Registered User
:yeahthat: Gotta spread the love Inanna
Personally if DH & I weren't together I'd be happy to be recieving anything. DH didn't pay when we were seperated$65 a week is so hard when your making a fair few hundred!!
A single friend of mine is entitled to $100 a month for her DD. She might recieve that $100 every 3 - 4 months. Thats only $25 a week. For someone working full time. If you want the best for your kids this shouldn't be a problem, but some are simply too selfish.
Registered User
it's a tough situation - you want to be fair to both parties but you also need to take into account the extra curricular needs of the children. yes, they are a choice - and more often than not that choice is made by the resident parent and the non-resident parent doesn't see a need to help with the costs.
what pandora is getting at (from what i can gather) is that there are women on higher incomes than their exes - so because of this, they receive nothing from their ex to help support those children. a parent who goes out and works to support the best interests of their child, gets nothing from the non-resident parent (and it can be both ways - there are single dads out there too!) - they foot the bill for child care, accommodation, schooling and everything, so may have little to no money left each week - but because the government deem them to be better off than their lower income earning ex, they get nothing. it's not right
the current calculation is messy - it looks at total income for mum and dad. takes out a basic living expense per annum (around 13k) for rent and basic essentials. it then puts whatever money is left over in a pool. works out what percentage of time each parent has the children, and where that income comes from. in a situation where the secondary carer has the children a small amount of time, but is on a low income, they may actually be entitled to child support from the primary carer. that isn't fair! it is a dis-incentive for primary carers to do the right thing by their family and go out and work
Registered User
thanks, yes that's what I meant.
I seem to be less articulate than I'd like of late, I thinks it's the sick kids and sleep deprivation.
BellyBelly Member
i dont think thats what the original post was asking about though. i think she was just asking if she can expect her X to contribute half of extra-curricular activites even though he is paying his child support.
in my opinion, i dont think so. just because he is paying what he is meant to pay. if he had a big income he would be paying more and then there would be enough money to pay for the extra-curriculas without extra help.
if he is not making a whole lot of money and only paying a small amount of child support its because he cant afford to pay anymore than he is, (he needs to be able to pay his own bills etc too).
in my situation (living with my partner) we dont have enough money pooled to take our kids to swimming lessons etc so we just dont do it. its a shame cause i would love them to be able to do that.
so i guess what i am saying is, if she cant afford to do the extra-curriculars without help then she may have to bite the bullet and not do em at all. it sux though.
just my 2 cents worth, and i understand not everyone will agree with me. and it is a complicated situation that varies from situation to situation.
Registered User
if both parents want a child to engage in a certain extra curricular activity and that carries expense, than i don't think it's unreasonable to ask for them both to commit to paying for it - but i don't deem that "child support" as such - i deem it to be paying for extra curricular activities.
child support is to help, within each parents means, for the essentials of raising a child. extra curricular activities are nice, and yes, they can help developmentally - but there are many children both from broken homes and from stable two parent families that simply don't engage in extra curricular activities - whether it be due to time or financial constraints. they are not an essential part of life (and yes, i know some people will want to argue this - but they are NOT essential - they are a want, not a need)
if it is only one parent wanting for the child to engage in a certain activity, then i dont' think it should be expected for both to foot the bill. this is just my personal opinion. due to location, my DD will not be able to engage in many, if any, extra curricular activities. as her parent, i won't let that disadvantage her. we simply don't have access to anything without ridiculous travel and expense. she will have to grow up knowing that she can't do everything she wants because its' not viable. i don't think it's a bad thing for children to learn from a young age that there are limitations to what they can do, that money doesn't grow on trees yada yada yada.
my dad was unemployed for most of my childhood due to health reasons. we couldn't afford extra curriculars all the time - i don't think i turned out bad for not being able to do all the different activities my friends did!
I agree with BG...
I disagree sorry Hollo. I think that CS is covering food, clothing, housing, utilities & paying for the time that a Mother or Father if they have residential care of the child dedicate to a child.i dont think thats what the original post was asking about though. i think she was just asking if she can expect her X to contribute half of extra-curricular activites even though he is paying his child support.
in my opinion, i dont think so. just because he is paying what he is meant to pay. if he had a big income he would be paying more and then there would be enough money to pay for the extra-curriculas without extra help.
if he is not making a whole lot of money and only paying a small amount of child support its because he cant afford to pay anymore than he is, (he needs to be able to pay his own bills etc too).
in my situation (living with my partner) we dont have enough money pooled to take our kids to swimming lessons etc so we just dont do it. its a shame cause i would love them to be able to do that.
so i guess what i am saying is, if she cant afford to do the extra-curriculars without help then she may have to bite the bullet and not do em at all. it sux though.
In my situation my children's father has a high income. They go to dancing, attend an independent school, play netball, learn guitar, marimba, football, cricket, yoga, art.
The amount of CS helps to cover that. However, it doesn't cover it. Because it costs. If this is about what's best for the children (which it is supposed to be) then it's best for the children to be able to do all the activities that they always have - regardless of the children's parents decision to not be together.
I think it is fair and reasonable for the costs of extra activities to be halved. I have girlfriends who work full time careers and raise their kids alone and receive zilch because the ex partner earns a lower income. They pay for it all with little left over.
MY ex husband has more available excess income now than he has had for 16 years! But if my kids want to do anything extra he won't pay half. Because: "I pay what I am supposed to"...
This then isn't about kids. It's about one party making a judgement that x "should" be enough money.
We all have different values about what money should be spent on. I value education and learning & happily pay for my children's opportunity to learn and be exposed to different experiences. For others it might be nice holidays (which by the way I don't believe are a luxury - though it's been a dang long time since I personally have had one!), it might be creating a beautiful garden and buying plants to educate that way with their kids, this is about different ideas about what is meaningful. If two people could really be on the same page about spending money perhaps they wouldnt be apart!
But I have not seen an unfair amoutn of CS paid to any woman actually. I just see different perspectives of how it's okay to spend that money...
If I was to partner with a man who had an ex partner and kids - personally I would want to support her as much as possible. Because supporting the Mama supports the children... Showing someone through either payment, time off, kind deeds that they are valuable and respected is the BEST thing for kids!
I find it really really distasteful when there is not acknowledgement of the fact that CS does not cover the basics let alone the extras...
The people who lose out are the kids.
BellyBelly Member
i dont think this topic is ever going to be something that we will all agree on. its gonna start going round in circles soon. its just a really complex, emotional and varied from situation to situation. i guess it is something that the individuals need to come to an agreement with on their own.
i have to agree though that of course it should be about the children and their best interests. but like i also said, having to miss out on ballet or some other extra curricular activity is sometimes a fact of life for all family make-ups (mine included and i am living with my partner). this doesnt necessarily mean that the kids are losing out.. if that is so my kids are losing out because we cant afford to send them to swimming lessons.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks