Is child support fair...?

Question

I'm an advocate of taking care of children and I think child support was meant to insure that the child(ren) is financial stable, but sometimes really good guys involved in sour relationship suffer grately out of spite and a system. I think instead of taking a persons pay off top, they should take into account preexisting and residual bills dating back a certain amount of time, subtracted by the cost of living, and/ or take into account both parents income and the percentage that it would take to raise the child(ren). It shouldn't be a set percentage in my opinion. Because, if I can't afford a car, or to let alone catch the bus and feed myself, how am I able to maintain a job? I can't get to work because I can't afford a car or bus fare for a month and I can't afford to take care of myself. FYI, I am happily married w/ two kids. I just had this on my mind and I have a dear friend that's going through similiar situations. God Bless!!

Ok for the few rude people, lets use some common sense. First of all we know that children comes first. I have two as I mentioned and would die a thousand deaths for both them and my wife. However, let's look realistically at this issue. If I can't afford to get back and forth to work because child support is taking the overwhelming majority of my check to include health care, dental, fed and state tax, how can I maintain a job to continue support? Remember, cause and effect! I'm ordered to pay "X" amount of dollars, so I can't afford a car and or apartment along with monthly necciesities(i.e food, clothes, water ,light, electric bills) as a result, I lose my job which in turn inable me to pay my obligation. So, does the child really benefit in this particular situation. It's almost like some vs none. I love kids and wish we had better parents, but I also wish this flawed system designed to in some way punish dead beats, hurts the real men/women. Take care

Answer 1

True the law is not always fair to all parties involved in a case. But on the other hand, from what you wrote, is it fair for the mom to try and raise the child on what she makes . When the kids probably was first born, both parents were together living happily ever after, with a dual income into one family and maybe a comfortable life. Then comes a divorce where the dual income one family is now being broken into a dual income dual family scene where there was once single bills,there are now double bills in utilitys, etc. Less many supporting two families now. Mom gets custody of the kids and has to support the once dual income single family basically on what she has. Thus the need for child support. Really true is the fact that support may not be fair in that the court doesnt care how Dad does it just as long as he makes the payments, but worst yet is the fact the courts dont demand accountability of the funds, where mom could spend the funds as she pleases and the courts do nothing, especially if the funds dont go to the children as expected. Majority of the dads really do the best they can for fear of jail time if they fail, but it does come down to a matter of survival in most cases, and alot of dads unfortunately try to find a way to beat the system by whatever means possible. True dad is half responsible for the child in the first place and most take that responsiblitiy seriously but they still have to survive day to day and many give up any kind if life to do so, and it gets really impossible to do when they know the funds are supporting moms new car, boyfriend or whatever. This is why there should be accountability of the funds to make sure dads money is really helping raise the kids. So yes child support is mostly unfair and unjust but its the only system we have til someone comes up with a new thats better The courts should also back off on the severity of penalities of non payment on dads. Maybe someday. Thank you for letting me vent my opinion!

Answer 2

I think fathers have an obligation to support their children financially. But so does the mother. I don't think either should have to live in poverty....especially the children.

I think the best system would be that the kids are raised equally by both parents with equal financial responsibilities.

If it costs xx dollars to support a child per month....why shouldn't the parents share that cost equally? Both parents made that child, both decided to bring it into the world, both are or should raise that child. Why does one parent have to pay more based on income?

No where else in society do you pay based on percentage of income. If you eat a meal in a restaurant....do you pay based on your income? When you go to buy a washer and dryer....do you pay based on a percentage of your income? So if there is a set cost for raising a child....why isn't the cost split down the middle?

If both parents work full time, but based on job and education...one parent has only contributed 20% to the family income....why after a divorce to they get to leave with half? Both provided emotional support, both raised the children together......

Just my thoughts.....

Answer 3

I think it's fair that men have to pay it, I don't necessarily think the amount is fair. For a man that makes a great deal of money, I suppose the percentage table works pretty well even if they don't like it. For a man making minimum wage or just slightly over, no, it's almost impossible to support yourself that way.

