Meager child support as reason to move?

[killerzoey]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? HI

Please let me know if this is better addressed in the custody forum.

STBX has refused to help financially during the course of our now half-year separation because according to him I "have the greater earning potential". This is true, partly because I try to work as much as I can, whereas he does not have a job. The kids live with me. He loves them and sees them quite often, but I even supply the diapers and food for the visits. He lives off a meager trust and does as little as possible other than surf. Our youngest is still an infant and our preschooler only goes part time to school. I could theoretically get a full time job and support us given my trade, but my industry is practically nonexistent here. I currently do freelance work but it is not faring very well at the moment due to distance decay (clients in another state).

I am aware that he may be imputed an income because he is able-bodied, just lazy and unmotivated (and extremely entitled). He has a trust fund but even if I manage to prove its existence, it currently amounts to less than a full time minimum wage job.

STBX and I are both from the same state, and in that state as well are all my clients, and 99% of their jobsites. It would help my freelance business for me to be able to visit both the clients and jobsites, as I used to do when I lived there and did this same work.

I am considering taking this to court and trying to get permission to move to our home state based on financial prospects (low here/high there). If I wait until the move is financially necessary (estimated by me to occur within a few years) I fear that by definition I won't have the money to go to court to try to get permission to move.

Part of my proposal would include mentioning the fact that STBX can relocate if he chooses as well. He may not want to do so but his reasons for doing most anything have been very selfish and I don't think the court will view them as anything else. The waves are good here and the water is warm. He has no job here, as I mentioned. If he wants to be near his kids, he can easily move back. He has a house he can move into that he will inherit in the future (along with a very large sum of money and probably yet another house).

The move would help me provide economic stability, as I could live with family with low overhead while the kids are young, doing my current freelance work. Once they are in school I could take a full time job in my industry. I have a few long standing verbal job offers from my current clients, which I could ask be put in writing for me.

Our families live there too, and we have wonderful families who love our kids.

I do not want to harm our kids' relationship with their dad, but I am the only one considering their financial needs, or their need for relationships with their extended family members. He is not "in reality" about things. Considering all the factors, including how feasible it would be for him to move as well, do you think I have a shot at convincing a court that a move would be in the kids' best interest? Thanks.

 

[Ohiogal]

Yes I believe have a feasbile chance of prevailing.

 

[CJane]

While I agree that you have a better than decent shot at prevailing (and the sooner you file, the better)... where is "home state" and are you prepared to pay 100% of transportation costs for visitation? Will you be asking that visitation take place in "home state" until the children are older?

 

[killerzoey]

Yes I believe have a feasbile chance of prevailing.

Thank you.

 

[killerzoey]

While I agree that you have a better than decent shot at prevailing (and the sooner you file, the better)... where is "home state" and are you prepared to pay 100% of transportation costs for visitation? Will you be asking that visitation take place in "home state" until the children are older?

Home state is CA.

I've started to sketch out the visitation plan but don't know if I would be able to foot the entire bill. I do understand that as the moving party I would be expected to. I feel like if he isn't helping much financially and has vast family wealth to draw on (soon to be his own personal wealth) that he could absorb some of the cost. But I am willing to commit to the costs if I have to, as again, I don't really see much hope for us financially if we stay.

Yes, I would be asking for the visits to take place in CA until youngest is of a certain age. Thinking about age 7 as the magic number. Then have some sort of graduated plan working up to them having a long summer visit every year, as well as a short Spring visit. I want to ask that the winter visit occur in CA regardless of age, as stbx is accustomed to making an extended trip out every year to visit with his family and I think it is a nice tradition that could be kept constant for the kids.

Ideally he would move back to "home state" where he could see the kids often and I could work. There are waves in California. But I know I need to have a good plan to propose if he stays.

ETA I filed and he was served divorce papers in July. We are currently in mediation. Upcoming date in a few weeks for motion for pre decree relief hearing, which has been stayed twice to allow mediation. I'm not 100% clear on what will come of this hearing, as it looks to me like if mediation does not produce a settlement (which for me would include acknowledgment of the financial situation and pre-approval to move) then we are trial-bound, right? Maybe my lawyer will just ask to go to trial.

I am asking him to state permission for the move in the divorce decree, but am thinking of having the mediator propose (this will occur tomorrow) that the earliest would be summer 2011. This is so that he would have more time to bond with our youngest. I am not sure if I can make it here much longer (cost of living extremely high, even versus CA) but I feel like I need to do what I can for the kids. It is sort of the cart before the horse, though, since I don't know what child support will be. He is not disclosing his trust amount and this is delaying everything.

I am considering asking for immediate move instead, though, as a bargaining tactic while in mediation. Then agree to a 2011 departure. Any thoughts on that?

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

So let me get this straight.

Part of your argument for moving is that Dad, who you say has a good relationship with the kids, can follow you to another state, and that it's important that the kids have a good relationship with "extended family members"?

