"Bob W" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Bob W" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]

.
.
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"jean paul sartre" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 14:37:37 -0700, teachrmama wrote:

You don't mention how much the mother earns. It makes a
difference.

"jean paul sartre" wrote in message
...
Hi, I have a question... Does anybody have an idea about this?

I live/work in Washington DC- I have two toddlers with a woman in
NY.
I
earn (before taxes) 51k a year.

We don't have a formal arrangements with the courts for child
support.
I send her 1k a month and I help out with medical expenses as they
show
up.
Last year the amount I sent her averaged to about 1300 a month.

Is this too much? Too little ? What would the courts find- what is
the
likelyhood they would order me to increase or decrease the
amount??


She earns very little. She works part time and moved in with her
mother.

Ok. Look on alllaw.com, at the child support calculators. You will
have
to
use the state the child lives in. It will show approximately what you
would
have to pay with a court order. I am not sure whether it includes
child
care into the calculation.

For what it's worth, courts NEVER order someone to pay less. In other
words,
they order a minimum; not a maximum.

Perhaps I'm unique, but I was ordered to pay less CS after the CS
guidelines were implemented. The irony was I had more income than when
the original CS order was made yet the modification of the CS order
using the new guidelines dropped the amount paid down about $150 per
month.

I have to admit the above is why I don't think the CS guidelines are
that unreasonable. But I did think paying CS, SS, and income taxes that
took 75% of my gross income was way over the top.

=================
I think it probably depends on what state you are in. Some states take
out way more than others. We were really rocked financially when my
husband got hit with CS and arrearages, but we survived. They tried to
force him to change to another insurance option at work that they thought
would be more convenient for his older daughter, but would have put all
of us over 2 hours from medical care. The attorneys where he worked
stepped in and told them no. If we had been hit with the cost of that
insurance (much more expensive), plus child care, on top of the CS order,
it would have wiped us out. The CS itself was doable, even though it was
far more per month than we spent on both of our daughters.

I was just making a point about how the CS guidelines helped me. Before
the guidelines were in existence the judges had a free shot to screw NCP
fathers. They didn't explain how they came up with the amounts ordered,
what incomes they used, etc. They just flipped out a bunch of numbers.
In fact, the only thing the judge in my case mentioned was the Lyin'
Lenore Weitzman line of BS about how I would recover very quickly in the
future. I read that to mean the judge knew she was screwing me in the
short-term under the assumption I would be okay in the future. Of course,
now we know the concept of men recovering financially very quickly after
divorce was based on erroneous research calculations by Weitzman and her
10 year cover-up and denials of the mistakes that cost a bunch of us big
dollars because the "recovery" demonstrated by her research calculations
was never real.

I know, Bob. I wasn't criticizing you.