A
female
age
30-35,
*assnadrajones
writes:Im not sure why/when child support payments got so high. I understand your child gets 20% of you money but that still seems like a lot. When I was growing up my father had 4 kids and had to pay my mom 200 a month ( he hardly even payed that). My mom used that money for things I needed, or if she was short on a bill one month. Normally if there was left over money she put it away so she would have extra money saved if I got sick, the car broke down, the light bill was crazy high one month, or just anything out of the blue happen she would have money to pay for it. My mother worked to take good care of me and made sure i lived on the "good side of town" so I could go to the best schools in my area, she made sure i never went without. Now a days it seems like I see a lot of women who use their children as cash machines. my husbands friend "Bill"( I can not use his real name) pays 1000 dollars monthly for one child. He also pays half of the mothers rent, because she "can not" afford it and he was the one who wanted them to move near him. He's daughter has reading and writing difficulties and the mother would not pay the 55 dollars a hour for the tutor so it was up to him to pay for twice a week sessions. His daughter is at his house on the weekends, so its not like she is the only one who physically takes care of her. He is a better parent than she is, but he can not have full custody because he travels a lot, sometimes weeks at a time. This woman is a "deadbeat mother", she allows her boyfriend to lay on her sofa all day long and not work. Bob often buys clothes and shoes for his daughter, so its not like the mother has to buy much for her. I just do not understand why she needs 1000 bucks a month, if he is doing more than she is. She works as a assistant so Im sure she does not make much, but that does not mean she should not be putting up half as well. If he pays 1000 dollars she should be putting 1000 dollars a month up just to take care of her child her child. Being a parent is a 50/50 job. She gets her hair done more than I do, and my husband and I actually have good paying jobs. Bob even helped to buy a new toyota so she could take his daughter back and forth places. He is always buying things for his daughter, he loves her and would give his life for her. often times after he has boughten cloths, payed the tutor, help his BM pay HER bills, and pays for his own needs he barely has the 1000 dollars needed to pay his child support. Yet she has the nerve to call him a deadbeat if he is late one month. Every time I see her she is in expensive cloths, I honestly think she spends the child support or her lazy boyfriend and herself. She even expected him to help pay for the child's birthday present this year ( an expensive one) even though he had already gotten her one. The sad part is i know men who pay much more than he does, all the BMs I see these days are greedy. I think 150-300 dollars is enough to support any normal child. iI the child has special needs then I can see it going up a little more. Bottom line if the men are putting up 1000 where is your 1000 dollars to contribute? So Im curious to know what you guys think? Do you think she is getting over or am I over reacting? Feel free to share your stories as well.
View related questions:
money Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
female
reader, dmartin89  +, writes (28 July 2011):
 We actually have the same situation in the UK.
My boyfriends business partner has a 12 year old son who he shares joint custody of with his ex-wife. They share him COMPLETELY EQUALLY. Half the week at his house, half the week at hers, alternate weekends. Half the school holidays at his house, half at hers. Yet he still has to pay her £600 a month ($1000) child support!! WTF?!
They both have full time jobs (he is self employed and works 50+ hours a week). She is a PA earning a decent amount, has no problem paying the bills. They also send their son to private school. For the payment of this they split it 50/50, but he actually had to draw up a contract with the lawyers to make sure she stuck to the deal because he knew that at some point she would say that she "cant afford it" then leave him to pay it all.
So effectively, him giving her £600 a month is paying her half of the school bill, and all his food, clothing and after school club fees. And this is when his son is not in his care!!
Does the father have the rough end of the deal; YES.
A
female
reader, cassnadrajones +, writes (27 July 2011):
cassnadrajones is verified as being by the original poster of the questionHE CAN NOT AFORD TO KEEP THEM. HIs child is is only responsibility not the mother. Its not right for him to work to the bone so she can have fun and live her live. I grew up just like you. my mother had 2 jobs to make ends meet. This father works the equivalent of two jobs, why is it fair for her and her boyfriend to lay up all day and watch him struggle. He is always broke. Its not like he is just throwing money around. He doesn't have a lot left over to even pay his bills.
...............................
