thought that a camping trip would qualify. The Order
says 'including but not limited to...soccer and piano lessons...'
because those were the only activities going on at the time. He even
refused to pay for the soccer this winter because it was not 'on his
nights'. If it were on his nights he would complain about the time
taken away from his custody time. There is no way to win with him.
My son is already complaining about being held hostage to custody, and
is starting to rebel over it. He is 13 and keeps asking when he can
choose where he goes. Any ideas on that one? (We are in PA)

Liz

Did the second order, where he got joint physical custody, state that
he would pay for extracurricular or does it refer to the first, which
stated it, as remaining unchanged except for terms of custody? I'm
just trying to help you determine if he is using any logic in his
"it's not on my night" argument.

On another note, I always recommend to anyone who wishes to maintain
custody of his/her children to be WILLING to bear the burden alone.
No, it's not fair and yes, the parties should adhere to the terms of
the court orders... but ultimately, one can only depend on his/her own
ability to provide for a child in his/her care. How ridiculous would
it be for us to tell our children "well, you can eat once we see the
judge again." We feed our children regardless, don't we? Sure, there
are legal remedies, but they never come in time to make a difference
to the child. You can't go back and undo the countless nights of mac
and cheese just because a court says the other parent must "make up
for those" with filet mignon later... when it should have been a meat
and two veggies all along, you know? The only time it ever works out
correctly for the child is if the parent had the ability to provide
the same all along, albeit forgoing discretionary spending on self in
the meanwhile.

I know that this isn't an issue about food, but I use it as an analogy
that I hope you can understand. Your son will never be able to play
soccer the winter he missed. If you managed to pay for it; sure, you
are owed as it was your ex's responsibility according to the court.
But you can't be owed for something that did not take place. If you
were unable to come up with the funding, I see this as an unrecoupable
loss. I do hope you managed to finfd a way to pay for your son's
soccer. I know I always would rather "take the hits" from my ex's
irresponsibility by doing without myself rather than let my children
"feel the blow." I can be paid back later... my children cannot.

Beverly wrote:

On 8 Apr 2005 13:12:22 -0700, "Emmily" wrote:


At the time child support was originally determined, I was a stay at
home mother. We have joint legal and physical custody. We started
off with my having primary physical, but he fought me in a very
unpleasant manner to get shared physical custody.

There really is no comparison between what he earns and what I now earn
- I am a part-time instructional aide, but will soon be a full-time
elementary teacher. Since he was ordered to pay for extra-curricular
activities, I thought that a camping trip would qualify. The Order
says 'including but not limited to...soccer and piano lessons...'
because those were the only activities going on at the time. He even
refused to pay for the soccer this winter because it was not 'on his
nights'. If it were on his nights he would complain about the time
taken away from his custody time. There is no way to win with him.
My son is already complaining about being held hostage to custody, and
is starting to rebel over it. He is 13 and keeps asking when he can
choose where he goes. Any ideas on that one? (We are in PA)

Liz


Did the second order, where he got joint physical custody, state that
he would pay for extracurricular or does it refer to the first, which
stated it, as remaining unchanged except for terms of custody? I'm
just trying to help you determine if he is using any logic in his
"it's not on my night" argument.

On another note, I always recommend to anyone who wishes to maintain
custody of his/her children to be WILLING to bear the burden alone.
No, it's not fair and yes, the parties should adhere to the terms of
the court orders... but ultimately, one can only depend on his/her own
ability to provide for a child in his/her care. How ridiculous would
it be for us to tell our children "well, you can eat once we see the
judge again." We feed our children regardless, don't we? Sure, there
are legal remedies, but they never come in time to make a difference
to the child. You can't go back and undo the countless nights of mac
and cheese just because a court says the other parent must "make up
for those" with filet mignon later... when it should have been a meat
and two veggies all along, you know? The only time it ever works out
correctly for the child is if the parent had the ability to provide
the same all along, albeit forgoing discretionary spending on self in
the meanwhile.

