OF COURSE parents should contribute financially to the upbringing of their child, but should a NCP starve or potentially be homeless in order to pay CS? Should a NCP be forced to pay CS that never goes to the child and goes to the state because the CP won't get their lazy arse up and work (as is the case for our BM).

My SD doesn't see the great majority of the CS that SO pays because it goes to our state to pay back the aid that BM gets for SD. So, when SD could be having MORE and a better life because of CS, instead she has the same life she would have if SO didn't pay a dime of CS and BM just stayed on welfare. How is that fair?

In our case, I am fortuante that I don't need CS to support my kids, but you better be damned right I filed for it. I did it because XH created life, so he can't just abandon it. I don't discuss CS with my kids, and I don't do it to be petty.

I specifically told the case manager that I wanted the amount based on is actual income since he is self-employed in a job that makes A LOT of money, but I know he's not making that much. I do not want him to starve or struggle to pay CS because the simple fact of the matter is we don't really need the money, and doing that would be just to be a bytch. I believe in being fair.

The sad thing is there is no way to fix the system to make it fair. CPs will continue to exploit the system, as will NCP's. Parents who share custody equally, but one is still forced to pay, will continue to do that, even though they actually contribute equally finacially for the upbringing of their kids.

It's sad that people can't just be adults and responsible, isn't it?

Hello from a custodial SM! We've had custody of my 2 SSs for 6+ years and haven't received a dime in support from their beloved BM (who only gets supervised visitation, of course). We've never asked for CS b/c:

1. My DH is a sweet schmuck who wants to be the nice guy and;
2. Stupid Crackwhore hasn't had a job (besides hooking)in 6 years. We could pay our lawyer $1000 to get a child support order and she would be required to pay our state's minimum of $50/month. Total. For 2 boys (13 & 10) that eat like horses. Except that she wouldn't pay the $50/month and nothing would happen to her. And $50 is our cereal budget for one month. Wouldn't pay for school clothes, sporting activities, field trips, school lunches, school supplies, etc. So it's not really worth it, is it?

But I think I've finally convinced DH to do the court thing because F*@& HER! We eat ramen for dinner every Thursday b/c money is tight and she doesn't give us anything to support her children. So we'll go to court and get CS ordered but never paid and nothing will happen to her and I'll be $1000 poorer and you know what? It'll totally be worth it to me cuz you know why? F*@& HER is why. I wish the court would award us $8000/month. We don't need $8000/month but F*@& HER! I wish the court could order her to work in some Thai sweat shop to pay the CS b/c F*@& HER! I wish the court would force her to sell her dilapidated single-wide and give us the proceeds ($200) b/c F*@& HER! After all the abuse she has subjected these boys to, after all the missed visitations and the drugs and the lies etc etc etc...F*@& HER! If there was any way I could screw her w/an exorbitant CS order I totally would. I know that makes me a horrible person but I've made peace with it.

"Hot button topic," Rags? That's an understatement!

OMG you all keep goin on and on about the CS thing. I have stayed totally way far away from the topic. Till now. I just don't care. It is just something else to hold over someone's head and to be angry about and to use against someone. I don't care.

We have two kids in our house the we have ALL the time. The other parents do not see them, nor have either one of them paid CS in well over a year, and two years for the one. I don't care!

WE are still stuck doing what we have to do regardless. We don't have to speak to one parent at all, so to us it is a fair trade. The other...I just don't care...its on his conscience not mine. The kids know each parents does not pay. They can do with that information what they want. We don't have to deal with either of the "other" parents and that is fine by us. Everything is our decision and we don't have to consult with anyone. Period. We like it that way.

I have a friend who is the same way. She gets her CS but she would rather NOT at all and give it back or not have him pay, but the CSE told her she has to take it if he pays.

I think both parents should be contributing equal $$$ to their kids. However, I don't believe those responsible for paying CS should have to just scrape by. I think both parents should be working unless they made an agreement stating otherwise, and should be living within their means. I also think BM and BD should come to an agreement about where the kids go when a) they're not in school and b) one (or both) of the parents is/are working. For the BMs we blog about here they'd actually have to spend the CS on their kid(s) and not on designer shoes, clothes, bags, jewelry, and fancy hairstyling. It kills me when I see kids walking around in filthy, horrible clothes and see their parents with fancy hairstyles, designer stuff, etc. The NCPs, if they are good people busting their butts to be there for their kids in all ways they can, should be able to sleep at night knowing their children are being fed, clothed, bathed, and receiving proper medical treatment.

My SS12 was just here for his xmas visit. We went outfor a sit down lunch, and he orderd a $9 double cheeseburger meal... And ate every last bite. When his books are good with the lunch lady he will order extra treats every day with lunch. I believe the amount we send now is fair. We'll see how I feel when that $250 jumps up to $600, if my hubby can find a decent job again.