A
female
reader, cassnadrajones +, writes (27 July 2011):
cassnadrajones is verified as being by the original poster of the questionNo, getting a second job can mean babysitting kids, typing papers at home, anything you can do from home. i simply think she is a mother who waits around for him to do everything. Clearly if he is willing to spend an extra 1000 dollars a month half of her rent he care to be around his daughter. No offense but you do know know this woman, she is not a very supportive parent. I may not be in the house with her, but we live in a small town I see her a lot. If you think she is really spending so much time with her daughter why are my husband and I constantly seeing her places. She is never with her child. If she is wearing fakes she is wearing some of the best fakes I have ever seen. She is an assistant if she can afford name brand clothes, getting her hair and nails down, supporting her lazy boyfriend then she should be able to contribute more to her child. He is with his daughter 2 days and 3 nights and he has her every break. My husband has often told me he sees "bob" leaving to go to her school to have lunch with her. He is clearly the better parent but is trapped because if he quits his job he and the child suffers. If he did have her all week he would have to get a nanny because she would be home for 3-5 hours a day before he gets home. If he does not work as much he can not afford any of the things his child NEEDS, therefor he clearly does not have the time to have HER for 5 days a week.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (27 July 2011): Let me explain why I have this opinion.
I was raised by a single mother and my father was deadbeat who contributed nothing and didn't even stay in contact with us. So she had absolutely no choice but to work 3 jobs and I barely ever got to see her. I pretty much had to raise myself as a child, bathe myself, dress myself to go to school on my own, I started learning to cook dinners when I was 8 years old.
Now my father could have contributed financially and even if it was enough for my mom to only have to work 2 jobs then I would have had a lot more time with her as a parent, going doing things together rather than be babysat all the time or have to stay in friends houses until she had finished work. But it was either that or it was starve and get evicted.
You see in my opinion money is only really important when you don't have any, if you have it and you're bitter about spending it on your loved ones or you demand that everything be 50/50 when it comes to your child then you're being greedy. Kids need parents not money, they need love, attention and affection far more than they need greedy parents who are bitter about having to pay more when they can actually afford to do that. You see there are too many kids being raised alone by parents who can't afford not to work tonnes of jobs just make ends meet and you suggest this woman do the same thing even though the child's father can well afford to keep them?
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (27 July 2011): Actually there is a reason why she shouldn't get a second job and that's because he's already paying for most of it.
No offence cassandra but you're seriously suggesting a single mother get two jobs when she doesn't have to? When she can actually afford not to and can afford to spend time raising her child?
So you think just to be financially fair she should deprive her child of her time as well as that of her father who is away all week? Who raises the daughter then? The lazy boyfriend?
Seriously, what you're suggesting is impractical and unnecessary, is money really more important than a parents time? Especially to a child with developmental problems.
Who benefits out that arrangement then? The dad because he has to pay less? So in your opinion he matters more than the child then? Because that's basically what the onus is if you had your way.
In all fairness you have no idea whether she buys those clothes out of her own money nor have you got her accounts to suggest that she doesn't buy those clothes in sales, or whether they're good fakes you have no idea how much of a percentage of her own income she actually does pay towards the kid.
It's not as simple as you like to believe. If he earns 3 times as much as her and pays a certain amount of upkeep to his child yet pays only 30% of his salary towards her and if from her income she spends 50% of her salary towards the child then who is paying more? She's making a bigger contribution as regards her income isn't she? You see you make it sound like she should be earning an equivalent amount to pay exactly half but he then will have to put in exactly half of the effort of practical physical parenting to balance that would he not? Or is the money itself far more important than the time and effort put in?
So in your opinion then she should work twice as hard,spend less time with her child, just to be "fair" well in that case the father can step up and take over half of the time requirements and half of the practical parenting side then if we're going to talk about equality. It wouldn't exactly be fair on her the pay half if he only has to do weekends with the child would it?
You know kids aren't just a monetary figure, you can't put a price on the time and effort it takes to raise one if that was the case then all the stay at home moms, housewives etc are a waste of space that never do anything, by your logic they too should all go out and earn exactly half of the income and the father then should do half the parenting too.
It's not about financial fairness, it's about giving the child the best possible life and if one parent has a lot more money to contribute then why shouldn't they do that? If one parent has a lot more time to contribute then they too should do that.
Your father had 4 kids, did he put in as much time and effort into raising you as your mom did? So which in your eyes was more valuable then? Your mom's time or your dads money?
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (27 July 2011): Yes, the system screws men. It's not even debatable IMHO. I've got some female friends who are pretty down on men in general but they still agree that men get totally screwed by the family court system.
...............................