I know that this isn't an issue about food, but I use it as an analogy
that I hope you can understand. Your son will never be able to play
soccer the winter he missed. If you managed to pay for it; sure, you
are owed as it was your ex's responsibility according to the court.
But you can't be owed for something that did not take place. If you
were unable to come up with the funding, I see this as an unrecoupable
loss. I do hope you managed to finfd a way to pay for your son's
soccer. I know I always would rather "take the hits" from my ex's
irresponsibility by doing without myself rather than let my children
"feel the blow." I can be paid back later... my children cannot.

Amen, Bev... This is truly about "the best interests of the child".

- Ron ^*^

"Emmily" wrote in message
oups.com...
At the time child support was originally determined, I was a stay at
home mother. We have joint legal and physical custody. We started
off with my having primary physical, but he fought me in a very
unpleasant manner to get shared physical custody.

Why should anyone have to FIGHT for shared coustody?



There really is no comparison between what he earns and what I now earn
- I am a part-time instructional aide, but will soon be a full-time
elementary teacher. Since he was ordered to pay for extra-curricular
activities, I thought that a camping trip would qualify. The Order
says 'including but not limited to...soccer and piano lessons...'
because those were the only activities going on at the time. He even
refused to pay for the soccer this winter because it was not 'on his
nights'. If it were on his nights he would complain about the time
taken away from his custody time. There is no way to win with him.
My son is already complaining about being held hostage to custody, and
is starting to rebel over it. He is 13 and keeps asking when he can
choose where he goes. Any ideas on that one? (We are in PA)

Liz

P. Fritz wrote:

"Emmily" wrote in message
oups.com...
At the time child support was originally determined, I was a stay at
home mother. We have joint legal and physical custody. We started
off with my having primary physical, but he fought me in a very
unpleasant manner to get shared physical custody.

Why should anyone have to FIGHT for shared coustody?

Indeed... Her comment does say volumes about her values.

- Ron ^*^

"Beverly" wrote in

You can't go back and undo the countless nights of mac
and cheese just because a court says the other parent must "make up
for those" with filet mignon later...

Perhaps most of the problem in America is too many nights out to mac and
cheese, what ever happend to good old fashioned cooking at home which is
much cheaper too?

. I do hope you managed to finfd a way to pay for your son's
soccer.

Kids will never be denied to play soccer as there are many programs and
funds available for parents with limited means.
Christ, I remember when I ran a paper route at 12 to pay for my own
activites, not all kids are so spineless as to need handouts at every turn.
What standard of living is CS based on?

"spr" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Beverly" wrote in

You can't go back and undo the countless nights of mac
and cheese just because a court says the other parent must "make up
for those" with filet mignon later...

Perhaps most of the problem in America is too many nights out to mac and
cheese, what ever happend to good old fashioned cooking at home which is
much cheaper too?

Uh, mac and cheese IS cooked at home. It is an inexpensive meal--and a way
to make it through the month when the month lasts too long for the money.

"teachrmama" wrote in

Uh, mac and cheese IS cooked at home. It is an inexpensive meal--and a
way to make it through the month when the month lasts too long for the
money.


Sorry, thought you we're referring to Cheese Burgers at McDonalds.
Still, too many families these days exist on fast food and pizza!

"spr" wrote in message
ink.net...

What standard of living is CS based on?

The Betson-Rothbarth estimates of child rearing expenditures. Technically
child expenditures are based on a "standard of child well-being" rather than
a standard of living. In developing the CS guidelines they also look at the
Engel and Espenshade estimators of child expenditures plus the USDA annual
report on child expenditures. The Betson-Rothbarth estimates are the
newest, the lowest, and are considered the most accurate picture of child
rearing costs.

The problems with the CS awards occur with all the adjustments that get made
to the basic data. Most of those adjustments are not fully explained
anywhere for public consumption. Plus the CS award calculation methodology
is a mixed bag of tricks. By using things like imputed incomes, expenditure
add-ons, no adjustments for visitations, no acknowledgement of NCP expenses,
no consideration for expenses that travel with the child, and no
consideration for tax consequences, the CS awards increase far above the
solid science developed in the Betson-Rothbarth estimates used as the
starting point.