Cs and second families

I was talking about this with a friend who is a sm too.

We both feel that yes, obviously it'll need to be adjusted appropriately to help dad provide for the new kids as well. And all courts and BMs should accept that.

But we also feel it is not BMs job or duty to show concern for the second kids. If dad wants to reduce cs because of the new kids HE can get the paperwork to do so. Someone kind of recently talked about bm doing immoral things to the second family via cs. Quite frankly, bm didn't have a role in making the younger kids so it really is not her job to think about or look out for them. If I were a bm, I'd accept my Ex's cs reduction in this case. But beyond that, if his wife/so thinks the decrease in what I get isn't big enough, that's her problem.

I think that people who pay cs (mostly dads) need to think about these things very hard before they decide to have subsequent kids.

As a sm, I wouldn't expect bm to do or feel anything for my kids. Even if we were paying cs. That's my job. If my dh wanted to reduce cs HE would go to get the paperwork. If she were to do anything morally abhorrent via cs, that's on dh and me to care about. And it is a possibility we'd think about before bringing more kids into the mix.

I know this may be unpopular but it is what some feel.

Anon2009's blog
Log in or register to post comments

Comments

DF has 4 kids. The three

DF has 4 kids. The three girls are minors so he has to help support them.

We want to have a child together. Planning for that child does not involve him decreasing the amount of support he provides for his three daughters.

Why should BMs give a damn about how or if we're able to support our child?

Agreed.

*

There are plenty of stupid

There are plenty of stupid laws/courts out there regarding CS.

My top three are:
Decreasing CS because the NCP has more children.
Paying CS until a child is 21.
Paying CS when custody is 50/50.

Exactly Lavender75.

If a custodial parent MARRIES

If a custodial parent MARRIES then you think CS should stop?
What could be the reasoning on THAT one?

You would think men would

You would think men would have enough
sense to demand a DNA test.

You sure would think wouldn't

You sure would think wouldn't ya?? I agree with you on this. I am pretty certain had my DH demanded one we would not be in the mess we are in now.

Where I live, if a woman

Where I live, if a woman applies for assistance with CS Enforcement, and there is no father listed on the BC or no paternity affidavit signed at birth, the first thing they do is do a DNA test on the man she is going after, it is mandatory. What nails a lot of guys to the wall is that when their GF says they are pregnant, they believe it, sign the paternity affidavit at the hospital, and it is considered a legal document. Fast forward 3 years later, they split, she goes after him for CS, the BF finds out she was sleeping around, he questions paternity, and is told it does not matter. The law here is that if a child is born and a man is either on the BC or the man signed the affidavit, and two years go by and paternity is not questioned, it is final. It does not matter if a test is done and he is proven not to be the bio father, he is still considered the legal father forever and responsible for the child. I think this is absurd, no way should that man be held responsible for the upkeep of that child when it belongs to someone else. I don't think that the answer is to test everyone automatically, but I do think that the rule of two year statute of limitations should be done away with. If a test is done after the child is two years old, it should remove the responsibility of the man said to be the father. Even better, instead of letting it get this far, if a man has his doubts, he should have the guts to say so and get a test done on his own before marriage or before signing the affidavit. Not all women cheat, but if a man knows he was not the only one, and he does not take steps to know the truth, he is an idiot (my DH). But, even still, a man who makes this mistake should be able to find out the truth later on and not be held accountable if the child turns out not to be his.

I agree with Disney, SAF,

I agree with Disney, SAF, imaSmom & CW. On some of your points, I think cs should not only be cancelled but the other parent should get custody.

I also think it depends on what you mean by "unjust." "Unjust" can range from describing actions such as cursing at someone to murdering them.

"Unjust" aside, many of the sks in question are still minors who need for their parents to not walk out on them and are often acting out because of pas. If anything they need their parents to step up their involvement.

Also, what if the first marriage/relationship ended because the ncp dad was an alcoholic and/or abuser, but then suddenly turns his life around, meets another girl and has kids with her, and this new girl doesn't like all the cs going towards the older kids? Shouldn't Dad and SM in that situation have thought about that before procreating?

I agree that if you want to

I agree that if you want to have more kids then you need to budget for that support obligation first. In saying that I also believe that if the BM tries to get more money then the state support agencies should then consider the new familial size first. Simply put.... If you budget to pay $400 a month for one child then you have three more obviously you can't afford more than the $400 now.

