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

(minimum 6 characters)

Another S/O on CS...SP income

Posted by on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:10 PM
  • 95 Replies

In the intereste of full disclosure:  I'm an SP with no kids of my own.  And I have paid DH's CS when he was unemployed.  Kids were on my ins. BM was not employed. 

That said....Should a SP's income factor in to CS calculations?  Whether you're the side paying or receiving?

To be really honest, I think it should.  I'm sure that's an unpopular stance.  I think that CS should be figured based on your total household income and your total household dependents. 

If I were a SAHM not working but had a millionaire husband who was more than capable of caring for me and my kids, then I don't think the other parent should be paying me as if I were unemployed with nothing.  I still think the other parent should be chipping in on the care of their kids, but not the same as if I were single and unemployed.

On a more realistic note, I think that our total income as a household should be taken into consideration along with BM's total household income when it comes to my skids.  Since I'm now a SAHW, I don't have any income but if DH and I were both working full time, I think that it's fair to tkae that into consideration.

As much as I want to protect myself and my own finances as a person who has not legal responsibility for the kids, the fact that when I WAS contributing, we had a lot more earning power as a married couple than BM did as a single.

I really think that if we want to make things fair, including a SP's income is important.


by on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:10 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
mcsmom1
by Member on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:21 PM

I don't know. My ex and I are both still single. He lives with a nurse, so I assume she makes decent money. He pays that maximum cs in our state, so I suppose her income wouldn't matter.  Do some states use the entire household income when figuring cs?

Silent_Sea
by on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:22 PM

 

Quoting Birdseed:

That said....Should a SP's income factor in to CS calculations?  Whether you're the side paying or receiving?

To be really honest, I think it should.  I'm sure that's an unpopular stance.  I think that CS should be figured based on your total household income and your total household dependents. 

If I were a SAHM not working but had a millionaire husband who was more than capable of caring for me and my kids, then I don't think the other parent should be paying me as if I were unemployed with nothing.  I still think the other parent should be chipping in on the care of their kids, but not the same as if I were single and unemployed.

It is considered in a lot of states for the above reason. It has to be an extreme situation to be considered. Get this though..... they will even consider the other childrens income too - so if you have a child living under your roof, and they inherited money through the death of the other parent, it could be used as an offset. They ask on many forms for the household income and if there is child support being received to support the other children in the home.  The reasons are due to allowing deviations from the standard calculations. They are looking for an extreme.  Where the responsible parent isn't paying what they should due to lack of income or the finances being hidden with SM. 

On a more realistic note, I think that our total income as a household should be taken into consideration along with BM's total household income when it comes to my skids.  Since I'm now a SAHW, I don't have any income but if DH and I were both working full time, I think that it's fair to tkae that into consideration.

I disagree with this. I don't think income as a stepparent should be considered.  If I work, then my income offsets any extra financial household expenses naturally. These child/ren go between two homes. We provide the same in our home albeit less food, etc. due to time but we already support them in the other home and support them in our home. That is double charging.

As much as I want to protect myself and my own finances as a person who has not legal responsibility for the kids, the fact that when I WAS contributing, we had a lot more earning power as a married couple than BM did as a single.

You also paid CS to her did you not and you paid for the children to be in your home did you not?  

I really think that if we want to make things fair, including a SP's income is important.

 It already is. If your DH becomes unemployed that CS doesn't just go away. You pay for it no matter what even if it at a later date.  So, you as a SM either pay it now for him or you pay it later by making up for the loss of income.  It is double dipping if you include household income instead of just the bio parents. There is comingling with the children going between two homes and supporting those two homes.

 

pepper504
by Platinum Member on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:29 PM
2 moms liked this

No, I do not think that a SP's income should be factored in CS. 

In Louisiana, it is ONLY factored in if the other party is unemployed or underemployed, unless a separate property agreement was done to separate the spouse's property while married.

Eternity807
by Bronze Member on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:34 PM
3 moms liked this

I disagree.  I came in to SS's life when he was 10 years old.  Why should my income be considered for supporting a child that was created long before I ever met my husband?

That being said, BM thought my income would be figured in to the calculation and couldn't wait for us to be married so she could get her CS raised.  Someone somewhere set her straight on that before she made the mistake of modifying. 

It is DH's responsibility to support his child, not mine.  My income is used to supplement where DH's income does not.  Being that I am a CSM to my younger SS, my income is used to support him where DH cannot.  But if BM were to get a boyfriend or husband, I wouldn't expect that person to support SS. 

 

owl0210
by on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:41 PM
No, I don't think a SP income should be counted. My ex-husband and I work to support our son. My fiance supports his son soley because his ex-wife doesn't work. She can get off her ass and find a job and support her child that she created with him.
Birdseed
by on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:45 PM
1 mom liked this

My skids were 10/11 when we were engaged and DH lost his job.  I tried to get him to just get married in a courthouse so we could get them all on my ins right away.  He insisted on a wedding.  I understand where you are coming from but on the flip side, if CS is designed to equalize things between two homes, does it make sense for a SP to be the "extra" instead of the "available" funds?

If the household has X funds available, shouldn't all of those funds be considered for the kids?

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather not be responsible for kids who aren't mine, but in many respects, you are anyway.  Why would the finances be any different?


Quoting Eternity807:

I disagree.  I came in to SS's life when he was 10 years old.  Why should my income be considered for supporting a child that was created long before I ever met my husband?

That being said, BM thought my income would be figured in to the calculation and couldn't wait for us to be married so she could get her CS raised.  Someone somewhere set her straight on that before she made the mistake of modifying. 

It is DH's responsibility to support his child, not mine.  My income is used to supplement where DH's income does not.  Being that I am a CSM to my younger SS, my income is used to support him where DH cannot.  But if BM were to get a boyfriend or husband, I wouldn't expect that person to support SS. 



Leigh84
by Gold Member on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:46 PM
6 moms liked this
I disagree. While I certainly don't mind buying my sk's things and I don't mind helping financially, on my own terms. I don't feel I should have a financial obligation to kids I didn't help make. I also have a child of my own to help provide for.
jesssanate
by on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:47 PM
1 mom liked this
I don't agree with it if BM is voluntarily unemployed. I would not be ok with my income supporting a non-working parent. Then again they have 50/50 split so that factors me to think this way.
OvrMyHead
by on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:48 PM
2 moms liked this

 I've come to the opinion that child support is completely unfair in most cases.  I don't understand the calculators, they had my ex paying almost 1/2 his take home income to me when I made just as much as he did.  My old neighbor had to pay his ex around $1200 a month--problem was that he was a building contractor and was not getting much work.  In the meantime, the ex was living with a very wealthy man who had several homes.

Then on the flip side are the deadbeats that pay absolutely nothing (whether the custodial parent needs it or not) and get away scot free.

While I understand that parents need to provide financially for their children, I see too many examples of this implemented in a way that is hardly fair. 

That being said, if my income was going to be factored in with DH's for child support, I would not have gotten married.

Birdseed
by on Feb. 14, 2014 at 3:49 PM

My DH has 50/50 too.  I always thought it was insane that we were paying CS and she wouldn't keep a job.  But it's not really about BM, it's about the kids.  So we did it.

Quoting jesssanate: I don't agree with it if BM is voluntarily unemployed. I would not be ok with my income supporting a non-working parent. Then again they have 50/50 split so that factors me to think this way.


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)