O/T: So Tired of Hearing People Complain

[StampGirl]

What is the name of your state? CA

*sigh*

I am so tired of seeing/hearing people complain that they pay too much child support. Especially if they continued to have other children with other spouses/gf/bf/flavor of the day, month or hour.

WHY on God's Green Earth should the first child suffer financially because YOU chose to have more kids than you could ever possibly afford??? Thank Goodness my Ex will never have anymore kids than the ones we had together.

Just is frustrating when people think that they already pay too much when they really don't have any idea that 9 out of 10 times what they pay doesn't even scratch the surface of what it costs to have the children 80% of the time. (that is a personal reference as I have my children 80% of the time)

I am so tired of hearing "you already take 60% of my take home pay how much more do you want". UGH.

Sorry for venting. If I am out of line then I apologize. Its just amazing sometimes how some people think that it should be cheap to raise kids. Trust me. I have 3 girls (almost teenages even) and they are NOT CHEAP!!!

Enjoy your day.

 

[45Frank]

Amen
I am raising an eleven year old girl (Cheerleader) son who is an athlete. Three sports so I agree the other half usually has no idea what it cost. Just for track this week $200.00 plus for shoes only. Then there's wrestling, football then the summer camps because you hope they can get a scholarship because you know there's going to be no money from the X.
Then the X complains she pays to much. I pointed out years ago in court that she smokes more per week then she pays in CS. Oh by the way she's 20 thousand behind and hasn't paid in 4 years now.
I give nearly 100% of my life to my children in time and money the X-Wife Zero.

 

[fairisfair]

What is the name of your state? CA

*sigh*

I am so tired of seeing/hearing people complain that they pay too much child support. Especially if they continued to have other children with other spouses/gf/bf/flavor of the day, month or hour.

WHY on God's Green Earth should the first child suffer financially because YOU chose to have more kids than you could ever possibly afford??? Thank Goodness my Ex will never have anymore kids than the ones we had together.

Just is frustrating when people think that they already pay too much when they really don't have any idea that 9 out of 10 times what they pay doesn't even scratch the surface of what it costs to have the children 80% of the time. (that is a personal reference as I have my children 80% of the time)

I am so tired of hearing "you already take 60% of my take home pay how much more do you want". UGH.

Sorry for venting. If I am out of line then I apologize. Its just amazing sometimes how some people think that it should be cheap to raise kids. Trust me. I have 3 girls (almost teenages even) and they are NOT CHEAP!!!

Enjoy your day.

True, however you are only running one household. Many NCP's are basically having to finance the equivalent of at least 1 and 1/2. Even if they don't have additional children, they still gotta live somewhere, pay utilities somewhere and eat.

Oh and I am the CP so no bias here.

It is that daaaaaaaaarned fair is fair thing.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

Come on ... the CP should have to pay for 90% of the costs because, well, they are the CP. So what if it took TWO to have the children.

And they ONLY take out 60% or 65% when the arrearages are VERRRRYYYYY much past 60-90 days.

 

[StampGirl]

Come on ... the CP should have to pay for 90% of the costs because, well, they are the CP. So what if it took TWO to have the children.

And they ONLY take out 60% or 65% when the arrearages are VERRRRYYYYY much past 60-90 days.

Ummm.... pssst Ginny?? Come here. Yes I do get about 65% of my Ex's take home pay. We had 3 kids together. But before EVERYONE freaks out and blasts me..... the amount court ordered is based on what wages were being earned 6yrs ago ($60,000 per year). He now makes close to $110,000 a year. I haven't asked for a modification. See how nice I am?? I considered it but tabled the issue out of the goodness of my heart.

 

[qurice]

True, however you are only running one household. Many NCP's are basically having to finance the equivalent of at least 1 and 1/2. Even if they don't have additional children, they still gotta live somewhere, pay utilities somewhere and eat.

Bingo! Which is why I was crashing with family or friends before I married my wife. Even in crappy neighborhood I couldn't afford even the smallest of apts. on my own.

Thanks for looking at it from the otherside

 

[StampGirl]

Bingo! Which is why I was crashing with family or friends before I married my wife. Even in crappy neighborhood I couldn't afford even the smallest of apts. on my own.

Thanks for looking at it from the otherside

Oh I see the "other side". But its hard on CP's too. I had to move back in with my parents because the rental market is WAAAAAAAAAAY out of control.

