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 in a bit of an awkward situation. My ex husband and I were married for 12 years and have a 6 year old daughter and 4 year old son. Though we got divorced it wasn't due to abuse or anything of the sort, we just had different paths. I have a much better job than him, I am white collar and my ex husband is blue collar. Nothing wrong with that at all, just that I do make significantly more than him. Well during our divorced I requested I didn't want any child support because he still is in their lives and does things with them but doesn't have much money, so even CS really cuts into what he gets. It was declined and my ex was forced to pay anyway; $700 a month!
Well he can pay it but after that and what he pays for his apartment, food and other misc things he doesn't have much left especially to do something with the kids.
So I started just giving him back his CS because I don't need or want it and he needs the money to go take the kids out for fun.
It's ridiculous that even when you DON'T want CS you HAVE to get it regardless of how it may negatively affect others. So my question is, is there anything legally wrong with this? In a way I AM using it to support our children by letting him have the money to do things in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with what you are doing, legally or otherwise. When my husband and I divorced, he gave me more money than he was legally obligated by the state. He did it so the kids would be taken care of. Just because the divorce decree states something, it doesn't mean you must follow it, unless one parent objects.
No, There is nothing wrong with that, You can Gift Money (Up to $14K a Year tax free) to anyone you want. If you want to give him a gift of $700/month you can. Its "Your" money.
But Please DON'T stop him paying you, that could have problems with the courts later on, if he needs to prove he payed his child support.
Also If you do it, he has to be able to count on it, If he goes and get a nicer place to live, so when the Kids come over they won't he on the Sofa in a small apartment. In a questionable neighborhood.
I don't see a problem with you giving him the money. The court did decide that he could afford to pay that which is a good thing. Should your circumstances change in the future, the CS would be in place. Circumstances can change for anyone and, frankly, I am tired of my tax dollars supporting other people's kids!
Thanks everyone, I actually did try to plead the case to the judge that if he pays CS he will have very little left over to do anything with the kids but the judge didn't care. Amazing how easy it could have been for me to really screw him over if I wanted, alimony was even offered but was able to decline that. Isn't this system supposed to be fair? It's not even that me making more money is new, ever since we got married I always made a lot more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse
I don't see a problem with you giving him the money. The court did decide that he could afford to pay that which is a good thing. Should your circumstances change in the future, the CS would be in place. Circumstances can change for anyone and, frankly, I am tired of my tax dollars supporting other people's kids!
No, it isn't a good thing. After taxes my ex husband only gets $1200 a month. So after the ridiculously expensive CS that greatly affects him he has to pay his apt and water/electric which takes almost all away.
The system was originally indended to be fair for the circumstances that existed when it was originated. As with any bureaucracy as the times change it stubbornly refuses to change with them. It's now more punitive than equitable and often seems oriented towards aggressive notions of social justice.
Thanks everyone, I actually did try to plead the case to the judge that if he pays CS he will have very little left over to do anything with the kids but the judge didn't care. Amazing how easy it could have been for me to really screw him over if I wanted,
alimony was even offered but was able to decline that. Isn't this system supposed to be fair? It's not even that me making more money is new, ever since we got married I always made a lot more.
It depends on the state.
In my state, for at least several decades, in the case of divorce, and the wife made more money than the husband she may be required to pay him alimony.
I know a case where the wife had to pay years of alimony to her dead beat ex-husband who was basically "too lazy" to work. In addition, she received absolutely no child support from him even though she had primary custody of the children. After paying off all of his credit card bills in the divorce, and paying the alimony to her ex-husband she barely had enough to support herself and their children.
So, not all states are like your state.
Also, in some states it is a certain percentage of the non-custodial parents income, X% for one child, XX% for two children, etc. set by law.
A little off topic, but how come we have rights for women in this aspect, but men are thrown under the bus? As one woman has posted, she could have screwed him over if she wanted. These men that are screwed turn to drugs and suicide. I hopersonally everyone can agree that alimony and child support needs to be treated fairly case by case.
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.