OG's and CJanes answers surprised me. Why should Dad have to move, and why is being close to "extended family members" more important than being close to Dad? And, why should Dad have to "absorb some of the cost" of transportation when you are the one creating the distance?

Just curious...

 

[killerzoey]

So let me get this straight.

Part of your argument for moving is that Dad, who you say has a good relationship with the kids, can follow you to another state, and that it's important that the kids have a good relationship with "extended family members"?

OG's and CJanes answers surprised me. Why should Dad have to move, and why is being close to "extended family members" more important than being close to Dad? And, why should Dad have to "absorb some of the cost" of transportation when you are the one creating the distance?

Just curious...

Regarding the cost of transportation, I only mention that he may be able to share cost of transport as he will be very wealthy in the upcoming years. Given what he's put us through financially, I think that should matter. Maybe it doesn't. I don't know. As I've said, I am prepared to pay.

I did not say that Dad's relationship with the kids is less important than the relationship with extended family members. Not once did I say that. What I said was that both of our families live in the other state and that they are loving with the kids. And the other comment regarding him not considering their relationship with extended family comes from conversations I've tried to have with him where he completely disregards the merit of this. Again, not saying it is more important. Plenty of families live a great distance from their extended families. But I think it's important to note that we'd be moving toward lots of good family support.

If this were an ideal situation, Dad would be working and helping support his kids and the move would not be an issue. But Dad is not doing so and has no aspirations or intentions to do so. Yes, Dad is loving with the kids. And yes, his relationship with hem is extremely important. But Dad is not considering the kids' financial needs, so I have to do so. He has put it on me, saying I have "greater earning potential". This is not proving to be the case so far from my clientele. So I need to go where I can work. If this were an ideal situation, this would not be the case. But at it seems like Dad may lose a vote regarding where the rest of his family lives if he is only thinking of himself and his own needs.

 

[poppabear]

Legally, dad has NO obligation to pay you anything without a court order. If finances are so important, why have you not had a temporary order put into effect? Do not expect him to be penalized in court for not shelling out cash without an order, and if he chooses to fight the move do not expect to hold it against him as a reason to move.

 

[CJane]

OG's and CJanes answers surprised me. Why should Dad have to move, and why is being close to "extended family members" more important than being close to Dad? And, why should Dad have to "absorb some of the cost" of transportation when you are the one creating the distance?

Just curious...

My answer was that she stands a good chance of being allowed to relocate the children due to Dad's inability/unwillingness to assist in financially providing for the children, the children's ages, Mom's difficulty finding reliable work in HI, and her assurances that she WOULD be able to secure reliable work in CA.

I did not suggest that Dad should move or assist with transportation expenses - though I CAN see Dad being ordered to share in the costs if he's seen as being willfully un/der employed and his trust is extensive.

Relocating is MUCH easier than it used to be in MOST scenarios where a parent is clearly not trying to thwart a relationship, but instead provide for the children and ESPECIALLY when one parent is unable or unwilling to assist financially.

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

I did not suggest that Dad should move or assist with transportation expenses...

Yeah, I know, and I should spaced that out a little. Neither you or OG said Dad should move. And the transportation expenses is something of a sore subject with me personally.

This is a STBX, so is there an order for support? That could come into play here as well with regards to whether Dad should be paying support yet.

 

[killerzoey]

Good point

Yeah, I know, and I should spaced that out a little. Neither you or OG said Dad should move. And the transportation expenses is something of a sore subject with me personally.

This is a STBX, so is there an order for support? That could come into play here as well with regards to whether Dad should be paying support yet.

You are right, he is a STBx and, there is no order yet. There is a motion for pre-decree relief that's a month and a half old, but the hearing has been stayed twice as we try mediation. In any case, without his admitting to the trust money it will still probably be a while before there is an order, since there are no numbers on which to hang it yet.

STBX did, right after I filed, try to get me to agree to having our child support arrangement be a very informal one. He said "Instead of child support, if you need something sometimes I can buy it for you". I told him child support is typically calculated by the system using a formula, and that is how I intended to have it arranged. He was visibly upset by this.

Our mediator, who was the family court judge here for almost two decades, told me in the first meeting that I did not have to wait for a formal order to ask for help from STBX. That was the only time I did in these 6 months - right after mediation I asked STBX to pick up some diapers and baby food and have them for us at the next visit - and he gave me grief about it. That is where the "but you have the greater earning potential" comment came from.

So yes, charitably, it could be that he knows he will be ordered to pay support and hence is not offering to help at this time. However by the reactions I get from this from people like our mediator the ex judge, I was under the impression that this fact (combined with his general attitude that it's all on me and his lack of intention to improve his financial situation) does not help him any. He also made a comment that he was hoping I would see how expensive this is and come back.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

My answer was that she stands a good chance of being allowed to relocate the children due to Dad's inability/unwillingness to assist in financially providing for the children, the children's ages, Mom's difficulty finding reliable work in HI, and her assurances that she WOULD be able to secure reliable work in CA.

I did not suggest that Dad should move or assist with transportation expenses - though I CAN see Dad being ordered to share in the costs if he's seen as being willfully un/der employed and his trust is extensive.