Hi I am new here and have never posted before but the cs pushes alot of buttons with me... I think the courts definitely work in favor of the mothers or cp (in my experience that is the mom). I agree that the NCP should have to pay child support but I think the court also needs to look at the overall picture. When BM and my husband split she left him with alot and I mean alot of debt (we have gone to court to try and get it split but were denied). BM keeps taking DH to court trying to get more money out of him. She'll go and spend money without consulting him but expects him to pay whatever she asks; stating they are section 7 expenses. That's fine but he does not have it and he's tried to explain that to her and has asked that she include him in the decision to spend extra money. Anyway the cs wasn't set as high as she would like so when DH and I got married guess what we got as a wedding gift. Yep served with court papers because she thinks she is entitled to some of my wage. I nearly lost it. I went to school for many years to get where I am now and I am not giving her a cent of my money. She doesn't work and has a grade 8 education, I am sorry but I am not going to work so she can stay at home and do nothing. This has been going on for over a year now and it doesn't look like there is any end in sight

Also, DH and I just had our first child together, my first his second. When he tried to address this in court the judge basically said that he didn't care about my son he was only concerned with the welfare of ss8. What? So one child's welfare is more important than anothers? And I know when you are having a child you should consider if you can afford to have one (we did and I can support my child and future children) but I don't think that our children should suffer because BM can't get off her lazy a$$ and get a job. Agh I am just so angry and disgusted with the whole legal system.
I apologize for the rambling I am just so angry.

As DH is a non-custodial parent, we pay out the ass for child support. I would feel great about paying the 1200+ a month if the BM would take responsibility for the skids and not let them run feral all over town and quit sending them to us for fixing. I'd rather pay her to raise them than raise them myself.

If a person is paying child support, the least they could expect is that the other parent makes sure the child attends school and has proper supervision when they are away. This should be done without the ncp having to enforce it in court. We pay every month as expected and the other party should at least do these two things, as expected.

When I am more of a mother to my skids than BM is, it makes me mad that she doesn't step up and make sure they go to school. I don't care if she works or not, but she definately should quit bitching about not having enough money to buy the kids clothes. $1200 a month is a generous amount, but she is too lazy to get off her pot smoking ass and she is too selfish to give any of that money to the skids for their clothing or deodorant, etc.

So I'm a little irritated about CS. Our skank bm is a lazy brainless selfish twit. I hope I am not insulting the word "twit." It may be giving her too much credit :/

You're right rags. There are responsibilities on both parties and they each should participate appropriately, instead of one of them just being a genetic garbage.

I live in a military town and CS is a major issue here. Some (not all) of these local girls see making a baby with some young military guy as a major source of income. They very often have more than one child with more than one military man. Max child support PER child. They don't have to work, and it doesn't technically count as income, so they still qualify (notice I did NOT say "are entitled to") for every free handout there is.

From personal experience, my son-in-law got nailed for child support. He was the 7th (yes, I said SEVENTH) guy BM had DNA tested for support. Apparently, she was a very busy girl! All of these guys were military. All of them were one-night-stands, picked up at a club. Granted, he should have used protection, but we all know men aren't real smart when it comes to this. He swears on a stack of bibles she told him that she was on the pill. At any rate, you can't tell me she wasn't looking to make a "baby check". Courts didn't care. By the time they finally found the "lucky guy", they nailed him for the hospital bill, back child support (for a kid he didn't even know was his!), and a hefty monthly installment for the next 18 years. BM does NOT work, doesn't ever plan to, gets full services from the tax payers, too. In my opinion, this is just prostitution on the installment plan!

"In my opinion, this is just prostitution on the installment plan!"

AMEN to that!

DH and I know that if CS were recalculated now, it would go up between $200-$400/month, for a single child. As I've said repeatedly, if the money were going to SD15, we'd have no problem. But it goes toward BM's status symbols; her "sexy" convertible and her 5BR house with a pool. SD15 is dressed in thrift store clothes and has (literally) 3 pairs of shoes. She has to beg DH for the cash for her band instrument.

So fuck BM. It's on her to go back to court, and we will fight hard to keep CS as low as possible.

SD15 can come live with us at any time, and we'll spoil her rotten within reason. Band money? Private school? Decent clothes and food? Summer camps for what she's passionate about? Sure thing. Cell phones and designer anything? Not a chance in hell.

One real problem I see with Child Support, is that it refers only to that portion paid by the NCP when people are talking about it.

Child Support, to me at least, is that sum of money which the courts have calculated that is needed by the child to maintain their standard of living, and usually it uses both parents' income in the calculation. So money allocated to support children from (both the parents) should be labelled as Child Support, and be set aside by BOTH parents and clearly shown as such, instead of the NCP's share becoming a part of the CP's general income.

In my mind, NO divorced parent who is NOT entitled to receive alimony should be able to claim an income less than a certain minimum required to support themselves, AND including, some minimum amount which goes toward supporting his/her child/ren. Any divorced parent not receiving alimony should automatically be imputed an income to a certain level, whether they are working or not, because they should NOT be using child support to support themselves, and there should be some minimum financial allocation to the children. If a CP chooses not to work, income should definitely be imputed to the level of income they could receive based on education, (plus some punitive amount based of years of experience lost by choosing not to gain work experience and better their chances of getting a better paying job), similar to the way it would be done for a NCP who chooses not to work. Then apply the same "punishments" to these CPs who fail to clearly put their share in, as they would to NCPs who fail to pay their share. If the courts would criminalize the CPs inability and inaction to pay, in the same way that they do for NCPs, BOTH parents would be more motivated to financially support their children, CPs because of the fear of revoking of license, etc and NCPs because of some semblance of fairness in the system.