Generally on line calculator.   If she is custodial parent, she likely gets CS. 

CS is tricky. What your mom probably got more than CS was alimony. She didn't have a career because she and your dad decided for her to be the homemaker. 

As for CS, it is largely based on calculations on how much time the child spends with each parent. The more equitable the time the lower the CS. Sometimes with 50/50 there is none at all for either parent.

One thing, take emotion out of it. CS is a bill. It gets paid. It doesn't matter what it is spent on as long as the child has food, clothes, shelter. If those aren't being provided, then you need to get back to court and the child should live with the parent that provides them. (It doesn't matter if the clothes are 2nd hand, Wal-mart or Prada. Even if he is paying thousands a month, we get no say in how it is spent.)

Every parent has an obligation to financially support their children. How that financial contribution is calculated differs from state to state.

Here in Anti-Canada, it's based primarily on the number of overnight visits per month. The fewer overnights a NCP has, the higher the percentage of their pay that they will pay in CS.

Some places don't care about number of overnights and require a NCP to pay a set percentage of their income, even if the NCP has their child 1 night fewer a year. Other places have the higher earner paying CS even if they are CP just so that income can be equalized between households.

No matter how it is calculated, though, each parent has to financially suport their child whether they were in a relationship with the other parent or not.

Now, that doesn't mean the CS system is flawless. Not even close. Once the money is in the recipient's hands, they SHOULD spend it on child needs, but there is not enforcement of that.

Your DH is only required to pay what he is COed to pay. That would likely include CS, a percentage of medical bills and extracurricular activities, and maybe college, special schooling, day care, other special needs, etc. If it isn't outlined in the CO, he can say no. It's up to the CP - BM - to make that money stretch.

Now, that ALSO means that BM isn't required to provide items for your home. BM does not have to supply school supplies, clothes, shoes, etc for your house. DH, in addition to CS for BM, still has to supply items for his child in his own house.

BM may have more money, but if DH only gets his kid EOWE, he needs to help support the kid's needs when he's not with DH. Even if BM were a millionaire, it's not her responsibility to fully support a mutually created child. There is no getting out of paying CS if you are a NCP 99% of the time.

Do you have any specific questions OP.

Support is usually set per state guidelines.. which often take into account custody situations as well as relative incomes.

In short.. your husband DOES need to support his kids.  Now.. he may have no choice what he sends BM.. court order and all.. but it is his choice how he spends money on his time.  If he is trying to somehow "keep up" with BM as far as being a disney dad.. that is on him.. and his choice... you can decide whether you can live with him doing that.

And.. you can drive yourself crazy noticing every new thing BM has.. she makes a lot of money... how do you know she doesn't spend any CS on the kids?  because her nails are done regularly?  Unfortunately, you can't dictate how she spends the money.. but he doesn't have to pay EXTRA... so if she is coming to him for more money to pay for things outside the CO? that's a problem... a husband problem.

Here and onlne will give you a better perspective.

My perspective is that a woman should be able to support her children on her time and man on his, when they have 50/50.

So often it seems that the BM has the majority of custody and the father has to fight for his rights to parent. So that is your first consideration - how much custody does each parent have. And look at the whys of it. Are they too young, etc.

I get that CS is considered an "equalizer" because kiddos should have the same support in each household, but lets be honest here. In my case BM Toxic Troll broke up the family and they divorced after 20 years and 2 kids. Her choice. He has always been the higher earner, but he also took on all the expenses. And transport. She can go out and get a job, but chooses not to. Her workmans comp claim is bogus, I feel and its almost run out.

BM has ALWAYS asked and gotten support from both of us. At one time (early on), DH would drop bags of groceries off during her visitation time because the kids told him there is no food over there. She would proceed to eat it all.

Shes a mooch, plain and simple. She gets her spousal support but happily it will end in 6 months. If he hadnt filed for divorce when he did it would have been forever (calif law 10 years...) and boy did she get so angry when he filed ahead of 10 years. For me, in this situation its about entitlement. Why should BMs be entitled to everything and not have to work to earn it? I take munchkin out places and to lunches and salno visits, and shopping on my own money. Because I want to.

So Child support is a dirty word for me. Only 4 years and 8 months to go!