Fathers and Split Custody CS

I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers. My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.

In article . net, Bob Whiteside
says...

I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers. My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.
====
Except that subsequent children are younger with years of dependency before
them. The 18 year old can get a job and cover his own expenses as my stepson has
during his college years with us. He came to live with us when he turned 18 and
his mother kicked him out. He had at least 2 years of high school left due to
some learning problems earlier. He lived here and went to high school then
college. Of course we covered his expenses during high school which were really
minimal--well, he did eat a lot. Oh yeah, and those 20 minute showers--and his
perpetual laundering.... He is now entering his senior year of college (honors
student now--go figure) and we only see him when he picks up his mail.
====
====

In article . net, Bob Whiteside
says...

I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers. My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.
====
Except that subsequent children are younger with years of dependency before
them. The 18 year old can get a job and cover his own expenses as my stepson has
during his college years with us. He came to live with us when he turned 18 and
his mother kicked him out. He had at least 2 years of high school left due to
some learning problems earlier. He lived here and went to high school then
college. Of course we covered his expenses during high school which were really
minimal--well, he did eat a lot. Oh yeah, and those 20 minute showers--and his
perpetual laundering.... He is now entering his senior year of college (honors
student now--go figure) and we only see him when he picks up his mail.
====
====

In article . net, Bob Whiteside
says...

I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers. My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.
====
Except that subsequent children are younger with years of dependency before
them. The 18 year old can get a job and cover his own expenses as my stepson has
during his college years with us. He came to live with us when he turned 18 and
his mother kicked him out. He had at least 2 years of high school left due to
some learning problems earlier. He lived here and went to high school then
college. Of course we covered his expenses during high school which were really
minimal--well, he did eat a lot. Oh yeah, and those 20 minute showers--and his
perpetual laundering.... He is now entering his senior year of college (honors
student now--go figure) and we only see him when he picks up his mail.
====
====

Bob Whiteside wrote:
I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers.

Yep, it's quite common for mothers to be unable to raise children into
decent adults. By the time they are teenagers it's often way too late.


My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.

Yep. the whole C$ system is crap. It hurts children to pay females.

Bob




--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

Bob Whiteside wrote:
I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers.

Yep, it's quite common for mothers to be unable to raise children into
decent adults. By the time they are teenagers it's often way too late.


My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.

Yep. the whole C$ system is crap. It hurts children to pay females.

Bob




--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

Bob Whiteside wrote:
I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers.

Yep, it's quite common for mothers to be unable to raise children into
decent adults. By the time they are teenagers it's often way too late.


My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.

Yep. the whole C$ system is crap. It hurts children to pay females.

Bob




--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

"Gini" wrote in message ...
In article . net, Bob
Whiteside
says...

I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd
raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers. My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and
parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And
parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get
the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get
a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the
ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way
children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system
that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.
====
Except that subsequent children are younger with years of dependency
before
them. The 18 year old can get a job and cover his own expenses as my
stepson has
during his college years with us. He came to live with us when he turned
18 and
his mother kicked him out. He had at least 2 years of high school left due
to
some learning problems earlier. He lived here and went to high school then
college. Of course we covered his expenses during high school which were
really
minimal--well, he did eat a lot. Oh yeah, and those 20 minute showers--and
his
perpetual laundering.... He is now entering his senior year of college
(honors
student now--go figure) and we only see him when he picks up his mail.
====
====

I did not mean to imply I was unhappy with the situation. My intent was to
point out that fathers who step in to help raise children who are a handful
for the mothers, can end up having to pay twice - once in CS for the other
children, plus another time for ongoing support of an adult child living
with them. And in the later teen years the expenses accelerate rapidly.
The irony is the child's age overrides the fact the adult child may not be
emancipated yet and the system encourages CP mothers to dump the child off
onto dad when the actual expenses (not the CS guideline assumptions for
expenses) start to rise.

My son had a job. I chose not to charge him rent as long as he helped out
with some of the household chores. The underlying costs for providing him a
place to live, food, etc. were the same pre-18 and post-18. The difference
is the CS system stops recognizing those costs at an arbitrary, magical
point in time and treats those costs as if they no longer exist.

His biggest expense was his car. I paid for the cost of insurance to add
him to my insurance policy to drive my car. He paid for the car payments,
maintenance, gas, and the cost of insurance above the marginal cost to drive
my car. Just those items cost him over $500 per month.