We won't bring up where my Ex lives!!! He has the really nice condo, cars, etc. But good for him. It means my kids have a nice place to go when they see him and his wife. They deserve to have a life too. Maybe that is why I never did the modification.

Divorce is hideous on both parties financially as well as emotionally.

The system does need to be revised to take into consideration that hte NCP deserves a place to live and the means in which to do it. I never said they didn't.

I guess today I am just on my soapbox and I need to get off it.

 

[Silverplum]

Bingo! Which is why I was crashing with family or friends before I married my wife. Even in crappy neighborhood I couldn't afford even the smallest of apts. on my own.

Thanks for looking at it from the otherside

She's remarkably fair. I find it to be a major plus in her otherwise scary personality!

 

[fairisfair]

She's remarkably fair. I find it to be a major plus in her otherwise scary personality!

BOO!

(dang I wish they had a great big ole font)

 

[rabiddad]

playing Devil's Advocate here:

Especially if they continued to have other children with other spouses/gf/bf/flavor of the day, month or hour.

Good Point.....but is it fair that custodial parent is free to breed like a bunny with her new flavor of the month because it is acceptable for her to be SAHM. Not really a justification merely pointing out the other side.

WHY on God's Green Earth should the first child suffer financially because YOU chose to have more kids than you could ever possibly afford???

Many time this is not the case at first...people get downsized, laid off, cancer, diabetes years after subsequent children are born. I know, i know....file for a modification but downward mod are very hard to convince a judge to give even if involuntary and often (at least in Illinois) take 6 months to a year for CSE to recognize. Kinda throws some gray area into the whole first child comes first theory. Not to mention the wonderful practice of upward deviations. Once CS is set and if the NCP can handle CS and another family why shouldn't he? But then what happens when CS raises? My 16 yr old and ex are harping on me to get her a car....I told her I would pay the same amount of cash for a car for her as my parents did for me (and I'll give them the same answer in 2 years when they hit me up for college money).....$0!!!

really don't have any idea that 9 out of 10 times what they pay doesn't even scratch the surface of what it costs to have the children 80% of the time.

If it's that expensive, why not let ex have kids an extra 30% of the time? Then there wouldn't be a need for CS Now I know that this is not always feasible because of fitness or geographic concerns but this could be easily turned around by saying "I am so tired of hearing Custodial parents whining about how expensive it is to raise kids on NCPs CS and if it's so rough why doesn't she just sign the kiddos over to me"

I am so tired of hearing "you already take 60% of my take home pay how much more do you want". UGH.

See above rebuttal....and there's no justification to take 60% of NCP's pay....ever! IMHO

Just for track this week $200.00 plus for shoes only. Then there's wrestling, football then the summer camps because you hope they can get a scholarship because you know there's going to be no money from the X.

And who is giving permission to participate in all these VOLUNTARY extra curricular activities? As one of my personal idols (Nancy Reagan) used to say "just say no!". Even an intact family must pick and choose what activities thier kids want to join because of finances. My boys wanted to be in soccer and scouts. Soccer $70 plus uniform fess and parent provided shoes (they wanted all kids to have matching name brand shoes...Nike I think) for 3 months of the year. Scouts 17 the first year (troop paid annual fee after 1 year of membership) and had a uniform turn in policy where kids dropping out could turn in old uniforms to be given to kids joining) for a year round activity. Plus they learned alot more than how to kick a ball around. Guess which i let them join?

True, however you are only running one household. Many NCP's are basically having to finance the equivalent of at least 1 and 1/2. Even if they don't have additional children, they still gotta live somewhere, pay utilities somewhere and eat.

AMEN! AMEN! Common Sense.

But that's just my opinion....I could be wrong.....

 

[Gracie3787]

Ummm.... pssst Ginny?? Come here. Yes I do get about 65% of my Ex's take home pay. We had 3 kids together. But before EVERYONE freaks out and blasts me..... the amount court ordered is based on what wages were being earned 6yrs ago ($60,000 per year). He now makes close to $110,000 a year. I haven't asked for a modification. See how nice I am?? I considered it but tabled the issue out of the goodness of my heart.

is the court order set at a specific 65% of ex's pay, or is a set amount?

I'm asking because if it is a set amount and you are now getting 65% of the $110k, then the original order was way too high for the $60k.

Does your ex owe arrears? If not, you should consider yourself very fortunate to be able to get such a large percentage of ex's income. Normally, even with owing arrears, most NCP's pay no more than 20% to 50% of thier income.

