Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

child support.

do you think there should be like a set amount you should get? i just dont see how its fair that one mom gets only 200 a month if lucky and some get over 3,000 a month. i think it should be somewhere in the middle. with income taken into consideration of course. but just because a man makes alot of money shouldnt mean that the mom gets more.

 
Anonymous

Asked by Anonymous at 11:06 PM on Mar. 28, 2009 in General Parenting

This question is closed.
Answers (14)
  • imo the whole thing with child support is a joke, all of it
    hautemama83

    Answer by hautemama83 at 3:37 AM on Mar. 29, 2009

  • They usually go by how much the father makes and go from there if he makes good money she could get a decent amount and if he makes alittle she could sometimes get a good amount and leave him with nothing it depends how the court looks at it.


    You should check it out with a lawyer. GL

    Butterfly1108

    Answer by Butterfly1108 at 11:16 PM on Mar. 28, 2009

  • Every state is different. Honestly I think that it should be determined by the income potential of both parents, so even a non working mother has a potential income she could get if she got a job. It shouldn't be based entirely on the father's income, because both parents should be required to provide financial support. When a couple is married and has made a commitment then they have agreed to work together, so one parent might stay home, but once that commitment is broken or never existed then there should be no such expectation for one parent to be the sole support of the children. The amount of time each parent has with the children also needs to be considered. You cannot expect one parent to foot a huge bill for the children to live 55% in one home and then have to foot the bill for them to live the rest of the 45% in their home too. And all extras, daycare, medical, etc. should be separate from CS.
    PROGENITOR

    Answer by PROGENITOR at 11:22 PM on Mar. 28, 2009

  • In CA they go by both parents income and how much time each parent has with the child
    PROGENITOR

    Answer by PROGENITOR at 11:22 PM on Mar. 28, 2009

  • Don't worry about what others are getting.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:26 PM on Mar. 28, 2009

  • In our state, it's based on a set "monthly" amount based on the combined income of both parents, and then each parent "pays" a percentage of that monthly amount - if the father makes more, he pays a higher percentage, and vice verse. However, the calculation also takes into account other children that one or the other parent is financially responsible for, what insurance coverage each pays for the child etc. In my situation, the father and I each made the same amount, so we were each obligated to provide 50% of the monthly amount; however, his monthly child support was offset by having 3 other kids (now 4). Costs beyond the monthly support, such as for child care, does not get the offset and is strictly a percentage of each parent's portion of the combined monthly income. So if the parent's make more money, then there's more CS due in order to maintain a standard of living that the children are used to.
    JPsMommy605

    Answer by JPsMommy605 at 11:27 PM on Mar. 28, 2009

  • Butterfly, I've never heard of calculated chidl support based on fathers' income only at least not since 10 years ago and honestly there are SO SO many FATHERS with custody now a days that the "fathers" income in your scenario could be the "mothers" income. It's easier to say CP and NCP or residential -

    Here they say 18% of the total combined income and what is your portion of that.

    So one parent is paying cs but the CP is also supposed to be contributing as well. I can't stand when people forget that CS isn't supposed to care for ALL the childs' expenses just the NCP's PORTION of them.
    Praying

    Answer by Praying at 11:35 PM on Mar. 28, 2009

  • No. It should be a percentage of what the parent makes (we'll use the father as an example). The father that created the child needs to pay his fair share of the child's living expenses. It should be as though the child were in a two parent home being supported by both parents. If the father of a child makes a lot of money, naturally, the child would have nicer things and a higher quality of living if the child lived with him so naturally, he pays more. It wouldn't be fair to the child for their father to be able to have a vast income but only pay a flat rate. A man who fathers a child owes a portion of what he makes to his child. That money is to go towards: the mother's time caring for the child, the water, electricity, utilities, groceries, supplies, gas in the car, car mileage, field trips, classroom contributions..anything the child uses (cont.)
    NovemberLove

    Answer by NovemberLove at 12:16 AM on Mar. 29, 2009

  • as an example, a friend of mine just got recently divorced after being married for 13 years and having 4 children. The father moved out. He is a wealthy man and the kids were accustomed to a nice lifestyle. Should he have to pay a flat rate like everyone else, giving his children less than what they're used for and keeping more for himself? Forcing the children into a lesser lifestyle than they're used to? Into a smaller home? Changing from the private school they've attended for years to a public one where they don't have any friends? That's not fair. If you make a child, that child should live exactly as you do or BETTER.

    It also wouldn't be fair to dads who don't make very much. It might be easier for a dad who makes $50,000 per year to pay $500 per month but devestating for a dad who only makes $20,000 per year to have to pay that much...hence why it's a percentage of your income instead of a flat sum :-)
    NovemberLove

    Answer by NovemberLove at 12:20 AM on Mar. 29, 2009

  • (and when I say "two parent home" I don't mean the dad supporting everyone as a two parent home single handedly. I mean him supporting the children along with the mother as he would be contributing if they still lived together. Kids should not become impoverished just because daddy leaves. Sorry!)
    NovemberLove

    Answer by NovemberLove at 12:22 AM on Mar. 29, 2009