What does Child Support Cover the cost of?

[Pandora]

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
...
it's a dis-incentive for primary carers to do the right thing by their family and go out and work

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.

[2CheekyMonkeys]

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.

[briggsy's girl]

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!

[Inanna]

I agree with BG...

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.

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.

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.

[2CheekyMonkeys]

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.

[Inanna]

Absolutely I agree that we all have things to miss out on. What is really hard is when a child has an aptitude for something & it can't be managed (cost wise). It is really disturbing for any parent. It is absolutely necessary for most children to have to miss out on something - & of course that's normal too.

But unfortunately the decision often isn't made based on what's best for the child but rather than on what's judged as being "over and above what is deemed has to be paid". We all know that it's hard to juggle the finances. We all have to. My children now don't do many of their activitites as I just can't afford it any more. I find that incredibly sad for them & for me to watch it I feel sad. But it's a reality. I just don't think it's a reality that should happen when it could be split down the middle.

I know this is emotional and we all have our places & experiences that we are coming from. But I can only speak from what I have seen over the years with friends & what I have experienced now with my children's father...

[Peg]

I just don't think it's a reality that should happen when it could be split down the middle.

Splitting the kids expenses right down the middle may seem like a good way of ensuring that the ex is making a fair contribution

but then the problem would be that the maintenance money could not go on things such as rent and food bills or petrol or car rego or insurance...

the way it is now is that the primary carer can determine where the money will be spent which is really the best option because needs may change from month to month.

[Inanna]

I believe you may have misunderstood Peg...

I mean the extra expenses. The extra things that all kids need & all single Mamas struggle to survive.

I think if it's your kids a non residential parent should strive to get past the Marriage and focus on the kids. What is right for them? They want to dance, draw, play netball... Let's halve it so she/he can have that experience.

Kids cost money. It's not a finite amount and it changes.

The CS system is so difficult to work out for Ms Average & I have to say its very often unfair to the kids.

[Inertia]

I guess this is why separation and divorce are not the best option and probably should be avoided... much like we are encouraged to avoid having a c-section over a natural birth

Woah! You are more than welcome to my Ex! I am fair sure that separation and divorce was the best option.

But a fair contribution doesnt include paying the mums rent and food bills and trips to the salon.

but then the problem would be that the maintenance money could not go on things such as rent and food bills or petrol or car rego or insurance...

Um... me and my kids don't live in separate houses. My rent is their rent too.

I find it curious that society (not aimed at anyone in this thread) thinks it okay to question how a single Mama spends her dosh... "She's out drinking", "she had a new dress", "things can't be too tough"... Yet, the ex partner pops a 2 carot diamond on the finger of the next "lucky" lady and "that's lovely he's found happiness again"...

Do you get what I mean? Single Mums seem to need to explain and justify. I think we have to remember that there for the Grace of God (*insert deity) go most of us... Sometimes life throws a few curve balls and we are reminded of how difficult the other side of the fence actually is.

I have to spread the love, Inanna. Will be back when I have to rep you for this though because it is spot on.

So what if we go to the Salon? I can't afford to and cut my own hair because my kids come first, but if I could, then the pitiable $26 per month my ex gives me for our two kids wouldnt even cover a simple haircut. He can get one though - wont be questioned. Just because he pays maintenance, does not mean it goes on things for mum. For ANY mother. She has to pay rent, buy food and pay expenses too. Just because she is sitting in the salon that afternoon, does not mean she hasnt already spent his maintenance on their kids!

[Peg]

I believe you may have misunderstood Peg...

I mean the extra expenses. The extra things that all kids need & all single Mamas struggle to survive.

I think if it's your kids a non residential parent should strive to get past the Marriage and focus on the kids. What is right for them? They want to dance, draw, play netball... Let's halve it so she/he can have that experience.

Kids cost money. It's not a finite amount and it changes.

The CS system is so difficult to work out for Ms Average & I have to say its very often unfair to the kids.

i see what you're saying, and it would be great if kids could do the extra activities and even better if the ex pays half of them.... but as mentioned by briggsys girl and hollo, they are not necessities of raising kids. Their learning experience & social life will definately be enhanced by them, but they get the same opportunities at school on a smaller scale.

The necessities are things that kids need such as shoes, clothes, school, medications, food....these are the things they need the most. I agree that rent would fall into that category, but i dont think its fair to expect the ex to pay for it. Once couples split, they each go their separate ways and live in separate dwellings so I dont think its reasonable to expect him/her to pay for the others rent.

but thats the good thing about CS, the carer gets the money and can use it on what ever they need to use it on at the time. There is no restriction on how its used so long as its going to where its needed.

[AwesomeFoursome]

Just my POV from the other side.

Not all second wifes have a 2 carot diamond on their finger. Not all EXs can afford to contribute half of extra-curricular activites. Dh is paying crap all CS atm because he loss his job and is getting crap all money on centrelink. He is not paying a small amount of child support because he wants to be an a-hole, its because he cant afford to pay anymore than he is. Even though his ex-wife tells everyone its because his an a-hole and he doesn't care about his kids and he won't give her money for this or that. When coming out of woolies a couple of weeks ago one of her friends came up and abused him for not giving her money for her to visit her parents . If he had a big income he would be paying more. We don't go out, don't drink, don't smoke, don't go to the Salon, I cut dh's hair at home, my kids don't do extra activities, we don't buy new clothes because we can't afford it. We have to pay rent, buy food and pay bills too and we barely have enough for that. If it means feeding my children and having a roof over their head and a light at night or dsds doing ballet, soccer, swimming and giving ex-wife money when she wants it, sorry but the first is always going to win out. His ex-wife doesn't pay rent, can afford to smoke cigarettes, drink, buy pot, she can pay to see her parents herself.

