College costs should NOT be addressed by any court.

The courts don't make married folks pay for their childrens schooling, so why should this even be addressed in a divorce decree.

Most college students are adults when they go off to college, so if they want the NCP to pay, let them make the case.

My mom did not pay for me to go to college, I DID. I earned the money and the scholarships to go to a to 20 ranked school in the US.

I learned a lot, and not just in college. For the court to order me to pay for school for my daughter would be to deprive me of a learning tool for my daughter.

I personally think the courts should stay out of the collage funding issue.

Besides, the $1K/month that my ex-wife gets for one child provide more than enough for her to put back a lot of cash if she wants to pay for her schooling.

My ex-wife didn't need to buy a new car when her 50K mile almost paid for, never ever broken down 4year old minivan was just fine. Instead, she decided to go into more debt for a new VW Beetle.

Our home with a mortgage payment of $800/month was just fine. She didn't need to pick a luxury apartment that is now over $1200/month.

The problem with the CS system is that NCP often have to give money to a cheating former spouse and have no say over how that money is used.

I have no problem supporting my daughter. I have a problem with giving the money to a woman who has proven herself not trustworthy.

Wanna give guys a fair shake in the custody "battle?" Make infidelity count.

As we've read here before over 70% of divorces are filed by women. Women are unfaithful in about 40% of marriages and men in 60% of them. That means there are more women filing for divorce than there are unfaithful husbands, even if every unfaithful husband was divorced by his wife. We know from these boards that many women want to save their marriages.

So I think a good start would be for fidelity to count heavily in the custody decision. If one can't be trusted to keep their vows with an adult spouse, how can we possibly trust that person to raise and set a good example for a child?

T

Nellie,
If you don't understand how wrong it is to exclude any child from being taken care of, then I feel for you. When did anyone say that it was okay to not provide for the children born first?? Where did you get that? The law was changed to include alll children, equally. There isn't a law that could be written to create money where the parents don't earn enough to cover both households when there is a divorce. There are people who would argue that you were negligent in bearing 6 children when you personally didn't have the resources to take care of them alone. As far as your ex not working...didn't they impute his wages anyway? Our state is setup that way so in cases where one parent does exactly as you described (marries well and stops working) they STILL have to pay cs based upon what they are capable of making and have made in the past.

"Why did the guy even have another kid without decent medical insurance?

What's so bad about paying $20K a year for ONE kid to go to college? He's got many years to save for the next one"

First, not all parents agree that they owe a college eduation to their children. My husband and I didn't get one from the parents, neither did my ex. Second, the guy does have "decent medical insurance". Even good insurance leaves people in the poor house with enough surgeries!! What an unfeeling statement! There is no more to the story. And college for the second child, who knows if this child will live that long? It's not looking good. Oh and your calculation is wrong. It was much higher than 20K.

If your state had a law that mandates college expenses, your ex would have never gotten out of it. Judges don't make laws, they just enforce them.

"The courts don't make married folks pay for their childrens schooling, so why should this even be addressed in a divorce decree."

I've said this a million times myself! Why are divorced parents "made" to do things that married ones are not? It just plain wrong. The government has overstepped their bounds.

I finally got it all...

Just waiting to hear new husbands of 1st wifes lobbying/changing CS law, to get more CS from the 1st husbands...
From the same reason...




<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

EE, I am so glad you are not my X.
"As we've read here before over 70% of divorces are filed by women."
In many cases, like mine, the X left and didn't bother to clean up his mess. Women file to protect themselves and their children financially, and to get the X to pay some support.

You have made some very sexist comments on this board. If you are an angry X, take it out on others. Most mothers on this board are just trying to do the best they can for their children and provide a good lifestyle for them - not living the lavish life that you believe.

If your X is getting $1000/month, then she's in the minority. Every X paying CS complains no matter the amount, and you have no control over how it's used.

