Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am a single working parent and I have a teenage child with ex- husband. The ex has been happily married to new spouse who is an Army Sergent who has a steady income. I want to know if it's worth fighting and going to court to see if new spouse income could be factored into the child support calcualtion. This would give the ex no excuse that he has no money. If new spouse loves him enough to take care of him, give him a place to live, and her car to drive, then her funds should be factored into child support. No I am not looking to get an increase I'm just looking for ways to get him to do what is right. Surely if I was to remarry my new husband and my income would support my child and no need to go to court for that this would be automatic. That's why I believe the new spouse's income should be factored in child support. The ex and new spouse should do the same and provide income for my daughter. When 2 people marry they become as one. If ex has an obligation to provide for his daughter and fails to do so then the new spouse should share in this responsibility since the two are now one. I just notice how ex's are jumping ship in not taking care of their children and living it up by being taken care of by their new spouse. If there was a law that stated new spouse's income would be highly considere and /or included for the dead beat parent's financial obligation (child support), they would think twice about marriage or they could encourage the deadbeat parent to become responsible!
What are your thoughts?
Two people never become one. And the two people who create a child are the only ones who have any responsibility to support that child. Some step parents volunteer to help but it certainly should not be their responsibility.
Two people never become one. And the two people who create a child are the only ones who have any responsibility to support that child. Some step parents volunteer to help but it certainly should not be their responsibility.
I'll push back on that a bit, in the sense that if an unemployed guy has a child who is living in poverty and then he turns around and marries Paris Hilton, I doubt folks would be like... "yeah, it's right that this kid is starving while the dad lives in a mansion and flies private jets". Especially if that kid was on welfare. Very few folks would be all "it's not the wife's problem" then. So I do think a case could be made that one parent shouldn't be living a dramatically different reality than the child.
I just don't know if that's the case here personally. Really it just sounds like dude is in a nicer house, but it's not like they vacation on a private island in Fiji or anything.
I'll push back on that a bit, in the sense that if an unemployed guy has a child who is living in poverty and then he turns around and marries Paris Hilton, I doubt folks would be like... "yeah, it's right that this kid is starving while the dad lives in a mansion and flies private jets". Especially if that kid was on welfare. Very few folks would be all "it's not the wife's problem" then. So I do think a case could be made that one parent shouldn't be living a dramatically different reality than the child.
I just don't know if that's the case here personally. Really it just sounds like dude is in a nicer house, but it's not like they vacation on a private island in Fiji or anything.
With this reasoning would you argue that if the custodial parent marries a rich person and their lifestyle dramatically improves that somebody -either the custodial parent and/or the new step parent should contribute to improved living conditions of non custodial parents just so the difference in the living standards is not so marked from one household to the other?
I don't think so. It is very common for kids to shuffle back and forth from one level of living to another depending on the income of the two households. When someone marries a person with children from a previous relationship or marriage they do not automatically have an obligation to support those children nor do they have an obligation to raise the standard of living of the ex just so one parent "isn't living a dramatically different reality than the child's".
I'll push back on that a bit, in the sense that if an unemployed guy has a child who is living in poverty and then he turns around and marries Paris Hilton, I doubt folks would be like... "yeah, it's right that this kid is starving while the dad lives in a mansion and flies private jets". Especially if that kid was on welfare. Very few folks would be all "it's not the wife's problem" then. So I do think a case could be made that one parent shouldn't be living a dramatically different reality than the child.
In your scenario, there's an easy solution to improving the child's standard of living: Switch full custody to the father.
With this reasoning would you argue that if the custodial parent marries a rich person and their lifestyle dramatically improves that somebody -either the custodial parent and/or the new step parent should contribute to improved living conditions of non custodial parents just so the difference in the living standards is not so marked from one household to the other?
I don't think so. It is very common for kids to shuffle back and forth from one level of living to another depending on the income of the two households. When someone marries a person with children from a previous relationship or marriage they do not automatically have an obligation to support those children nor do they have an obligation to raise the standard of living of the ex just so one parent "isn't living a dramatically different reality than the child's".
Actually no, I'm talking about the children. The two are not equivalent. That's pretty much the reasoning behind the law in the states that increase child support payments based on the income of a step-parent. The idea is that the child should have a standard of living not drastically below a parent's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopes
In your scenario, there's an easy solution to improving the child's standard of living: Switch full custody to the father.
Nope. Then you have a situation where physical custody is determined solely by money. There will not be laws passed where an otherwise competent parent loses full custody by the sole virtue of income. If that was so, every sports star and/or divorced celebrity would have full custody of their kids.
I just notice how ex's are jumping ship in not taking care of their children and living it up by being taken care of by their new spouse.
Is this new spouse a sergeant in the United States Army? If she is it's highly unlikely they are living it up. Even with hostile fire pay and 40 years of service soldiers aren't exactly rolling in the dough so the chances of the new wife making enough to "live it up" are slim and none.
p.s. On the outside chance he likes mature women and married a woman with 40 years of service she's probably been on multiple tours of duty and you should be buying her a beer.
So what happens if the non-custodial parent (who pays child support) quits his or her job because their spouse can comfortably support them? And let's say this new spouse makes a LOT of money. Is the non-custodial parent now completely absolved of paying child support since they individually have no income (yet just for the sake of argument, let's say they live a lavish lifestyle)? That's a pretty huge loophole. I think the issue is a bit more complicated than some folks here are making it. I don't know exactly what the answer is, since I too have an issue with going after a new spouse's income, but it seems just as bad to let deadbeats use this as a way to stop supporting their kids.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
