My child support story
My ex-wife decided to divorce me in April of 2006.
Nothing I said or did could change her mind. There was no abuse, or infidelity; just
differences and mistakes. After 10 years of marriage she chose to break her vow of
"til death do us part".
Over the course of the next few months, she and I
talked/fought about how the divorce would be settled. One of the topics was child
support. I did some research on general/Minnesota child support laws to see how
child support would affect me. I soon realized that the child support laws in effect
at the time would require me to pay out the same large amount of support regardless if I
had no custody of my kids or custody of them half of the time. Obviously that's not
at all fair. The support should be in relation to the amount of parenting time that
I and my ex were spending with the children.
Fortunately for me, in 2007 the laws would be updated to
adjust child support taking into account the percentage of visitation time each parent
would have (similar to the Hortis-Valento formula). This would decrease the amount
of support I would have to pay considerably. I heard that a lot of recently
divorcing couples were setting their child support obligations according to the new rules
already and I talked with my ex-wife about doing the same. I worked out a deal with
my employer to allow me to switch shifts every other week (from 2nd shift (evenings) to
1st shift (daytime)) so that I could have physical custody of my kids 50% of the time
(when I worked dayshift). Once again, I was very fortunate that my employer allowed
me special treatment to work this unusual workshift. Most people aren't so lucky.
My ex-wife and I eventually came to an agreement on child support payments. I
would pay her $50 per week (which was about 70% of the recommended guidelines) and then
70% of any costs associated with the children (for example, medical bills, clothing,
etc.). She would pay the remaining 30% of those bills. I chose to do it this
way because it routed the money I was giving her more directly towards the support of my
kids, and not so much my soon-to-be ex-wife. The reason that "I" end up
with the child support obligation (even though we agreed on 50% custody) is because I earn
about 3 times as much money as my ex-wife.
In September of 2006, the divorce was finalized and the
child support obligation went into effect.
However, I still wasn't happy with child support for several reasons, and I'll list some
of the reasons here:
KEEP IN MIND THAT THE REMAINING ARGUMENTS ON THIS PAGE ARE
FOR A 50/50 CUSTODY SITUATION.
1. My wife was the person who wanted to end the marriage,
not I. I didn't feel that she should 'benefit' from leaving me by now receiving
child support payments from me. If she chose to no longer be married and to be on
her own, then I felt that she should TRULY BE ON HER OWN and support herself, the same as
I would have to do. She was supporting herself before we met, she could certainly
support herself after we split. Now, you might argue that the child support is FOR
THE CHILDREN, but, well, I argue that point later...
2. I have 50% custody of my kids (both legal and physical). When I have custody of
them, I do my part of supporting our kids (housing them, caring for them, helping them
with homework, financially supporting them, playing with them, etc., etc.). I'm holding up
my end of the parenting obligation. However I'm also doing more than my part by
helping my ex-wife support the children when she has custody of them. Shouldn't each
parent be responsible for their 50%? Shouldn't they have to hold their own? I
don't believe that I should have to make up the difference.
3. My ex-wife immediately started seeing another man and he
moved in with her at her new apartment. Now legally, this isn't a problem, but
morally, I fight with this every day. Since there are no limitations on what child
support funds are spent on (not in MN anyways) this new guy in the picture as well as my
ex-wife can spend MY MONEY any way they please. They don't even have to spend it on
the children. I may be paying for their dinner night out bill once a week for all I
know. I'm helping to support both of their smoking habits, I'm sure (which
incidentally, doesn't help my children in any way; if anything, it hurts them). How
would you like to share your money with the guy that stole your wife?
4. Keep in mind that my ex only has 50% custody, not
100%. She has potentially the same amount of time available to her to work as I do.
My ex holds a part time job averaging 25-35 hours per week. I hold a 50 hour
per week job. These are not exaggerated work weeks. It's her choice to work
where she does. It's my choice to work where I do. I'm paying her child
support because of the huge differences in our incomes. The difference doesn't
really bother me. If she wants a low paying job, then so be it. The problem I
have with the system is that she doesn't have to hold a full time job or even work at
all! Since she's got a live-in partner to help pay the bills, she doesn't need to
work that much, if at all. Who makes up the difference? ME, OF COURSE. Child
support is only concerned with the parents, not any other contributing household members
(MN Statute 518A.29(f)). Why should I pay MORE because she chooses to work
less? Shouldn't BOTH PARENTS SUPPORT THEIR CHILDREN? Custodial mothers
receiving child support have argued this for years! Guess what, I'm a custodial
parent too! Where's MY support? I'm not saying that we necessarily have to
take into account the boyfriends income, but we must at least take into account the fact
that my ex isn't working as much BECAUSE of the live-in boyfriend. My child support
obligation should reflect that. Now one might argue that support could be based off
of my ex's 'potential' income, but that leads me into the next problem...
5. The new laws can adjust the parents support obligations
based on 'potential' income. This is actually though a ludicrous idea. For
one, my ex-wife could 'potentially' earn more money than I do. Seriously, what's
stopping her from doing so? All she has to do is apply herself (get a better
education if necessary, seek a better paying job, etc.) She could be paying ME child
support. Do you think that I could actually argue that point in court though?
Who determines what a person can potentially earn? I bet if I went to court and
tried to argue that my ex could perform the same job as my brother, who doesn't even have
a high-school diploma, and is earning nearly as much money as I am, that my argument
wouldn't go very far. The court would come up with some ridiculous reason why she
couldn't or shouldn't do it. Or imagine if my ex tried to claim that "I"
wasn't earning MY POTENTIAL. What would the limit be?
So, as I've said, the whole potential income idea is just plain ludicrous. There are
no limits to what a person could 'potentially' earn and therefore is no way to set a
standard.
Now some of you out there might argue that the $50 per week
I pay is very little child support to be bitching about. In a situation where
one parent has 100% custody, yeah, that wouldn't be a whole lot of money, but in a
situation like mine where each parent has 50%, in my opinion, money shouldn't even be
exchanged. As I once said to my ex-wife; "Why don't you start paying ME $50 per
week and see if you still think that it's not much money". That's an extra car
payment every month. Money isn't free. It has to be earned. It's always
easy to be the recipient of money.
I'd like to see the child support laws changed. I'd
like to see a new formula for figuring out child support where neither parent pays support
at 50/50 custody and obligations are based on different criteria than gross income, or
'potential' income.
Read about some of the ways that the system has tried to
screw me over on my Screw Ron page.
Back to top |
Laws