I ask this for a couple reasons, but mainly because I don't think some courts take into consideration the cost of living in some areas.
For example, I'll use the city I live in. It is a tourist and retirement town. It's located on the water. No matter where you live, you're less than ten minutes from beach access. This is also where all the jobs are- if you don't want to live in the city, you're looking at a 30-40 minute drive to work everyday, one way. I used to live in a small town outside of where I live, and it wasn't any cheaper just because rent went down. It ends up being about the same amount, without the convenience of being close to grocery stores, shopping malls, the hospital, the beach, etc.
Unless someone is on welfare, they're looking at at least $650 for a ONE bedroom apartment per month, no utilities included. Rent for houses is worse- I looked at them last summer and even the worst looking houses were available for $800 a month, two bedrooms. The average pay for jobs around here is roughly 8.50 an hour. There are not very many high level positions available. Lots of retail, lots of hotels, and doctors/dentist/veterinarian office jobs. Being single and having a place of your own on wages as low as they are is impossible. Most of my single friends (most of whom have college degrees, or certificates in something) have had to have roommates, or even still live with their parents because it is nearly impossible to live on their own, without children. I did it. I had roommates after high school and all throughout college. I lived with my ex-fiance, and we always had a roommate.
A co-worker of mine recently had a child with a woman he is not dating. He had filed for bankruptcy several months ago because the house he bought over ten years ago was foreclosed on after he couldn't make the payments on time for over a year. He was a manager for a hotel in a large chain for a long time, but the company asked him to take a pay cut or step out of the position because they were losing money. Not because of him, but because this area took a huge dive for a while during the early recession years. It's a vacation town, like I said, and makes most of it's money during the tourist season. He's been working front desk at another hotel for three years now, and it wasn't paying the bills- hence, bankruptcy.
So, anyway. Child support was put into effect. He will only have a couple hours with the baby per week, since she is breastfeeding. No over nights. The court set CS at $695 a month. He is already considered in arrearages because the baby is three months old and they just had everything figured out. He wanted to talk to the BM about the amount, because he is struggling to pay his bills and wants to ask if she'll have a different amount ordered. She is 22, lives with her parents, does not attend school, does not work.
His rent is $700 a month- he has a two bedroom apartment just outside of town and only signed the lease because he thought having an extra room for the baby would be a good idea, since he thought he would at least get him overnight once a week, or once every two weeks. He furnished it and everything, and is prepared at least physically for a baby to be there. It seems he is showing real effort in being a dad, and being there for the baby.
He's been stressed as hell at work. FoC is taking CS out of his checks now at work, plus some of the amount of arrearages. When he got his last paycheck (a full week with overtime hours) he didn't have enough to even pay an entire electric bill and get groceries. He usually puts away part of every check for rent at the end of the month, but now he can't do that.
Yes, I know- he's responsible for the choices he made. Yes, he should pay CS. Yes, he should be supporting his child financially. I am not saying he should not- but I think FoC went overboard in the amount. I believe the court should consider the cost of living into the equation.
Sorry for dragging this on- however, I want to bring up the roommate topic again. This co-worker had spoken of getting a roommate for the time being, but does not want to have a roommate once he gets over nights with his son (he DOES want to have them eventually, and I don't think there's any reason he wouldn't get them). I can completely understand, as SO never wanted a roommate, either, because it is too hard to find a roommate you can trust to be around your child for prolonged periods of time, unless they're your parents (and even then....some parents I wouldn't want around). SO went through the same thing, so I know where my co-worker is coming from. I've been trying to help him, but honestly, the only thing that saved my SO from moving 50 miles away back in with his parents was me, moving in and helping with bills. If he had been kicked out of his trailer before I came around (we were notified we had to move out in January this year because the landlord sold the property- he was on a month to month lease at $450 a month) he would have been fucked, no two ways about it.
So I'm NOT asking if you think your ex, or BM pays enough CS, I'm asking if you think the courts are fair in deciding amounts, especially taking into consideration that many places are still strugging fairly hard economically.
In Michigan child support isn't a strict set percentage, it is based on BOTH parents' wages. Since this woman doesn't have a job, my co-worker pays more than he normally would if she was working, even if it was at minimum wage. He also has to pay for her and baby's Medicaid since she has no coverage and is on state assistance.
As far as I know, FoC asks for pay stubs from work or verification for unemployment. I do not believe they take into consideration any bills either parent has. I think the way they see it is, "your bills are your problem." Even if those bills are providing for the kids (like, a vehicle and rent). This is why I ask.....
The two things I remember being calculated back in April for BM's CS amount were the cost of child care and how much overtime visitation was spent with her. And actually, the time spent with the NCP doesn't even factor in unless it's close to 50/50. The mediator told SO this when he asked why she would be paying less than he did even though she would have only 2 3-hour long visitations with SS. The mediator replied that the amount of time spent with NCP isn't calculated into CS amounts. Which is why even though SO started with having SS one night a week, to two nights a week, to three nights every other week, his amount of CS never changed. They straight up do not consider the cost of living for NCP, if one parent is considered to have physical custody.