And I believe that children should not be deprived because one parent has screwed up. My children deserve to go to college and I believe that we are both responsible for helping the children pay when the time comes. College is far more expensive now than when I went to school, and I believe the investment is worth it. My X should help our children cover college costs (perhaps not all of it) because it was not the children's choice that he choose to live separately and force us to incur two household costs. And trust me, I can't afford to save on the $300/mo I get for two kids. Child support covers the expenses incurred while raising the children.

EE, I'm guessing you're the type who refuses to pay any school expenses and blames your X for everything. Please do us a favor, stay out of the dating pool.

Newly, it is not just him (he was just sincere here), it’s almost any ncp that thinks so, unfortunately.
E.g. I receive $300 per month as CS, and the mortgage rate on the house I bought for my son and me after D is $1,200 per month (plus all other bills), yet my X sometimes says – it’s easy for you to have that house, you have two income. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />
Two weeks ago I paid $230 for 5 kids shows in the theatre!!!

Only once, in all my life time, I heard from a ncp (a friend of mine) to say/think that CS goes to THEIR child, for they have to eat and have proper clothing, and safe home, and many other expenses... Vs. the rest of them thinking that CS is just some additional expense for their X’s make-up/whatever else…

I notice that 2nd wives have the same tendency, OWs too…

Newly,

I guess you don't know me very well.

It seem you are looking at me through your pain as well. But I don't know and it would be disrespctful for me to speculate. I've not made a single sexist comment. I have mentioned well documented facts and explained my situation, only to have you continue to kick at me for whatever reasons. It would be disrespectful for me to speculate why.

I don't seek to deprive my daughter, in fact, I want her to have the very same opportunity as I did. In my opinion, part of what made me successful in the working world is learning to do it myself.

My personal belief is that for mom and dad to pay for college robs a child of a great opportunity to learn. I contend that giving your child a boundaryless "free ride" is the real deprivation.

I too believe the investment is worth it. I want to a top ranked school, graduated in 1987 and paid tuition, books and fees that are still in line with Ivy League schools today.

If you read here, I've owned plenty of what I did wrong, and do my best to ensure that my daughter does not pay the price for the mistakes both me and my ex-wife made.

I pay a lot of school expenses, I buy my daughters school supplies, pay for 1/2 of the school lunches to the school in advance to ensure she does not go hungry (even though this is supposed to be covered by the CS I pay to her mother.)

I voluntarily paid CS to my WW when the divorce was on-going, sought and still seek more time with my daughter.

I will respectfully ask that you leave your DJ's about me off this board. If you know a fact, share it. If you have speculation, please drop it, because it is very disrespctful.

I didn't say most mother were living lavishly, I gave one specific example about MY ex-wife and YOU took it to mean that all moms were on the gravy train.

The facts are:

More women file for divorce than there are unfaithful husbands.
Fewer husbands file for divorce than there are unfaithful wives.
Some ex-husbands are deadbeats and refuse to support their children.
Some ex-husbands love their children and seek to support them. They may not trust their ex-wives, but they love their children.
Some ex-wives are on the gravy train.
Some ex-wifes are just trying to get by.
Some ex-husbands (NCP's) feel like an ATM machine. The courts and the CP's want our money, but they don't want us to be part of our child's day to day life and the decisions that go with that.

I'm sorry you only get $300/month for your two kids. I don't see how that is my fault or the fault of any ex-husband but yours.

I pray that we both can find peace in our scenarios. I've learned a lot about single moms. Of course I already knew alot about single moms since my mom was abandoned by my dad before I was even born.

I may not trust my ex-wife, but I will do everything I can do to make sure my daughter does not feel abandoned by me.

T

Oh, one more thing.

I requested 50/50 parenting time and still offered to pay CS as if my ex-WW had sole custody.

Yeah, I'm a complaining dad who doesn't want to support my child. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Let's get this fact clear. I am very happy to support my daughter.

I don't trust my ex-wife. She left with 70K in debts and we simply disagree on how to spend money. Since she left, I paid off about $40K of that debt while paying CS and my lawyer.

She is not spending OM's money, has a credit card in her name from his account, etc.

I don't believe all women are golddiggers, just a few.

