You are here

Child Support - so unfair

lorlors's picture

DH received the letter from the Child Support Agency yesterday. We were expecting perhaps an amount payable of $1300/$1400 at the outside. How wrong were we. $2200 per month for 1 child, the SD17!! Frigging hell. 

BM can also apply to have it extended to the end of the school year in which SD turns 18, which in Australia is November 2020. You can bet your life she will.

My issue with this is that if you earn well, word hard and have a good income, the dad can get stripped bare in child support whilst the mum sits back and collects. Bloody hell..... The reason for this 'new' calculation is 1. DH income and 2. the cost of raising a child in Australia has apparently gone up by 50% in the last 4 years.

I am just in shock at the figure. Would I rather we paid it than have SD under our roof again? Yes but this is just outrageous.

lorlors's picture

and they said our baby boy only made a marginal reduction as it apparently costs more to raise an older child than it does a baby. Calling utter BS on that one. Babies and all the paraphernalia that goes along with them is much more costly than a teen.

shamds's picture

Stated that 2/3 of the approximate $300,000 is university etc. Basically those last 3 yrs when they are already adults. In australia you are an adult at 18 and thats the year you would normally start university.


Petronella's picture

In a lot of places, your baby wouldn’t make any difference at all to the amount of CS the dad owes for his older child.

Rags's picture


We had nothing but a shitload of pathetic with SS's CS from the SpermIdiot. It started at $110/mo for a  year, went to $133/mo for 9 years, then $785/mo for a year then down to $385/mo for 7 years.

My condolences on you and DH getting raped on CS.  The good news is that you are only 15mos from being out of the CS payment to BM business.

Even as the spouse of the CP in our blended family situation, I recognize that NCPs get raped by the CS system far more often than not. 

lorlors's picture

It is like a rape. Especially given DH gave her the house free and clear. That’s all I can hold on to now. At least she’s not 12 or something and there’s eons to go. It’s 15 months then it is done for good. Thanks Rags.

ProbablyAlreadyInsane's picture

Psycho was only gived $356 a month for 2 kids... She paid $200 ONCE... So over a year later... That puts her just shy of $5,000 behind... 

I thought ours was low... Yours was beyond low! $110 a month is NOTHING when it comes to child expenses!

thinkthrice's picture

when the MAN pays they jack it up to high heavens.  When the BM is the NCP, well then, they just assign a pittance even if the BM outearns the man by oodles and look the other way on collection.

Rags's picture

My SS's SpermIdiot is a waste of skin.  The courts in SpermLand are entirely biased towards state residents.  My brides CO granting her full physical and legal custody was issued in SpermLand. She left the state for college when SS was 14mos old.  She never moved back.   Follow up court hearings maintained the insanely pathetic CS level until I got hit when the semiconductor bubble burst in the early 2000s.  That is when CS went up from $133/mo after 7 years.  Though the SpermIdiot is a POS, he remained in SpermLand and POS is the norm for many people in that pathetic place. So the courts cater to POS behaviors and let them off of the hook.

We never needed the money but it irritated me to no end that that POS got off for a pittance and benefited from my professional income and my wife's successful career.

justmakingthebest's picture

Jeeezzzzz!!!!! I will stop complaining about DH's $1100 for one kid.... you guys win the crappiest CS!

ProbablyAlreadyInsane's picture

Internet says that Aussie dollars are worth 1.47 American dollars... So your Dh is literally paying like substantially more than I make a month in CS....

ProbablyAlreadyInsane's picture

1 American dollar = 1.47 Aussie dollars

Lol. It's been a busy day. My statement still stands though... My work pays me like $5

Livingoutloud's picture

Say what? Where do they pay $5 an hour? Isn’t it against the law? It’s below minimum wages. Like half of it. What do you do??? 

lorlors's picture

So if you earn good money you get penalised. BM manages to hide her true income as she owns a window business with her new husband but runs it through the books like she earns barely anything.

Rags's picture

The SpermIdiot did similar things in an attempt to minimize his income for CS purposes.  He worked for cash under the table in an effort to keep his official income minimized to avoid as much CS as he could.  Nothing hiring a Private Investigator did not find though.   We submitted the video of him taking cash from clients, subpoenaed the invoices for the work he performed for the plumbing company he works for on those days as well as his time sheets, and submitted the official hourly rate charts for the county he lives and works in.   That caused he and the SpermGrandParents to just about stroke out in court.  Running from the county constable who was serving him a summons for a CS review did not do him any favors.

