You are here

SS10 Went Home & Other Updates

CastleJJ's picture

BM picked up SS10 yesterday. He will not come back until late February unless BM tries to negotiate that time for sport obligations. 

The rest of SS' visit was okay. SS has one friend in our town, since he is never here long enough to make any real connections. This kid is a year younger than SS and lives down the road from my parents. We are close with his parents. Anyway, this kid is super sweet but has been bullied mercilessly in school due to a visual impairment that requires extra strength prescription glasses. This friend visited before New Years and had a sleepover with SS. During his sleepover, he told us that he is blind as a bat without his glasses and has difficulty seeing in the dark or dim lit environments. The next day, SS and friend were playing and SS kept turning off the lights and making fun of friend calling him "boy" in a very derogatory manner and saying "Do you know how stupid you look?" DH immediately called SS out on his crap and read him the riot act. DH explained the effects of bullying and followed the whole "treat others the way you want to be treated" mantra. DH told SS if he couldn't straighten up, friend would go home and SS could spend the rest of NYE cleaning the house. DH also emailed BM about the incident and outlined how he handled it to prevent SS from playing both sides. SS' behavior improved after that. I am sure SS is getting this bullying attitude from football and his super toxic coach. 

SS did great with DD11months. He played with her, tried to soothe her when she fussed, etc. There was genuine concern about her and he did seem to enjoy her presence. I am still wary to keep DD at a distance. 

BM and GF did call SS again this weekend. DH told SS he needed to stay in the living room while DH "cleaned up SS' room." Well dummy DH came down with a trash bag and some empty water bottles so SS took that as cue that his room as cleaned and ran upstairs, slamming the door to continue his call with BM and GF. I told DH that if he wants SS to keep his calls in a public space, he needs to spell it out clearly and explain why and not make excuses like "cleaning his room." DH isn't sure how he wants to handle that going forward - if he is going to let SS maintain his private calls with BM and GF or if he is going to force him to have them in a public space like the kitchen or living room. 

We are still in the middle of our CS review. DH called the FOC today to follow up to which they reported it could take up to 3 months to calculate and finalize. This would put us at end of February. SS informed DH that BM was indeed promoted in December; perfect timing since she petitioned for review and submitted all of her financials in November, knowing she was being promoted a few weeks later. SS said she was promoted to manager and got a hefty pay raise. DH did a Google search and found her promotion highlighted on the company website. It wasn't as big of a role jump as SS reported, but it was big enough to make a financial difference. Based on the information we could collect, BM is likely making $20k to $30k more than DH now compared to only the $5k more than DH she was making before. This, along with the email she sent about no longer needing daycare and factoring DD into the calculation, we are hoping our CS goes down. DH called the CS review caseworker today to see if he can submit that proof to the FOC to be considered during the review, therefore forcing BM to produce her updated paystubs. DH doesn't want to have to object the review after it's finalized and go to court with this information; he would rather it all be handled on the front end, during this calculation period. 

I am hoping that all remains calm on the SS and BM front. We have a visit with SS every two months until summer, which for me, is a little too frequent. I like fall because we have four or five months gaps - something I used to hate, but now appreciate. 

UPDATE: THE FOC called DH back and let him know that BM did include her promotion information in the CS review. Surprising since it would logically mean even less money for BM. I can't fathom why BM would petition for a CS review if she got a hefty raise, no longer needs daycare, and knows we have a second child to factor in. It seems like it would be a lose-lose for her. 


Noway2b1's picture

So it might not be surprising that she submitted it. Our state law is strange, if both parents work the presumption is if one makes less and the other makes more that they are BOTH expected to contribute a certain amount towards the "standard of care" , they rarely reduce it if the primary custody parent is making more but more often increase it for the payer if they are, I know it's not exactly fair. They also use a imaginary imputed income here, meaning what you can potentially earn at 40 hours a week and minimum wage is calculated even if you aren't working that much or at all. There are plus and cons to this of course. 

CastleJJ's picture

Our state utilizes a income-share model for calculating CS. The courts calculate the estimated expense to raise a child and each parent contribute up to 100% total between the two of them based on their individual and combined incomes. The parent with the higher income, regardless of custody, contributes more than the lesser earning parent. According to this model, if BM's income goes up while DH's stays the same, his CS would go down. Under the current order we have where BM's income is higher than DH's, BM contributes 58% while DH contributes 42% due to their income differences even though BM maintains 85% physical custody. DH is working above 40 hours per week and making above minimum wage so imputed income isn't a concern. 

Other factors are also included like child care and additional children. If you do not utilize childcare, it is removed from the equation. BM was using childcare under our current CS order and informed DH (and we believe the FOC) that she no longer uses it. That is $150 per month that DH pays toward childcare specifically that would be eliminated from the equation since it is considered an additional expense outside of base support. DD is also a factor now. If there is only 1 child, that child gets up to 25% of the NCP's income as their portion. If there are two (or more) children with two (or more) different BMs, the first child gets x percentage of the 25% and the second child gets y percentage of the 25%. 

In theory, based on all of this, it should go down. DH and I are not holding our breaths since we have seen increase after increase in the past but we are HOPING it goes down. 

advice.only2's picture

SS making fun of the kid isn't too surprising and I doubt that behavior is coming just from sports.  His mother and SM encourage him to mock you and DH so why shouldn't he do it with everybody.  

CastleJJ's picture

I don't disagree at all. I think BM and GF are 100% contributing toward that behavior. They view themselves as superior and so does SS. Hell, even BM and GF bully each other and feel that one is superior over the other. Narc traits for sure. Calling him "boy" in a slang/derogatory manner is definitely the football coach though. Ive heard the coach talk down to the kids like that at games - "what are you doing boy? Get up boy." It's gross.