I agree with you

I agree with you Beenalongroad. Subsequent children of NCP should most certainly be factored in if BM is seeking an increase in her CS.

That makes no sense. Say my

That makes no sense.

Say my car payment is $500.
I decide I want another car, so I buy one. It costs $600 a month.
I bitch and whine and insist that my first car payment go down, because it's not faaiiiirrr.
Nope.
I knew I had a $500 car BEFORE I decided to go out any buy car #2.

Financial responsibility, people.

Stickafork, you are comparing

Stickafork, you are comparing children to cars? I am sorry but all children deserve to have their needs weighed and considered no matter what order they were born. I deal with a BM who is constantly trying to discount the young children my husband and I have together. BM and her current husband have the wealthier household by a considerable amount even before the $18600 a year in tax free child support for SD18 and SD16. Enough is never enough for this woman. But the state formula uses just a flat percentage formula that does not consider BM's income or the fact that DH and I have little ones.

We haven't ever tried to decrease her hefty child support. We just do not feel she should get an increase. We fight her every attempt to increase because, quiet frankly, she does not deserve one.

Your husband had financial

Your husband had financial obligations that existed FIRST. If he chose to have more children, cool. However, that doesn't then magically lessen the obligation that already exised.

No, children aren't cars.

When I married XH, he had a daughter and a hefty CS obligation. We had 3 children together. Never ONCE did we request a reduction in CS.

How would you have felt if BM

How would you have felt if BM tried to increase the support? And kept doing it and doing it and doing it. I think you get the picture.

I guess it depends on the

I guess it depends on the circumstances.
Was CS originally ordered low for some reason? Did she agree to a reduction? Has her income decreased significantly? Has the NCP's income increased?

Now, I feel the same way when mothers (who collect CS) quit working to have a baby with new boytoy and go after more CS. SHE knew that SHE had an obligation to her "first family," too!

I never requested nor

I never requested nor received any child support for my 2 kids, so I'm not that familiar with CS. This is probably a dumb question, but I'm going to ask it anyway....why should child support go up just because dad got a raise or a better paying job? I assume, if dad's pay never changed, then child support would remain the same. If dads pay decreased because he lost his job or he had to take a cut in pay for whatever reason, then everyone, including the kids, would need to cut back on spending.

I don't get CS for my kid,

I don't get CS for my kid, either.
CS is based on either the income of the NCP or the incomes of BOTH parents - depending on the state. Thus, if dad is NCP, then a change in his income will always affect CS.
Sometimes, if his income drops, he can get a reduction. Of course, that's left to "judicial discretion." (UGH)
Additionally, if the NCP's income does NOT change, that does NOT mean that CS won't go up...most states have an "index" they use when calculating CS. Many states allow for a cost of living increase, regardless of whether or not there is increased income. Some states also allow for more $$ based on the child's age (for example, in WA, kids age 12 and older get a bigger "piece" than do younger children.)

Thank you for the

Thank you for the explanation.

Support for my husband's ex

Support for my husband's ex has always been extremely high. And she would cut her left boob off before agreeing to any reduction for any reason ever.

We paid CS AND had FT

We paid CS AND had FT custody. I feel ya.

Shitty judge? SD wanted to

Shitty judge?
SD wanted to live with us. We went to court, and when it looked like we would win (I say "we," but yes...it was XH who won) then BM quit her $60K a year job to avoid paying CS.
The judge ordered XH to pay $200 a month to help BM keep "a place" for SD to visit 36 hours a month.
And we got to buy the plane tickets.

Forget that BM sold her house (the one she had with XH) and walked away with $700K in cash equity. SIGH.
So...we were struggling, subsidizing BM's house, completely supporting SD and our 3 kids, and paying for all transportation.

Short answer: JUDICIAL DISCRETION

It's not BMs job to think

It's not BMs job to think about your kids. That's your job.