 

[LdiJ]

The bottom line in all of this is that its expensive to have children, and if a family is not intact (both parents living together, raising the children, making joint sacrifices) its not easy on anyone.

Many CPs go on to have more children than they can realistically afford to have, many NCPs go on to have more children than they can realistically afford to have.

I have a bit less sympathy for NCPs who go on to have more children. Why?, because they know that they have a court ordered child support obligation. They know exactly what they have to pay each month, and therefore if they choose to go on and have more children, they are doing it with their eyes wide open. However I also don't have much sympathy for a CP who is struggling to make it, with child support or not, who chooses to have more children. If the CP is in a solid financial position, married or not, and can support another child even if they don't get assistance, or is in a stable and financially healthy relationship, then kudos to the CP....same for the NCP in a similar situation.

I have a friend who is incredibly wise. She married a man who had two almost adult children from his first marriage, and 4 minor children from his second. She went into the marriage with her eyes wide open, and fully understanding his obligations. After they married he really wanted to have children with her. Her response? "Heck no, you can't afford the kids you already have".

There is this whole culture out there that seems to say that if you are in a serious realtionship, that you have to have a child with the person you are with....that somehow the relationship isn't validated unless a child comes from it.

Basically, people need to make sure that they can support the child(ren) they already have before they go on to make more....its that simple.

 

[45Frank]

No you may be right that's why it called your opinion

AMEN! AMEN! Common Sense.

But that's just my opinion....I could be wrong.....

 

[45Frank]

You may be right but saying no just because the other parent is lazy and refuses to pay isn't fair to the kids either. I say no to plenty of things. I personally will do anything I can to give to my children. I have given up more than many intact families for my kids.
I think the OP was complaining about the CP's who give 100% as compared to the ones like my X who give Zero. Actually cost my kids and I money when she is around.

And who is giving permission to participate in all these VOLUNTARY extra curricular activities? As one of my personal idols (Nancy Reagan) used to say "just say no!". Even an intact family must pick and choose what activities thier kids want to join because of finances. My boys wanted to be in soccer and scouts. Soccer $70 plus uniform fess and parent provided shoes (they wanted all kids to have matching name brand shoes...Nike I think) for 3 months of the year. Scouts 17 the first year (troop paid annual fee after 1 year of membership) and had a uniform turn in policy where kids dropping out could turn in old uniforms to be given to kids joining) for a year round activity. Plus they learned alot more than how to kick a ball around. Guess which i let them join?

 

[haiku]

The bottom line in all of this is that its expensive to have children, and if a family is not intact (both parents living together, raising the children, making joint sacrifices) its not easy on anyone.

Many CPs go on to have more children than they can realistically afford to have, many NCPs go on to have more children than they can realistically afford to have.

I have a bit less sympathy for NCPs who go on to have more children. Why?, because they know that they have a court ordered child support obligation. They know exactly what they have to pay each month, and therefore if they choose to go on and have more children, they are doing it with their eyes wide open. However I also don't have much sympathy for a CP who is struggling to make it, with child support or not, who chooses to have more children. If the CP is in a solid financial position, married or not, and can support another child even if they don't get assistance, or is in a stable and financially healthy relationship, then kudos to the CP....same for the NCP in a similar situation.

I have a friend who is incredibly wise. She married a man who had two almost adult children from his first marriage, and 4 minor children from his second. She went into the marriage with her eyes wide open, and fully understanding his obligations. After they married he really wanted to have children with her. Her response? "Heck no, you can't afford the kids you already have".

There is this whole culture out there that seems to say that if you are in a serious realtionship, that you have to have a child with the person you are with....that somehow the relationship isn't validated unless a child comes from it.

Basically, people need to make sure that they can support the child(ren) they already have before they go on to make more....its that simple.

Total agreement. ( I have one child because my husband already had 3, I would like all the children to have everything we can possible give)

And to add MY own thoughts....children are not cheap for anyone. I am not thrilled with NCP's who DON'T consider child support when making thier financial decisions IE: when planning for a mortgage you need to NOT count your income BEFORE you pay child support. Your actual income is NOT what appears on your tax forms, it what you get after you pay support. Live BELOW your means...your kids will be 18 soon enough, you can live a little THEN....

And I am NOT thrilled with CP's who depend on the support to pay thier own basic needs....(I don't care what they use it to pay for-but if they have older children do not work, and complain the support is not enough- or that the NCP has nicer stuff....GET A JOB!) again, your kids will be 18 soon enough, PLUS YOU get the joy of seeing them EVERY day...