"Gini" wrote in message ...
In article . net, Bob
Whiteside
says...

I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd
raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers. My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and
parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And
parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get
the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get
a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the
ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way
children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system
that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.
====
Except that subsequent children are younger with years of dependency
before
them. The 18 year old can get a job and cover his own expenses as my
stepson has
during his college years with us. He came to live with us when he turned
18 and
his mother kicked him out. He had at least 2 years of high school left due
to
some learning problems earlier. He lived here and went to high school then
college. Of course we covered his expenses during high school which were
really
minimal--well, he did eat a lot. Oh yeah, and those 20 minute showers--and
his
perpetual laundering.... He is now entering his senior year of college
(honors
student now--go figure) and we only see him when he picks up his mail.
====
====

I did not mean to imply I was unhappy with the situation. My intent was to
point out that fathers who step in to help raise children who are a handful
for the mothers, can end up having to pay twice - once in CS for the other
children, plus another time for ongoing support of an adult child living
with them. And in the later teen years the expenses accelerate rapidly.
The irony is the child's age overrides the fact the adult child may not be
emancipated yet and the system encourages CP mothers to dump the child off
onto dad when the actual expenses (not the CS guideline assumptions for
expenses) start to rise.

My son had a job. I chose not to charge him rent as long as he helped out
with some of the household chores. The underlying costs for providing him a
place to live, food, etc. were the same pre-18 and post-18. The difference
is the CS system stops recognizing those costs at an arbitrary, magical
point in time and treats those costs as if they no longer exist.

His biggest expense was his car. I paid for the cost of insurance to add
him to my insurance policy to drive my car. He paid for the car payments,
maintenance, gas, and the cost of insurance above the marginal cost to drive
my car. Just those items cost him over $500 per month.

"Gini" wrote in message ...
In article . net, Bob
Whiteside
says...

I have not seen this CS topic discussed previously, so I thought I'd
raise
it for discussion.

It's fairly common for fathers to get split custody when teenagers become
unmanageable for the CP mothers. My son came to live with me when he had
just turned 14. My daughter, who is younger, continued to live with her
mother. We had split custody.

Here's the problem. CS calculations allow for CS payment offsets and the
parent with the higher income pays the parent with the lower income the
offset amount. An example would be parent A owes parent B $600 and
parent B
owes parent A $300. Parent A pays parent B the $300 difference. And
parent
B is not subjected to any CS enforcement tactics.

When the older child reaches 18, the mother can go back to court and get
the
CS increased for the under 18 child. Even though the older child stills
lives with the father, the mother can have the offset eliminated, and get
a
full 100% share of the CS for the remaining minor child. The parent B CS
received goes from $300 to $600 even though parent A still has the
ongoing
expenses related to having the over 18 child live with them.

This is an example where a biological child is treated the same way
children
in second marriages are treated, i.e. they are ignored by the CS system
that
pretends they do not exist for CS calculations.
====
Except that subsequent children are younger with years of dependency
before
them. The 18 year old can get a job and cover his own expenses as my
stepson has
during his college years with us. He came to live with us when he turned
18 and
his mother kicked him out. He had at least 2 years of high school left due
to
some learning problems earlier. He lived here and went to high school then
college. Of course we covered his expenses during high school which were
really
minimal--well, he did eat a lot. Oh yeah, and those 20 minute showers--and
his
perpetual laundering.... He is now entering his senior year of college
(honors
student now--go figure) and we only see him when he picks up his mail.
====
====

I did not mean to imply I was unhappy with the situation. My intent was to
point out that fathers who step in to help raise children who are a handful
for the mothers, can end up having to pay twice - once in CS for the other
children, plus another time for ongoing support of an adult child living
with them. And in the later teen years the expenses accelerate rapidly.
The irony is the child's age overrides the fact the adult child may not be
emancipated yet and the system encourages CP mothers to dump the child off
onto dad when the actual expenses (not the CS guideline assumptions for
expenses) start to rise.

My son had a job. I chose not to charge him rent as long as he helped out
with some of the household chores. The underlying costs for providing him a
place to live, food, etc. were the same pre-18 and post-18. The difference
is the CS system stops recognizing those costs at an arbitrary, magical
point in time and treats those costs as if they no longer exist.

His biggest expense was his car. I paid for the cost of insurance to add
him to my insurance policy to drive my car. He paid for the car payments,
maintenance, gas, and the cost of insurance above the marginal cost to drive
my car. Just those items cost him over $500 per month.