Did I get ugly when all debts piled up? You bet, I was stressed, had AO's, and all sorts of DJ's of my own.

But none of that merited her having an affair and tearing apart our marriage.

Am I bitter and angry? You bet? Tell me, how angry would you be if your cheating ex-spouse got to walk away from the debt and take the child because he made 20% of what you made and was a specific gender?

I am careful not to assign my anger to anyone but her and the court system that allows such miscarriages of justice to continue.

T

Belonging,

You still don't understand. If you did you wouldn't have said this, "Just waiting to hear new husbands of 1st wifes lobbying/changing CS law, to get more CS from the 1st husbands...
From the same reason..."

That isn't possible. All children "count" now. There are no children excluded.

You just didn't get my sarcasm...


Btw, why wouldn't that be possible? That doesn't exclude any children.
Just cutting down some money for some of them... as your 'movement' does.

If someone can find a college in the United States that charges much more than 42,000 for tuition, room and board, please let me know. Yale, for example, is $41,000 for 2005-2006, and almost all the highly competitive colleges are in the same ballpark. I believe that parents ARE morally responsible for paying for their children's tuition, with the children contributing as well. If a child is under 24, colleges will not consider him emancipated except under very special circumstances, and his need-based financial aid will be a function of the parents' income. For parents who make a lot of money, telling your child that they have to pay for their own tuition is therefore equivalent to telling them they can not go to college.

Not only is it in the law, sharing of college expenses is specified in our separation agreement. I did ask the court to impute my H's income. However, the court decided that my H didn't have to pay, because he was "too old" to get another decent job - at the ripe old age of 51. I managed to go back to grad school and get a job, but he wasn't willing to invest any time or money in updating his skills.

We, as a family, had enough money to raise six kids. If he had died, we would have had enough, between social security and insurance. My being a stay at home after our sixth child was born was a mutual decision, and what LF said would mean that no one would have a right to be a stay at home parent even though both parties agreed. Had my H ever mentioned that he was planning to leave me in poverty with six kids, after talking me into leaving my career so that he could move and start his own business, do you think I would have been dumb enough to have had even one child with him?

When the NCP parent remarries and has another family he can not afford, someone is going to get scr**, and it should not be the kids from the first family. Society as a whole is responsible for making sure that no child goes hungry or without shelter. The children from the first family should not have to shoulder the burden of their NCP's future children.

I don't know about much more, but here is the deal for my alma mater

http://facts.wustl.edu/finances.htm

We will disagree about the moral obligations of a parent.

T

"My personal belief is that for mom and dad to pay for college robs a child of a great opportunity to learn. I contend that giving your child a boundaryless "free ride" is the real deprivation"

You are not alone. There are many married couples that feel the same way. That is why things like this should not be legislated. It is a parents personal choice as to what THEY feel is best for their child that in in line with THEIR beliefs.

Again, married parents are not held to this standard, why oh why are divorced parents?? Please explain that to me. Of course, most states do not legislate this...I know that if a parent ever decided to truly fight it, that it would be overturned because it IS illegal in every sense as the "child" is no longer a "child" in the legal sense that the language it exists in.

"Btw, why wouldn't that be possible? That doesn't exclude any children.
Just cutting down some money for some of them... as your 'movement' does."

Have you been reading anything I wrote? It is NOT POSSIBLE to lower cs just because a group wants that to happen!!! The cause was NOT to lower cs, but to make EVERY PARENT responsible for EVERY CHILD. Why is this such a tough concept for you?

Perhaps if I explain (short version) of how cs tables are created...data is gathered from a study in the state showing what "two parent" homes spend on children. That data is then put into a table by one of several standard mathematical methodologies used by economists. There is leway in this as some methodologies yeld lower numbers than others. Our state used the methodology that yelds higher numbers.


Nellie,
First, it is YOUR personal opinion only about college. We all know that anyone wanting to go to college CAN go, and without a dime from the parents. If you choose to pay for your children's college that is fine, your choice, but don't be so rude as to push your beliefs onto the world. In your situation it is in your DD and whatever is in there he should be made to uphold...no arugment there.

