It depends on the state, but if we are talking about personal opinions on the subject I don't think future kids should effect support for kids already born.
It depends on your state. Each state does things differently. I'm in Washington, and it's based on the income of both NCP and CP and some other numbers. The CP gets a "discount" on child support for other children they support, ONLY if they have a current CS order or if they are the sole provider (meaning the other biological parent of the child doesn't work) for the child/children.
When CS was figured for DH it went from $360 a month to $266 a month because DH supported DS. DH lost his job and CS was set down to $50 a month, when he was working again CS was set back up based on his income, BM's income, and they took into consideration that we had two more children at that point. DH's CS was set at $150 a month (he was also making less than when it was first set at $266). DH didn't ask for our DDs to be included, BM demanded that when DH got a new job that DCS would do another administrative hearing. When they did, they asked BM and DH if either of them had any other children, DH listed our children, and the adminstrative law judge decided what the amount would be set at. Honestly, I think she was pretty pissed with BM by that time. We have a recording of the hearing, BM and her lawyer appeared by phone, as did DH. BM and her lawyer kept interrupting the judge and talking about how disabled SD was, the judge asked if SD got social security and they said no. DH said that SD was receiving social security but that it was stopped. The judge asked if SD had an IEP or anything else that proved her disability, BM said no. So the judge refused to take SD's disabilities into account.
Quoting MommySabs:
In our state other children on either side are considered.
Quoting Tinkerbellmama:It depends on your state. Each state does things differently. I'm in Washington, and it's based on the income of both NCP and CP and some other numbers. The CP gets a "discount" on child support for other children they support, ONLY if they have a current CS order or if they are the sole provider (meaning the other biological parent of the child doesn't work) for the child/children.
When CS was figured for DH it went from $360 a month to $266 a month because DH supported DS. DH lost his job and CS was set down to $50 a month, when he was working again CS was set back up based on his income, BM's income, and they took into consideration that we had two more children at that point. DH's CS was set at $150 a month (he was also making less than when it was first set at $266).
Quoting soonergirl980:It depends on the state, but if we are talking about personal opinions on the subject I don't think future kids should effect support for kids already born.
It's a double edged sword. On one hand it's not "fair" to the new wife who may want to have children. On the other hand, it's also not fair to the first child because money is being taken from them to support their siblings.
Quoting Tpayne2011:
I think that makes sense, why should a husband and wife not have children because the husband or wife pays support for a previous child.
Quoting Tinkerbellmama:It depends on your state. Each state does things differently. I'm in Washington, and it's based on the income of both NCP and CP and some other numbers. The CP gets a "discount" on child support for other children they support, ONLY if they have a current CS order or if they are the sole provider (meaning the other biological parent of the child doesn't work) for the child/children.
When CS was figured for DH it went from $360 a month to $266 a month because DH supported DS. DH lost his job and CS was set down to $50 a month, when he was working again CS was set back up based on his income, BM's income, and they took into consideration that we had two more children at that point. DH's CS was set at $150 a month (he was also making less than when it was first set at $266).
you should only have kids you can afford to have. if you can't afford a child because you are supporting previous children then you wait till you can afford it.
Quoting Tinkerbellmama:It's a double edged sword. On one hand it's not "fair" to the new wife who may want to have children. On the other hand, it's also not fair to the first child because money is being taken from them to support their siblings.
Quoting Tpayne2011:
I think that makes sense, why should a husband and wife not have children because the husband or wife pays support for a previous child.
Quoting Tinkerbellmama:It depends on your state. Each state does things differently. I'm in Washington, and it's based on the income of both NCP and CP and some other numbers. The CP gets a "discount" on child support for other children they support, ONLY if they have a current CS order or if they are the sole provider (meaning the other biological parent of the child doesn't work) for the child/children.
When CS was figured for DH it went from $360 a month to $266 a month because DH supported DS. DH lost his job and CS was set down to $50 a month, when he was working again CS was set back up based on his income, BM's income, and they took into consideration that we had two more children at that point. DH's CS was set at $150 a month (he was also making less than when it was first set at $266).
Quoting soonergirl980:you should only have kids you can afford to have.
Would you be insulted? And a second question...
- Tpayne2011
on Jan. 2, 2013 at 7:23 PM