Rags's picture

Though I get what CS is intended for I still logically believe that the parent most financially capable of providing for the child should by default be the CP unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise.

Far too often CS is paid to parents who are significantly incapable of providing for their children... or even themselves.  Why is is it a good idea to make the primary influence on a kid a person who can't, or worse, won't support themselves and their children?

STalk is full of examples of why finacial capability should be the primary factor for establishing custody.  The toxic opposition is likely to be a greedy manipulative CP who extorts money for breeding services from their former partner, uses the kid(s) as a conduit to punish and control their X, and demonstrate repeatedly that they don't really care about their own kids.

lorlors's picture

SD is a credit card to BM that she uses to extort/withdraw money from the Bank of DH. There needs to be a tipping point where enough is enough. BM never worked a day in her life until she shacked up with husband number 2 and joined his business. 

DH gifted her the former marital home, free and clear. It must be a fine thing to have free money just pouring in to your account each month and far more than you could ever need to sustain and support the child.

Petronella's picture

Why did he give her the home? It should have been sold and the proceeds divided. Or else she got the house, while he got other assets or something. 

lorlors's picture

He has lived to regret that ill-advised decision. DH didn't want the children further disturbed by downsizing or moving post divorce so let her keep the house post settlement and continued to pay it off until approximately 1 year ago. His choice that he made at the time on the assumption BM would play fair. BM down the track moves her boyfriend, now husband in and DH is paying off the mortgage on the house that they and the skids live in. It is paid off and DH's name taken off the deed.

No other assets to split other than his/her car. The house would conservatively be worth $1.5/$1.6 Million Aus dollars in today's market.

lieutenant_dad's picture

DH and I were having (and have had) these conversations around CS a lot recently. I'm tired of us working 40-60 hours a week with no real breaks while she can pick-and-choose what job she wants because she gets enough CS cover to (according to DH) her full rent, food, and internet. Add to that DH pays for 90% of their clothes, shoes, school supplies, and ECA; I carry their health insurance; DH puts money into their 529 college funds; and OSS (and in a few months, YSS) is on our cell plan. That literally leaves her with utilities, gas, her cell phone, and her various insurances.

DH hasn't seemed to learn yet that she can CHOOSE to do less because he just keeps doing more and getting promoted and getting pay increases. She doesn't actually increase her standard of living for her and the boys; she just figures out how to do less with what she has. Giving her money or burning it has about the same effect.

OP, I feel your pain. No matter how much DH makes, the boys will ALWAYS live impoverished with BM because she can't manage the assets she has. I honestly think she prefers food stamps and other forms of assistance because she doesn't have to figure any of it out. It's done for her.

lorlors's picture

It is the absurdity and unfairness of it all that I rally against. Child support should not mean that these women can stop self-supporting and live off the child support as well. It’s ‘CHILD support’ not ‘LAZY TURD EX WIFE support’.

I feel for you too Lieutenant.

DHsfamilyfromhell's picture

Ouch. That is a lot. Maybe take heart that it’s going to be a shock to her finances when the payments do eventually stop. 

lorlors's picture

I am usually a very positive person but I think I’ll only ‘take heart’ when Ding Dong the Bitch is Dead. She is that nasty and it is so unlike me to think that but there it is.

susanm's picture

I have to disagree here.  Money and how you raise the children are the major argument points in most marriages and continue to be in divorce.  "The life that they should" is something that is not standard just based on income.  My DH is a high earner but did not believe in spoiling the kids with material things constantly.  BM did.  Once she got an ungodly amount of child support and alimony, their entitlement went through the roof.  It was common for them to refer to themselves as "rich kids" to their friends.  Not even close to how he wanted them to be raised.  Now that they are young adults they are confused and unprepared for life.  They have no idea why money does not simply appear in their accounts or why they would lose a job because they don't show up when they don't feel like going.  They believe that they are entitled to have the things they want and are genuinely angry that they don't magically have them.

I don't know what the answer is here.  Right now a high earner is required to simply hand money over to the BM and that is that.  There is little control over what is done with support money and what kind of standard of living a child has with the BM whether it is way too high or way too low.  But I think most of us can agree that either one is detrimental to the child.  There has to be some happy medium between privation and spoiled brat.  The question is how we get there.

Petronella's picture

The number of NCPs who earn the kind of money where the CS would be ordered to be $2000, is pretty small. Most COD are in no danger of being “rich kids.” 