I agree with you on the all

I agree with you on the all children deserve to have their needs met no matter their birth order. Birth order should not dictate how much a child is entitled to in care from the parent. If a man married a woman, had one child, then two children, then three children, then four children, all from the same wife, this would not be an issue. It should not matter who birthed the children or who was born first or who boohooed first or the loudest. They are all his children, equally so, so they all deserve equal care. If the Dad makes 80,000 a year, then the number of children he has should be factored in. Let's say Dad had one child with one BM and was paying her CS based on his income/cost of living with one child, then he had another child with his new wife. Well, his cost of living just increased because he has another, but yet just as equal child to tend to, which in turn lowers his money available to him after expenses. CS paid out should be adjusted accordingly and that is how it is where I live.

There seem to be a lot of BMs

:? There seem to be a lot of BMs on this board.

Not in the context it is used

Not in the context it is used on this board. On this board it means the biological mother of the Step children.

I'm not a bm. I just fail to

I'm not a bm. I just fail to see how it is her responsibility to care in any way or think about your kids.

Thank you

It is not her responsibility

It is not her responsibility to care about my kids. But BMs have the choice to do the decent human thing now and then with their actions and from my experience they almost never choose the decent human action.

Wouldn't the "decent human

Wouldn't the "decent human thing" be to not have children you cannot afford????

If you can't afford an "ours" baby because he pays CS, then my opinion is that you and he are doing the indecent thing by having babies you cannot afford.
BM has no responsibility to ensure that YOU procreate responsibility. :?

Who said we can't afford the

Who said we can't afford the kids we have together? That is a pretty wild assumption on your part.

If you can afford the kids

If you can afford the kids you have together, what is your complaint?

Bm shouldn't constantly ask for a CS increase, but again, it is not her job to help your kids or think about them. She had no say in creating your kids so why should she think about them?

Many do the "decent human thing" by holding the door for someone. However, they've also usually given it some thought, even if not a lot. The recipient of their holding the door would have no right to complain if the door had not been held for them. The person who wound up holding the door was/is not obligated to do that.

My point is, in order for BM to do the "decent human thing" by your kids, she'd have had to have thought about them, even if only for a short amount of time. She is not obligated to do that, so unless BM isn't doing her share to provide for her own kids, I don't get why people get ticked off about CS when it comes to subsequent kids. These BMs do not raise these kids and had no say in making them.

My complaint is that she

My complaint is that she legally harasses my husband every chance she gets. Shouldn't she move on with her new life with Mr. Rich and Not So Handsome? Shouldn't my husband be able to move on with his life in peace without the constant threat of a borderline personality ex wife trying to interfere with his happiness? You have no idea what it is like to live with a sociopath BM lurking in the background. So I suggest reconsidering your overly simplistic, thoughtless, and shallow conclusions.

Most sociopaths do not do

Most sociopaths do not do "the decent human thing." If anything, you may want to check out psychological and medical websites and look up tips on how to deal with them and adjust your expectations, because sociopaths do not think or act in ways that you or I would.

No, you didn't Ladybug, I'm

No, you didn't

Ladybug, I'm sorry for your situation, that's got to be hard. I still suggest you check out medical and psychological websites to help you, dh and sks deal with sociopaths. There you can find ways to help you cope. Like I said, sociopaths don't think or act like you and I do.

Next time bm hauls you off to court, talk to a lawyer and see if there's a way a judge can court order that bm get help. Build a paper trail on her to help this happen.

Thanks for your advice.

Thanks for your advice. Unfortunately, emotional abuse is much harder to prove than physical abuse. The light at the end of the tunnel is the older daughter will be emancipated from the court order in June and there is only 2 more years to go for the younger SD.

I'd bet that "your" BM is

I'd bet that "your" BM is anything but a sociopath. Do you even know what that is?

She's difficult and she makes your life difficult.

She has a rich DH. So what? That has nothing to do with you.
She goes after more CS. Guess what? She can only do so within the limits of your applicable law...which usually includes minimum changes amounts and minimum amounts of time between requests. She cannot simply request an increase every 6 month or so. I don't believe she can even request one annually.

So, define "legally harass."

Not you, specifically.

Not you, specifically. Theoretically.

Why complain about the cost of "new" children if they're easily afforded?

If your BM works, would you

If your BM works, would you encourage your husband to increase CS if she lost her job?

After all, that would be the decent human thing to do.

:Snorty:

Not sure what your problem is

Not sure what your problem is miss Snorty or Miss Snooty but if you have lived the actual realities that my husband and I have gone through with his Ex you probably would not be so antagonistic with your responses. You might soften a bit. And yes I do know what a sociopath is. They are not exclusively the serial killers or the Columbine High School shooters. Millions are amongst all of us right here in the US. You might be one of them.