Maybe a better system would be for the ex-spouses to come up with a *reasonable* figure that is mutually acceptable. If they can't come to an agreement on their own, have a judge look at both figures and then make a decision.

Answer 4

I'm not sure where you are in this world but here in Canada both salaries are taken into account and then an amount is arrived at.
It is assessed at the end of each year in accordance with the cost of living (raise).
I can tell, you are the father in this situation but I was the mother of a child with a dead beat dad. If the woman makes the same salary as the man it should be taken into account. But you went out and added more responsibilities to yourself after the divorce. Your choose to do this, in the situation you were in. So go ahead support them all now and stop moaning.

Answer 5

I think a lot of the time it is not fair. But going by what bills you have, may not be fair in all situations, because a person can claim certain things or start "paying" more in rent just so that they will not have the extra income to pay for their children. It is a difficult thing to decide how much someone should pay, but a lot of the time, there is not guaranteed way to make sure everything goes the way it is supposed to, so changing the laws will not do much. Unfortunate. But "justice" cannot always be just for everyone.

Answer 6

I think you are completely wrong. Pre-existing circumstances should be taken into account before people start having sex. Once the child is born there is no more important obligation. Why should the child suffer just because the parent is incompetant or irresponsable or just not involved. I see your happily married with two kids and that's great. Still, there's got to be some personal responsability involved with children.

Answer 7

I believe that the best advise I can give you is the advice I give all young people. Are not willing to give up your paycheck on a first date? If not, then dont have unprotected sex. Children are not mistakes and need to be taken care of. No they dont need stipends for McDonalds every night and they are not a means to get your hair and nails done. But why do people look for any loop hole to get out of support when the best way is to avoid it. You should be respondsible enough to distinguish between a booty call and a baby mamma. If you cant, then you deserve to be paying through the head you allowed to make the desicion to sleep with her.

Answer 8

No, it's not fair. My husband pays out the butt for his 12 year old son.....his ex constantly tries to pull one over on him....she expects money for every little thing that the support should be going towards. Meanwhile, after paying support, he hardly brought home enough to make ends meet from paycheck to paycheck and often had to borrow money to keep his head above water, before we got married. When they decided on what he would pay for support , they counted his overtime. Well, overtime isn't guaranteed, so on the weeks he doesn't have overtime (which is often), we are strapped. The courts seem to be all about the mother and couldn't care less if the father can even pay his own rent/utilities/etc to live day to day. Meanwhile, the mother gets all this money to put towards her house/car payments (yes, it is supposed to go to the child, however, in our situation, it doesn't - there is no savings for him except what we have saved for him.) They even count part of child support as being his 'share' of the electric/gas/etc bills....um, were they planning on sitting around in the dark if he wasn't around?! When you have a child, you don't expect them to pay for their share of utilities, so why would you when the parents aren't together? Greed.

Answer 9

Child support is definitely not fair for the person who does not have physical custody of the child.In the state that I live in it's betwween 17-23%.Does it really take a $1000/month to raise a child if the other parent is working? Both parents income should be used to determine child support.

Answer 10

I believe that anyone who has children should support them, but to answer your question in general.........NO, I don't think child support is fair. I am a mother of 2 boys and divorced from their father I might add, but I allowed his child support to be reduced in court because he has to live to. I agree that a man should pay his part and help with his children, but ask yourself if this is fair........If you make, oh let's say $1000.00 a week and the next guy makes $300.00 a week.......does it take more money to support the children of the man who makes more money........no, it doesn't, but he has to pay a lot more money because he makes more..........that is BS......there should be a set amount that all fathers pay. Just because one man makes more money than the next man does doesn't mean it cost more money to raise his kids. It isn't fair to men and I feel for you guys. And child support is suppose to support the child, not support the ex with fancy homes, cars, clothes, etc......and unfortunately, that is what it is used for alot of times.