You personally did not have the abilities and resources to provide for 6 children that you brought into this world. Some people would call you terribly negligent. SS benefits aren't enought to raise children on. Geez, just ask anyone who is trying to do that!

300/month is not nearly enough for cs for one child, much less two! How are they calculating this? Do you make much more than your ex or does he have the children a lot?

Again, no child is excluded from the calculation. You keep bringing up "first children", in the eyes of the law in income shares states, there are only children, no order involved. Children are not "better" or "worse" because of their birth order. Surely you don't think that they are??

EE,
I personally know of MANY MANY men paying far more than $300 a month! In a couple of counties in our state it was NORMAL for awards of 4k to 8k/month. These women were living off of their children's money and did not work even though they were capable. The system was so corrupt it was sickening. Reminded me of "slave days", except every divorced man was a slave.

Nellie, I totally agree with you. And for EE in particular, even though he will refuse to contribute, his child will be hurt by his financial situation. If he makes a good amount of money that will be factored into financial aid calculations as if he is contributing, even though he refuses. I can't see how this is in the best interest of the children.

My undergraduate education was a bargain and I paid for it myself. I was lucky to be able to do that. Then as a graduate student, I taught in a university where the annual tuition was 4 times my total college costs. College will be a huge expense for us for our children - even if we don't pay for all of it. But, it is an investment in our children's future. I guess it just comes down to what is important to you. Educating my children, both academically and emotionally is high on my priority list. It is not for others. Too bad for their children.

EE your link has no references. Yes the costs are high, far higher now than when you went to school. But try getting financial aid these days. I, along with many others, benefited from the Reagan years.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

OK, then could you answer this:

E.G. A man get divorced, has income of $2,000 and pays $200/mth for a child from that first marriage plus $200 for extra expenses (schools, medical ets.).
He remarries in a couple of years, gets another child in that 2nd marriage - then what??
I understood You as - he now lives with the 2nd child and 2nd wife and gives the rest of money ($1,600) to that household), because he's (OF COURSE) responsible for the 2nd child too. Correct so far?
Now, the 2nd child needs more money. How/from where the 2nd wife and that man get more money for the 2nd child?

So?

"Correct so far?"

No...not even close. In order to give you an example I need the wages of all adults involved. Why are you only considering the "MAN'S" wages?? When two people bring a child into this world they are both financially responsible for that child...and should always consider how they will support that child should something happen to the marriage or the other parent! To not consider these things is completely assinine to say the least! What does the mother of the first child make? What does the mother of the second child make? Who pays the medical premium and how much is it? Are there special circumstances and deviations that need to be considered. There are tons to look at:

child care costs for working cp (give me $ amount)
special schooling
activities of any kind (music, sports, dance, art)
medical expenses beyon the premium
driving costs if at that age
driving costs to parent the child if they live far apart

These deviations are all child dependent and situational.

Additionally, how much time with each parent? 70/30, 20/80, 40/60?

Give me those figures and I'll give you the cs award...

"Now, the 2nd child needs more money. How/from where the 2nd wife and that man get more money for the 2nd child?"

Why does the second child "need" more money? Are they ill? Do they need special schooling because of a disability? What is the "need"?

I took these numbers as an EXAMPLE.
Let's assume, after all considerations you mentioned being taken, those are FINAL numbers a man has to pay after divorce.
Can you do that?


The same assumption, X time, CS as above.
CS is established, the guy accepts, pays it for x years, then he remarries, gets another child...


Whatever reason, take any you want, for this disscussion's sake.
Just answer - Where do you get money for those needs from?

You can't come up with valid numbers without all the information. The schedules are all based upon fairness to each child.

If the need for the second child is a valid one (illness or special schooling) then money would be reallocated to cover that. If it were only so that the child could have something or do something, it would be denied. The first child would never have activities or functions that they had been accustomed to taken away just because there was another child involved.

Reallocated from where???
From the first child's CS?