I was "snorting" at

I was "snorting" at Disneyfan's comment. Would you encourage DH to pay MORE $$ to BM in any circumstance? LOL, probably not.

I don't know your "realities," but you do not know mine, either. Keep that in mind.

Is BM a DIAGNOSED sociopath? Or is that simply a label you've assigned to her? Because, let's be honest here, an XH and his new wife aren't the most objective people when it comes to her.

You sound realllly jealous that BM has a new rich hubbie. She doesn't need to work if her DH CHOOSES to cover her portion of her children's support. All you need to worry about is what YOU and DH do. NOT what BM does.
Your life will be much, much simpler.

I am not jealous that she has

I am not jealous that she has a rich new hubbie. They can have each other. I just get angry that she can keep coming after my husband for more money when there is such a huge income disparity between the households in her favor. She has a half million dollar house, a BMW, vacations on $10,000 cruises. When is enough enough? She sues my husband for increases because she can. She does it to cause stress in his life.

Her whole nature is so different than I have ever encountered before in my life.

And yes, the diagnosis of borderline personality was by professionals.

All I want to do is worry about my own marriage and family. I just want peace of mind. It is her that is worried about my family. She cannot stand that my husband is happy with me and the children we have together. We have been married for 12 years. She can't stand it.

Hope she answers you. I asked

Hope she answers you. I asked the same question (twice now) with no response.

My husband has been to court

My husband has been to court 5 times in the last 11 years. We have spent much $$$ in legal fees. sorry stick a fork I didn't know I had to prove how litigious BM was. Not sure why you have such a beef with my posts. Hope you receive more compassion when it's your turn.

You don't have to prove

You don't have to prove anything to me...or to anyone, for that matter.

You're saying she's "harassing" you. I know that there are laws that regulate how often a modification can be filed/heard.
5 times in 11 years really, while annoying, it not out of line. Hell, my state requires info for recalculation more often than that. Of course, they determine whether or not to actually file.

FTR, I don't have a "beef" with your posts. You've made some statements, and I'm looking for clarification. For instance, in this case, 5 times in 11 years isn't even every two years. So, that makes sense. Statutory maximums and all...

While you may consider

While you may consider getting sued every 2.2 years (on average) merely "annoying", it happens to cause a lot of financial and emotional strain on our family. What would your personal cutoff be for calling it harassment? If she sued DH every 1.9 years?

Shouldn't you be worried about other things this evening rather than responding to all my posts?

Hmm, I thought BDP and

Hmm, I thought BDP and sociopaths were different.

Exactly how often is BM filing for a modification? Again, there are statutory limits on how often she can file.

A half million dollar house? Psh, that's nothing. At least where I live.

Your marriage and your family include a BM because you aren't your DH's first rodeo.

Look, the BM in my case owns THREE homes outright with her DH. She NEVER paid a penny in CS. Not when she had custody (she collected), not when XH had custody (she STILL collected), and not when *I* had custody. Yet, she had plenty of dough, and I was a SAHM with four kids to support on my own (one was hers!)

Life ain't fair, but it is what it is.
If BM is filing modifications that exceed the statutory maximums, then request the judge disallow it.

My family will not ever

My family will not ever include BM. Ever. My family is the circle of people I love and trust.

BM isn't even working right

BM isn't even working right now. She lives off her new husband's money and her child support money

Yes, I agree.

"These poor moms or dads

"These poor moms or dads cannot have another child because they already have one or some. They have prior responsibility, bullshit! If the parents were married nobody would be saying they couldn't have another child, they would make it fit into their budget."

And there are actually many married couples who decide NOT to have kids/more kids because they can't afford it.

"should the mom or dad who gets saddled with crazy CS never be able to have a child or children with their new spouse? Should they pay for that mistake for the rest of their lives?"

Should BM have to make sacrifices for kids who aren't hers and whom she had no say in creating?

Everyone makes mistakes, yes. But most learn after they make one and do not go on to repeat it a second, third or fourth time. You yourself said that you have two BMs in your situation. I've read posts from people on this site who deal with as many as four BMs. It is kind of hard for me to have sympathy for the biodads in those situations who complain that they are saddled with CS obligations, or the women who get involved with men who are dealing with more than one BM.