[sweetpea678]

From a mum on both sides, my dh pays cs to his ex and i recieve childsupport. My ex is a shocker with paying and is always behind, though my now dh pays on time everytime, and pay extra if needed for school excursions etc, I don't begrudge that at all. My ex doesn't pay anymore than he has to I even have to supply the clothes etc for the girls go to stay with him.

To me childsupport is for the everyday stuff, food, clothes, shelter, electricy and gas etc, as this is what kids need to survive, extra curricula activities are a bonus.

[~clover~]

Peg - Sorry I have a few questions.

I would like to know why CS shouldn't be put towards rent if needed? Yes the parties have seperated, but a one bedroom flat can be alot cheaper than a 3 bedroom home needed for the average family. Sure its her choice to live in a 3 bedroom home over a 1 bedroom flat, but would it be fair to expect her to live in a tiny flat just because that extra $50 a week she needs is coming from CS? Should she say no to the house & yard just because the CS shouldn't be used for that?

& why shouldn't it be put towards petrol, rego & car insurance? These are all needed for children. Some people do not have the luxury of public transport. I mean NO access to public transport at all. If that little bit of CS put petrol in her car so she can do some shopping so what?

&, lastly, if she's recieved her $500 for the week, paid $250 rent, spent $200 on food, paid $30 off her electricity bill & $20 off school fees, there's nothing left. All the responsibilities are taken care of, its been 18 months since she had a hair cut, so when her CS came in she used that for a hair cut & lunch with a friend. So what? Should she have used her own money for that? Then been short for the shopping, but gone & bought the kids a pair of new shoes each, even though they didn't need them just because thats what CS is meant to be used for?

All the single mum's I know have their centrelink income every week. They use that every week for the basics, because that money IS guaranteed to be there every week. If they are lucky enough to recieve CS that week, it goes on extra's. Taking the kids out to lunch (which would include using it for her lunch coz her money is already gone), buying them some clothes they need, but then she would have to use some to put petrol in her car to get to the shops.

As long as the basic necessities are covered & the kids have what they need, who cares where that particular money goes? I know there are women who get less centrelink, because of the amount of CS they get. If the ex is a high earner, she could be getting $500 a week in CS, then only $100 from centrelink (I know, rediculus amounts, just an example), but what then. Is she supposed to use the CS to cover all living expenses? Or put her young children in day care, get a full time job, lose more money from CS & centrelink & not have the choice of being home with her children just because she it isn't fair for her to use the CS money to live.

[shellbell3]

I don't think its unreasonable to ask for half of extra activities. I understand some men just cannot afford it, ok fair enough but the reason of "I don't have to pay for that" bugs me. Of course you don't have to but we are talking about your kids and it would be good for them if they can do things they enjoy.
Growing up yes my parents were together but we missed out on so much as my dad thought if he could pay bills and mortagage that meant the rest could go to himself meanwhile mum had to clothe, pay for school things excursions, pocket money etc on the tiny amount she got from family assistance, so while it is different in a way, I do understand it is dissapointing for a child to not be able to do all these things and have to miss out all the time just because he "doesnt have to pay"

[Inanna]

Mum my goodness what an amazingly compassionate sister you have. It just made my heart leap to read how kind she has been...

You're experience is that of many women that it doesn't cover the basics. And a previous poster mentioned something very relevant to me. Because my children's father is a high income earner I get the minimum FT. There is absolutely no way I could afford to live on that... So that is a dilemma! Because clearly some of that is to pay mortgage, car expenses etc!

It's not an easy path - but it's our path none the less & I figure I will do it as best I can!

MY children's father won't even contribute to the expenses necessary to transport Immy to Brisbane and back & help pay for therapy... Why? Because he pays what he should... And the clanger... "everyone has a chromosomal abnormality - I don't know what she's on about"....

It's a challenge not getting bitter & to let it go. I work hard at doing that & mostly I succeed...

[Amity]

I'm sorry, I can't get involved in this one because I'm going to blow my socks off... All I can say is the system is not always fair.

[Peg]

Divvy, i think in circumstances where the carer doesnt get any CS it is worthwile having a an agreed parenting plan in place which is based on the childs expenses, ie school fees, clothes, excursions, medical, child care etc

of course both parties have to agree and be willing to abide by it, but thats why its called an 'agreement' because its an arrangement that both parents are happy with.

Clover, everything you've stated is exactly what i've also said...the CS can be used wherever the carer needs it to go whether its rent or food or bills...

[knight]

Is there a way to see what your child support goes too? I pay my support every week plus half of the school expenses etc , but i'm still asked for more money to cover other items and i always see my ex with her hair & nails done every week ( with no job ) and those things arnt cheap , i would really like to know where my money is spent on my son as i dont mind paying money for him to live better its just i dont want his money going towards her personal things