OP, that is a pretty big amount of money every month but to be frank, you guys should have been prepared for this. The government CS tables are publicly available information. 

susanm's picture

Yes, that would be a somewhat small percentage.  But I am talking about the general lifestyle that the kids lead varying wildly from home to home regardless of income.  Many people who bring in a high income do not believe in living a lavish lifestyle and many people who do not have a high income live extravagantly by spending their entire paycheck and using credit to the maximum.  And of course other children do not have any money spent on them while their parent enjoys the child support money for themselves.  

Like I said, I don't know the answer.  This may be one of those problems that simply have no possible resolution.  After all, if the parents agreed on values then they probably would not be divorced.  It is just unfortunate that the emphasis is solely on the income of the NCP rather than the actual standard of living of the child.  But that would required a far more detailed analysis of each individual case so I am probably dreaming, right?

lorlors's picture

I quite agree. Yes DH makes good money but it is exactly the same as your scenario. DH doesn't agree with spoiling the skids, BM buys them everything electronic or new that their greedy little heart's desire. DH and I for that matter don't live lavishly and are trying to get our mortgage down and live fairly modestly. I can't remember the last new piece of clothing I bought. DH recently bought a pair of new trainers to go to the gym in. That's it. I rarely even buy a coffee out.

Just because DH makes good money shouldn't mean it then gets poured into BM's coffers.

shamds's picture

Its excessive. If we do the bare essentials like groceries, clothes, rent/mortgage, school supplies etc nowhere does it come close.

heck when my salary per fortnight was $1500 per month i could feed a house of 3 adults, pay home/car/health insurance, internet/phone and mobile bills, yearly car registration and still manage my yearly trip overseas. 

I’m on a monthly budget of $3,000 for 2 adults and 2 toddlers. We have ongoing costs of nappy wipes, nappies, formula/milk etc... that is more than enough for these things

unless skid has been raised the rich life wish designer brand goods, thats an excessive amount

my husbands exwife has not worked in 25.5 years, working is beneath her...

lorlors's picture

You will certainly have an awareness and feel for how much this actually is in 'Australian' terms. Especially considering BM lives rent/mortgage free off of DH's back. You would struggle to spend this much on 1 kid.

thinkthrice's picture

to the tune of his ENTIRE income when he moved in with me.  I put my foot down.  Somehow he was brainwashed to BELIEVE the Girhippo telling him he now owed his ENTIRE income to her because she was a stay-in-bed mom.  And he BELIEVED her!!!  And SHE wanted the divorce first!

Then it went "down" to 73% of his NET income (after taxes)  giving Chef a grand total of $138 a week (and sometimes less) to live on after CS.  Which wouldn't even put a ROOF over his head, never mind food, clothing, gas, insurance, utilities.  OH and Chef was covering all dental, medical and child care as well!

You're lucky that it's only for a few months.  This was going on since 2004 in our case and now we are down to the last feral who is 16.5.  They divorced when YSS was a toddler.  CS goes to age 21 here. 

lorlors's picture

Why would Chef plunge himself in to poverty like this? I am glad you knocked some sense in to him!!!! 

CS continuing until 21- I still can't get my head around that. My heart goes out to you.

CLove's picture

Both my spouse and I work full-time. DH pays child support to Toxic Troll as well as spousal support. He has always paid for Munchkin SD13 and her needs, and I fill in sometimes as well with food, and clothes, etc.

Toxic Troll isnt working currently and has received a large settlement from a "work injury". Plus she does side-gigs cleaning for money. All non-taxable of course.

She makes over 4K annually from Dh, that she doesnt WORK FOR. Somehow it is OWED HER. Thats what I have a problem with is that entitlement 'just because' she gave birth. And was smart enough to hook up with a high earner. She sounds like a gold digger type, and there are so many gold digging people, it makes me sick. Mommas little money maker.

Luckiiy for us the child support amounts are low, but it seems they will go on forever - 4 years and 10 months! it wont break us, but it does affect us.

I feel for you OP and others. The system is broken. Second families get the dregs. And no one ever finds this out until its too late, it seems.


flmomma08's picture

Yikes! I'm in America and not really familiar with how much things cost where you are, but that is about the total monthly expenses for my entire household! There is no way in hell it would cost that much to raise 1 child, at least where I live. I have never understood the CS calculations - why should anyone be expected to finance another adult? Support your child and be done. It blows my mind.

lorlors's picture

DH was at the doctor's meeting years ago where he told her to get her weight down to make sure there was as little strain on her heart as possible. She is still bison-sized. 