And I have no sympathy for BMs who do not do their part to provide for their kids either.

What is considered to be a

What is considered to be a sacrifice for BM? Not being able to buy her kids Rolex watches?

I think most people can agree that subsequent children should not necessarily be factored as a reason to decrease CS, but they most certainly should be factored if BM is sueing for an iINCREASE.

No, I mean its going to mean

No, I mean its going to mean that she has to make changes in her budget for kids she had no role in making/due to the fact that her ex now has subsequent kids. There are many people who abuse cs. But there are also those who do use it on the kids to cover extras.

But BM could also try to

But BM could also try to increase her income to cover extra luxuries, no? Why does iit always have to be the Biological dad to step up? Heck, women are outpacing men in terms of who are getting college degrees.

"But BM could also try to

"But BM could also try to increase her income to cover extra luxuries, no?"

She could and there are BMs who do that. They do exist.

Even working BMs would have to readjust their budgets due to the fact that now that ex has other kids and there will be a decrease in CS. I wouldn't love the idea of adjusting my budget due to a child I had no say in creating and am not helping to raise. I don't think many people would like it.

You are missing my point. I

You are missing my point. I said Subsequent children should not necessarily justify a decrease. So What DECREASE in CS are you talking about?

Also, if a DH gets an

Also, if a DH gets an increase in pay, a BM is entitled to sue for an increase in CS. But if BM gets an increase in pay, shouldn't DH , in the same line of thinking, be entitled to decrease CS. Imagine all the screaming BMs there would be?

Yes, moms can request

Yes, moms can request increases but dads can request a decrease if they have to take a pay cut.

Agreed.

"But in reality, as ugly as

"But in reality, as ugly as it is and as ugly as people can be some kids are going to get "less" because there is less to go around."

^^If this was an intact family, the kids that got less because there was less to go around would be the older children, not the younger ones. Why should the younger children "get less" because there is "less to go around" just because they have an older sibling? The older sibling should not be neglected but they would not be getting as much if they were the only child, why does divorce make this different?

I have known too many people and seen it happen time and time again, the CS check does not go to the child it goes to the BM and she spends it how she sees fit and it is very rarely spent on the children directly. If the father moves on, gets a life, marries, has a real family, those children should not do with out just so the first child gets to have it all. The whole standard of living this does not apply if the child was an infant. What if at the time of that marriage DH was a busboy making his way thru college and then ended up an attorney WAY after he and the mother ever lived under the same roof? The standard of living during the marriage was roman noodles and bologna sandwiches. Fast forward a few years, DH is making a good living, always providing for his child, remarries, decides to have a FAMILY with his new wife and the ex goes berserk and commences to money grub and put them thru hell. It is not the new childs fault. Why should this new baby be viewed as less deserving??? Absolute craziness.

I have a difficult time

I have a difficult time dealing with things that do not make sense. I love math and accounting - you know when 2+2 always equals 4.

The law does not have any degree of logic. I took some courses in law school and it drove me CRAZY. It's just bullshit and what some jerk judge decides to rule - based on nothing.

I could never have married a man with minor children. I would have either killed someone or myself - preferably someone else.

Nothing makes sense in the CS world - many women get nothing, others get ridiculous amounts of money. There is no logic.

Well said. I think you wrote

Well said. I think you wrote the best post yet!

"but the former partner has

"but the former partner has no obligations and no one should be expected to commiserate in the decrease of monetary support to adjust to the other parents new obligations. It's not like they both had equal decision making in that, right?"

Agreed.

I never expected CS to

I never expected CS to decrease when DH and I had our child together. But when we discussed any additional amount then yeah we considered all kids.

Can we afford gymnastic lessons for sd, and if we provide hers shouldn't all the kids be allowed am extra curricular activity? That's is the only time we considered my kids- we have joint bank accounts. And quite frankly dh did not have enough left over to.pay extras. In 14 yrs he hasnt had a raise.

We did us our child when SD became college age and BM went after dh to pay 70% of that.

However I think what we should have been allowed to use instead was his union fees, and gas money. Those are expenses he would have had if they remained married.

I raised my dd on 100 a week for 18 years. Her dad made 40k and makes. Over a 100 now. It never dawned on me to ask for more. National average was 10k to raise a kid.

You are here

Comments