In doing some research about the New York State CS laws & the history behind it, I learned that these laws (as well as most U.S. states' CS laws) are based on one basic premise: BOTH PARENTS ARE CHARGEABLE(OBLIGATED) WITH THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF THEIR CHILD.

With that said, I found it very strange that in a TRUE 50/50 joint custody (physical & legal) situation, that either parent should be legally obligated to pay CS to the other parent - assuming that BOTH parents are healthy and capable of working full-time.

It seems like the current case law in NYS requires a court (judge) to "label" one parent as the "custodial" parent, for purposes of computing child support, EVEN IN 50/50 JOINT CUSTODY situations. In NYS, it is the "breadwinner" parent that is labeled the NCP, simply because they have the higher income. That's all, nothing else. This is the main problem. There is no legal or rational basis for this, and the judges in New York State even AGREE, but say that "their hands are tied" and they must enforce the law as it is - that until these CS laws are changed by the legislature to make them more fair to both parents, this is simply how it must be.

Personally, I disagree with this. Of course, when there is a situation where 1 parent is somehow physically or mentally unable to work in order to support their child (i.e. severely physically handicapped, abusive, etc...), that's different. But what about the majority of situations here in NY, when 1 parent CHOOSES to underemploy her/his self or CHOOSES to be unemployed? Supposedly, the courts here in NY have the power to "impute" income, but they don't do so when they're dealing with the BM/CP and it makes no sense.

For purposes of discussion, I will use the woman/mother/BM as the "non-monied" parent (simply because in most cases, this is true and the fathers tend to be the "breadwinners"), although I do recognize and believe that where a woman is the breadwinner, this should ALSO apply to her as well.

If the basic premise is that BOTH PARENTS are obligated to support their child(ren), then why should it matter if father makes more $$ than mother and why should BM be labeled as the "CUSTODIAL PARENT" in the first place when there's a 50/50 joint legal & physical custody situation? The unfortunate effect of this is that this system ENCOURAGES a BM to not work or work very little, not obtain an education that will lead to gainful employment, etc... This is all very similar to this country's welfare system, IMO. Due to the higher incomes in NYS, there are actually women that use the CS$$ as their sole source of income (earning anywhere between $20K - $100K/year tax free!!).

Where is the fairness in this, ladies??? What happened to us wanting to be treated equally, equal pay for equal work, etc...? We've worked so hard to shatter the "glass ceiling" and to rise above, yet at the same time, women want to be "taken care of" and supported simply for being their child's parent?? This makes no rational sense.

I will insert MY personal opinion about my own situation. I am a self-made, educated, professional woman. I paid my own way through college, earning my Bachelors Degree in Applied Mathematics & Statistics. I then pursued law school (again paying my own way) and earned my Juris Doctorate degree in law. I support myself. Everything I have, I have EARNED with my own money, through my own hard work, "blood, sweat & tears" - I have sacrificed quite a bit to earn what I have today. I own my own house, obtained my own mortgage to buy it, bought myself a new car, opened my own law practice, pay for my own health insurance, car insurance, utilities, cell phone, etc... If I can do it, anyone can do it - it's called HARD WORK.

I say this not to "pat myself on the back, but simply because I am PROUD of these accomplishments. With all of this said, I have often "put myself in a BM's shoes" and have come to the conclusion that if I were ever in the situation where I was no longer with my biokid's father (I'm not married currently, have no biokids yet), I would NEVER, NEVER EVER EVER collect CS$$$ from the father, because I feel VERY STRONGLY about being personally accountable and responsible for my actions. I have too much PRIDE to do such a thing - I can earn my own $$ and support my own child. PERIOD.

With that said, I would hope that the man I CHOSE to have a child with would be an upstanding, hard-working man and would VOLUNTARILY help financially support my child, for no other reason than he loves him, that I am a good mom and that it takes $$ to raise children.

I have read several studies on this and it has been proven statistically that, in general, fathers WANT to be good fathers - and in a 50/50 custody situation especially, it is THOSE FATHERS that WANT to be in their kids' lives and obviously CHOOSE to do so!! For whatever reason, it just didn't work out with the BM. If they are NOT LEGALLY FORCED, UNDER COURT ORDER, to pay these unreasonable high amts. of CS$$, these men will be more willing and glad to financially take care of their own - it's "in their genes", if you will. If they are not dealing with the "fear" of being dragged, yet again, back to court by the BM and what she's "entitled" to under the current laws (more and more $$$), they would freely give whatever financial support is necessary for their child. It is a PROVEN STATISTICAL FACT that most 50/50 custodial dads pay their child support, in full and on time. It is when they are "forced" to spend $$$ they don't have on things that the kids don't necessarily NEED (as opposed to just "want"), that they get frustrated and feel overwhelmed. Also, when they are faced with the very real prospect of losing a large part of their hard-earned raise (due to say, a promotion or several promotions over many years) to paying a BM CS$$ who sits home and chooses to not work or work infrequently, it becomes overwhelmingly unfair to that parent. How long should an ex be able to "ride the coattails" of his/her successes? Where does the line get drawn?

Sometimes it is sad to see all of these BM's who complain about always "wanting more" and how their baby's daddy "doesn't give them enough" - yet they CHOOSE to keep themselves dependent on this man, they CHOOSE not to get an education which will lead to gainful employment, they CHOOSE not to get a full-time job, even though they are healthy enough to work...it's like they have given up on themselves and simply have no PRIDE. I have no respect for women like this - personally I feel it is counterproductive and doesn't help them in the "big picture" of their lives and their future.

I'm a big believer in ACCOUNTABILITY and RESPONSIBILITY for one's actions in life. I'm not here to advocate that men should be allowed to "walk away" and not help support the children they make. I know that there are unfortunately plenty of men that are "deadbeats" - however I do NOT believe that these "rotten apples" mean that the whole bunch is spoiled.

I simply believe that, IN GENERAL, in a 50/50 joint physical & legal custody situation, there should be NO CS$$ being exchanged. Doesn't matter that your ex makes more than you (and maybe always did before the kid) - that's no reason for you, as a woman, to not be ABLE to support your own child!! Makes no sense that when 1 parent works hard, earns promotions, and in turn, makes more money than the other, that the other lower-income parent should automatically benefit from the other's "success". Oh, and if that were true, then that same parent wouldn't mind the $$ going directly into, say a college fund for the benefit of that CHILD directly & for its future, and NOT PAID to the other parent. No free rides in life, no riding on someone else's coattails.

Maybe if these BM's were faced with the prospect that since the higher-earning parent is MORE CAPABLE of FINANCIALLY supporting this child - better lifestyle, more opportunities, etc... that maybe THEY (other parent) should be the actual CUSTODIAL PARENT of this child, they would be forced to think about their whole "dependent status" position. It seems that these BM's are so busy supporting their OWN lifestyles and NOT using the $$ for the kids, that they don't realize that they will be BROKE when the "gravy train" of CS$$ comes to its final destination...

I would want what is best for my child. I would work 24/7 to support my child if I had to. If my ex was a higher earner, could afford a lifestyle for my child that I couldn't, expose them to better opportunities, I would have absolutely NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with him being "labeled" the custodial parent, and I would make sure I always had 50/50 physical custody of the child and that I did everything humanly possible to CO-PARENT with my ex so that the kids would get the maximum benefit. I would be most concerned with making sure that we worked together as much as possible to raise responsible, independent, self-sufficient, hard-working, productive members of this society. THAT would be the truest form of SELFLESSNESS for my children.

Sorry for how loooong this post is, and thank you to those who have actually read all the way through.

Stepping off of my "soap box" now.....