In my daydreams I look forward to the 'she's dropped dead' phonecall haha. She will probably live forever.

lorlors's picture

you have to take your laughs where you find them in Stephell. 

Anyways, 15 more months the blood money will be paid with fingers crossed she expires in the interim. I have my sweet beautiful miracle IVF son that I never believed was possible just a few years ago. Cheers everyone. I know some steppers are in a far worse position than me. Some days it is therapeutic to have a good old rant to people who understand. So thank you. 

Rags- you’ve become a meme in my house by the way. DH cracks up when I quote ‘sperm clan/polluted end of the gene pool/crotch spawn/crotch nuggets’. Priceless!

Rags's picture

I am glad that I can inject some humour and myrth into a usually decidedly irritating situation.

Enjoy your lives together.  That is what marriage is about.

Sheree40's picture

Omg this is disgusting! Just like in NZ the child support laws favor the lazy parent. Basically the harder you work the more the government robs you! Its utter BS. I bet they dont take into account your mortgage, expenses etc. The only positive it there is a light at the end of the tunnel. 2020 is in sight. Thank goodness she is a teenager and not a 5 year old, that would literally financially cripple you guys 

SittingPretty's picture

Similar boat. BM collects $2500 a month in CS, and DH pays for basically all special expenses too. There’s no way it costs that much to raise 2 kids.

Ive learned to live with it but it really riled me when I went back to work after having our baby. I would have liked to stay at home a bit longer but I couldn’t because BM was STILL a stay at home mom and contributing zero to her kids (9,11, at the time). When you have kids you have an obligation to help support, clothe and feed them, unless both of you agree that’s it better to have one parent stay at home. 

At least the end is in sight! Was there a step kid who already aged out of CS?


Lollybobs's picture

Seems like the way child support is calculated is unfair the world over and definitely favours the lazier parent. I suppose governments figure it's easier to force money out of a parent who's prepared to work.

When I met DH, he was paying child support, maintenance for BM and she'd been awarded their house. She refused to work after having the skids...basically being a stay-in-bed mom was a much better option for her rather than having to attempt to work with a daily hangover. She actually started a teacher training course at one point and got kicked off for turning up drunk to a teaching practice.

DH was on a basic salary and commission - but commission was only earned by working abroad for periods between 3 weeks and 3 months at a time. The judge based the child support and spousal maintenance on basic and highest level of commission which meant that the year before I met DH, he had only been in the UK for 12 weeks. He was supposed to have the skids every other weekend so he only got to see them 6 times that year. Rather than telliing the skids OH was working away so much, BM told them he didn't want to see them.

DH was only able to afford a 1-bed flat  after the high amount of maintenance/CS so he had to sleep on the couch when he had skids staying. If he hadn't worked away so much he would have struggled to keep a roof over his head. Eventually this took its toll and he had a breakdown. Oh boy, did BM whinge when the payments got cut.

DH quit his job and  eventually started work for a company where that level of travel wasn't required so obviously income was less. So it was back to court for a reduction of maintenance. By this point, we were married with a 1 year old and a newborn. BM argued in court that it was unreasonable that she should be expected to work with a  12 and 14 year old because she needed to be at home for them - and at the same time she announced that I should be the one returning to work (I was 3 or 4 months into maternity leave and still breastfeeding). 

To this day (16 years later) she has still never had a proper job. Once CS stopped, and therefore easy access to ATM DH, a family memebr died and she received an inheritance. Why work when money just keeps on appearing in your bank account?!

Curious Georgetta's picture

work hard so that they can provide the best possible life for their children. That goal is not tied to the marital status of the parent or the relative contribution of the other parent. My obligation to my child  does not change because of my spouses ability or unwillingness to meet their obligation.

What I want and intend to do for my children is not tied to my marital status. Those intentions are tied to my character and my willingness to follow through on commitments that I made to myself as relates to my children.

Courts base CS on parental earnings and established formulas.  It always seems that the distilled essence of complaints about a partner paying too much child support is that the money is going into a home that is not that if the person making the complaint.

Parents ,when they have a child,1 usually have an idea of the quality of life and the life style that they wish to provide for that child. Rarely are they working harder than is necessary to live up to that expectation. 



SittingPretty's picture

CG I totally disagree with this.

My DH runs himself ragged trying to provide for 2 households. I don’t think he would feel the kind of pressure he does if BM made ANY contribution at all to their children together. 

He is also having to provide that quality of life for the children twice. I think in some cases, a parent does work harder than they would have needed to in an intact family.