child support to parent w/ no children in residence

[teejay]

state is WI..currently have children residing with us due to child abuse restraining order. mother has supervised visitation. restraining order is for 1 year. how likely is a judge to rule that mother is to continue to get support/ whether full amount or partial amount/ based on her defense of possibly losing her house if she doesn't get the support?

 

[Grandma B]

Your post lacks detail, but it sounds like the children were "placed" with you (other parent?) following an abusive situation. Was the mother the abuser?

If all this was done through the courts, wasn't the child support issue brought up at the time of placement? Is there a hearing scheduled for modifying the support order?

There should be no reason she would continue to receive child support payments if the custody is legally changed, even temporarily. Child support is to provide for the children, not the mother. Spousal support is a separate issue. In fact, it would seem she not only should not receive child support; but she also should be required to pay same.

If she loses her home in the interim, she could have a problem proving she can provide a stable environment for the children.

 

[teejay]

reply-grandmab

thanks for your response-i'll fill you in on the details you inquired about...yes, the children were placed with us (other parent) because of abuse. the mother's attorney made her defense that the charges were filed because of us wanting to stop child support-not the real issue at hand. the judge granted the injunction, but because of their defense our lawyer didn't want to bring up support at the same time. he said we had to suck it up...after a short time, we realized with 2 teenagers and 1 preteen that we needed support. we didn't request any money from the mother, but requested our support be stopped to the mother. her lawyer came back with she would agree to reduce the support but she needed 600.00 for her house. our lawyer has since filed a motion for the courts to decide so we were curious if the judge would rule in favor of the mother.

 

[LegalBeagle]

Re: reply-grandmab

thanks for your response-i'll fill you in on the details you inquired about...yes, the children were placed with us (other parent) because of abuse. the mother's attorney made her defense that the charges were filed because of us wanting to stop child support-not the real issue at hand. the judge granted the injunction, but because of their defense our lawyer didn't want to bring up support at the same time. he said we had to suck it up...after a short time, we realized with 2 teenagers and 1 preteen that we needed support. we didn't request any money from the mother, but requested our support be stopped to the mother. her lawyer came back with she would agree to reduce the support but she needed 600.00 for her house. our lawyer has since filed a motion for the courts to decide so we were curious if the judge would rule in favor of the mother.

I really do not see how a judge would rule for you to continue to pay CS when she has no children. However, I think her case is based on the charges being false and that when the temp custody is overturned and she gets the children back, she will have no house for them to live in.

My argument on that is to tell her to go get a 2nd job since she has no children to look after.