Relocating is MUCH easier than it used to be in MOST scenarios where a parent is clearly not trying to thwart a relationship, but instead provide for the children and ESPECIALLY when one parent is unable or unwilling to assist financially.

My long-distance move was in somewhat similar circumstances. Yes, dad faithfully saw the children EOW and most Wednesday evening. His downfall was that he paid zero support and was majorly in arrears. I was on medical state aid which meant that the support order was set higher.

To succeed in the move, I had to PROVE my higher potential for work. In addition, I had to provide a reasonable parenting plan that would allow the children to have contact with each other (landed up with a split custody situation), in addition to each parent being able to maintain a relationship with the child not in our custody. I fulfilled my end, but dad did not.

They look to make sure the move isn't to thwart parenting time for the other parent, but rather to improve the lives of both the moving parent AND the child(ren).

It took four years after the move until he actually got a job. Never really thought that day would happen, but found out the reason behind it all was.

 

[killerzoey]

My long-distance move was in somewhat similar circumstances. Yes, dad faithfully saw the children EOW and most Wednesday evening. His downfall was that he paid zero support and was majorly in arrears. I was on medical state aid which meant that the support order was set higher.

To succeed in the move, I had to PROVE my higher potential for work. In addition, I had to provide a reasonable parenting plan that would allow the children to have contact with each other (landed up with a split custody situation), in addition to each parent being able to maintain a relationship with the child not in our custody. I fulfilled my end, but dad did not.

They look to make sure the move isn't to thwart parenting time for the other parent, but rather to improve the lives of both the moving parent AND the child(ren).

It took four years after the move until he actually got a job. Never really thought that day would happen, but found out the reason behind it all was.

Thank you for that information. Encouraging to hear that your ex did eventually go to work! I am curious how he managed to support one child for four years without a job (if I understood you correctly).

Regarding the bolded part, that is going to be the tricky part, I think. I know that since I moved away from my clientele, business has declined. But other things have changed, too, so the hard part will be proving that being far away from clients, in and of itself, is important.


I have thought of asking for some letters from clients talking about the difference in having me near versus far, and what impact this has had on their willingness to send me jobs.


I can also get a few job offers put in writing. There are a few clients that have extended these repeatedly. But not sure if they would count if I am proposing to continue to do freelance work for the first few years, at least until our youngest starts school. I would choose to continue doing freelance work even after that if I had sufficient work load to support us. It would be wonderful to have that kind of flexibility, being a single mom.


Is this plan way too nebulous? On the one hand, it is harder to follow than "I'm getting a job here and we will rent an apartment here and the girls will go to daycare here". On the other hand, having my parents' home as a starting point will enable me to work at home and be there for the girls. And I will salvage my career, which is headed nowhere here.


I have to also think of what STBX will come back with. STBX will claim that all I have to do is "get more clients" in order to stay here, which I will have to be able to prove is not as easy as he says. The clients I have are from long-standing working relationships I developed over the span of a decade when I was working in the other state. Relationships I am trying desperately to preserve and grow. It is hard enough for clients to send work this far from the source even when the relationship is long-established. Asking for more from new clients while being this far away is not going to yield good results, but I should probably find a way to document this. Sort of a tricky one.


Just today I again contacted the two or three companies that are sort of in my industry in this area (there are really none that do exactly what I do) and there really are no jobs for me here in my area of expertise. None was even interested in talking about freelance work. I will take some time to submit formal resumes and get formal refusals, as this seems like a good idea.

 

[Zigner]

Ok, now I've read this thread.

At this point, you want to move so that YOU have more money. Furthermore, you currently have work available, but predict that some time down the road you won't.

You chose this man to father your two children. I'm SURE that he hasn't changed much since you first became horizontal with him.

There are others in this thread who seem to be encouraging this move. I, on the other hand, won't do that. Leave the kids with their father and move, making sure that YOU pay support to HIM. Then, YOU can visit with your kids...

 

[killerzoey]

Ok, now I've read this thread.

At this point, you want to move so that YOU have more money. Furthermore, you currently have work available, but predict that some time down the road you won't.

You chose this man to father your two children. I'm SURE that he hasn't changed much since you first became horizontal with him.

There are others in this thread who seem to be encouraging this move. I, on the other hand, won't do that. Leave the kids with their father and move, making sure that YOU pay support to HIM. Then, YOU can visit with your kids...

Not sure where you got the notion that I want to move so that I have more money. What, to get my nails done, are we going there? Currently there is not enough money coming in to support my children, and there will almost certainly still not be enough when child support kicks in. Hence the need to relocate where I can get back in to my industry and have support while I do that. Yes there is money coming in. I am working as much as I possibly can to ensure that continues. But it is not enough, not even now. The prediction of doom comes from the fact that I am supporting our girls off my limited savings.

Regarding the statement about leaving the kids with Dad, not even Dad is requesting that. I believe I mentioned that as the key point of my other thread.