A
female
reader, cassnadrajones +, writes (27 July 2011):
cassnadrajones is verified as being by the original poster of the questioncerberus:
I do understand that their are women who really do ned the money. But this woman is just lazy. There is no reason for her to not get a second job to help pay for tutoring classes, cloths, food ect. She has a Boyfriend who sits on his butt all day, he could always go get a job and pay his part of rent, electricity, gas, food, and water. Instead of getting her hair done every week she should be paying half of tutoring. If he always has to buy her clothes clearly she is not spending the money right.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (27 July 2011): Actually OP life is not as black and white as that. Firstly she's this girls primary carer, that's a hell of a lot of work for a normal child but one with learning difficulties makes it even harder.
As far as her being a deadbeat you really have no basis for saying that all because all you know is what your friend bob says and that's only one side of the story. You have no real insight into what happens in that house at all. That money was an agreed amount based on a pretty strict overhaul of their finances, what the daughter would need, how much the rent would be because yes he's paying for that roof over his daughters head.
You see OP if he really did think it was unfair then he'd fight it, he could call for a review of her expenditure and have it altered if needs be. You see you forget, no matter what this woman does with the money he has to ensure his daughter is well taken care of, if there is any sign of neglect on her part he has recourse to sort that out.
As far as her paying equal, that's very easy to say from the outside but balancing parenthood and work is exceptionally difficult, now unless you think it's better if she does go out and work to earn that money and leave the child be raised by daycare or the lazy boyfriend then yeah, the father has to cough up. Plus I don't know anyone that has the exact same salary as their partner so paying 50/50 is not always viable. Also his contribution to physical parenting is being the fun parent on the weekends, he doesn't have to take care of all the boring mundane stuff like getting her ready for school every morning, doctors appointments, taking her to hobbies, friends all that stuff, he's away anyway so he can't. He gets to have the fun time with her on the weekends while the mother has to take care of the business end.
So in the end it balances itself out OP, because 2/5 day ratio plus the type of days she has to raise that child are very different from being a weekend parent.
I see this all the time OP, I know single mothers and I know weekend dads. One of the most insightful of them was a single dad, who said he'd rather spend more time with his son than pay the money, the mother is the same as the one you describe, she likes to be seen in expensive stuff and it seems like like she doesn't take care of parenting at all like she should, but he knows deep down that's not true she just likes to give that impression but she takes care of and loves that little boy. You see he has to pay her way too because that's his role as father in this. He earns more money and puts in less time parenting, he also knows that he gets the fun time with his daughter on weekends and while he has to pay out a lot, it's all necessary because in his view he'll gladly pay extra to keep his ex in nice clothes if that's what keeps her a happy mother to his child. You see unlike other guys I know who are very bitter about handing over money because they think it should go directly to the child or that it's unfair, my friend sees it as only money and a small price to pay if it means his daughters mother and primary carer is happy and living well because it means his daughter is better off too.
You know those kind of dads should not put a price on the head of their child, they should not let differences with their ex get in the way of that. If it was a story of true neglect or if the amount really was unfair then they can challenge that.
Paying the money and being a weekend dad is the easy part OP.
Of course every situation is different and there are plenty of cases where it's very unfair on one partner, there does seem to be an unhealthy bias towards mothers too that's undeniable.
You really can't compare bob's situation to your mothers. They're both very different women and I bet you a million bucks if your mother could have gotten more money back then she would have taken it with open arms, as it was she had no choice because she had to ensure you didn't go without, and bob's ex has that too but has a nice bit left over to treat herself. Your mother had no real option because she wanted to give you the best and had to do that within her means, well there's no saying that bob's ex isn't doing the same and just has a nice bit left over after that.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (27 July 2011): You're not over reacting. The reasons you stated are the reasons, many men refuse to pay any child support whatsoever. I have friends whom pay $2500. per month for one single child, but the child is always in need of clothes and other things which the mother will not supply or use the child support payments for.
I believe every man should pay child support to their children, but I do not agree that the money should go to the mother's personal needs/wants. The money should go to the well being of the child only and if by chance, that there is a little money left over....half should go to the child and the other half should be put into a bank account for the child only, a "minor's" account.
...............................
A
female
reader, Nime +, writes (27 July 2011):
 I agree with you. I think men get a really raw deal when it comes to divorce and child support in this country and I cringe when I hear these stories.
...............................
|