Quoting LyndaLoo78:
Typically there is an information statement included in the paperwork for CS which allows both parents to show their monthly expenses (rent/mortgage, utility, car, car insurance, additional expenses). CS is a mathmatical equation with no emotional subtext; it is based upon the information provided; largely when looked as a mathmatical equaltion only it would be seen as "fair." (This is my nonemotional, mathmatical POV.)
She must make a bit of money then.
Do you think it is fair according to the cost of living in your area?
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
Lol, it would be fair if BM paid it! She owes 1200 a month according to state calculations. She was paying $300. Now she's paying $700 (forced to by her command). She refuses to fill out the paperwork for DCSE cause she knows it will go up to $1200! DCSE is taking thier sweet ass time moving against her / taking her to court. Now our lawyer is on it though and maybe it will get settled? DCSE is counting up arears in the meantime since last December. So BM is already 5 grand in arears.
Quoting ManicAttack:She must make a bit of money then.
Do you think it is fair according to the cost of living in your area?
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
Lol, it would be fair if BM paid it! She owes 1200 a month according to state calculations. She was paying $300. Now she's paying $700 (forced to by her command). She refuses to fill out the paperwork for DCSE cause she knows it will go up to $1200! DCSE is taking thier sweet ass time moving against her / taking her to court. Now our lawyer is on it though and maybe it will get settled? DCSE is counting up arears in the meantime since last December. So BM is already 5 grand in arears.
Quoting ManicAttack:She must make a bit of money then.
Do you think it is fair according to the cost of living in your area?
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
Lol, it would be fair if BM paid it! She owes 1200 a month according to state calculations. She was paying $300. Now she's paying $700 (forced to by her command). She refuses to fill out the paperwork for DCSE cause she knows it will go up to $1200! DCSE is taking thier sweet ass time moving against her / taking her to court. Now our lawyer is on it though and maybe it will get settled? DCSE is counting up arears in the meantime since last December. So BM is already 5 grand in arears.
That's a lot of effing money. Then again, for one child it was costing SO $650 a month. So, it's a good thing he didn't have any more kids with BM.
I guess I was just wondering if the cost of living should be factored in. If, say, the state had originally thought it cost $500 a month to raise one kid, but the cost of living had changed and paying that much would put a burden on NCP's shoulders, if that should be considered. I think minimum wage here is 7.35. That's not enough for anyone to make end's meet on their own....It's not going up with the cost of living whatsoever.
I noticed our grocery bill going up in the last couple months and couldn't figure out why. Then found an old receipt and compared them- on a lot of things I buy regularly, their prices went up. Maybe by only 2 or 3 cents, but my laundry detergent went up more than 50 cents. And I'm not a brand snob, but due to all our skin and allergy conditions (SS has extreme eczema, I'm allergic to certain scents and SO and I both have dyshidrotic eczema) I have to use certain detergents and softeners so I can't just go to the cheap stuff. We aren't hurting- SO pays $245 a month (he is CP but still pays CS....). But I just wonder about the situational stuff for each state.
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
Here CS is calculated by putting both BPs income (net) into a fraction equaling 100% 'household income'. In our case it comes out to my DH makes %40 and BM makes 60% of the household income. Therefore BM has to pay 60% of what the star figures it costs to support 3 kids. That's approx $900. Then BM/ NCP has to pay 60% of education, daycare, insurance etc. that brings it to $1200.
Quoting ManicAttack:She must make a bit of money then.
Do you think it is fair according to the cost of living in your area?
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
Lol, it would be fair if BM paid it! She owes 1200 a month according to state calculations. She was paying $300. Now she's paying $700 (forced to by her command). She refuses to fill out the paperwork for DCSE cause she knows it will go up to $1200! DCSE is taking thier sweet ass time moving against her / taking her to court. Now our lawyer is on it though and maybe it will get settled? DCSE is counting up arears in the meantime since last December. So BM is already 5 grand in arears.
I don't think this is true as if this were the case, they wouldn't use incomes as a basis. Some states don't even use CP's income, they just use NCP and take half of it (or whatever it is they do). That's not figuring in how much it would actually cost to raise a child. That's just figuring the so-called "fair" amount that CP should get.
Quoting zannahdeux:
I read something interesting the last time this came up...basically I read that the cs gets set as an average of what it costs to raise a child over it's lifetime...meaning that if children are really young the child support is typically more than the bm needs because it costs less to raise a toddler than it does a teenager....but that extra is suppose to cover the extra expenses of the child when they do get older and why perhaps some people feel cs is too low in other instances.....something to chew on
Here in VA it is based on the incomes of both parents, child care needs, insurance needs and other children the parents are biological parents to (such as previous CO CS and/or new children)
Watch the paperwork. BM took DH to court to have CS raised due to child care and medical insurance. No problem except they forgot to calculate in DH new son which changed the figure greatly. So DH had to take BM back to court which has taken 4 months and the agency even said that Dh overpaid and BM owes him now 1500, which he now has to go back to court to get back. Its a long process so make sure everything is straight before you walk out of court.
I'm going to have a shirt made...
- ManicAttack
on Aug. 20, 2012 at 5:03 AM