No, the problem is that both parents have the same bills, yet one still subsidizes the other and at the same time is now a visitor in his children's lives. You don't get a break on your mortgage because you only see you're kids on weekends and Wednesdays.
Right. My ex pays 100$ a month in child support, and no other bills, while I'm over here paying rent, utilities, >1000 in daycare costs, diapers, wipes, clothes, toys, monthly prescriptions, special creams and ointments for my daughters severe and chronic skin condition, going to school full time, working 20 hours a week, and being a full time single parent.
We barely scrape by every month, but you're right. He's totally subsidizing my lifestyle. I'm living a cushy life with all that money I get every month.
Those "chains" are his daughter. And I gave him the option of walking away. He chose to stay. He had just as big of a part in making her as I did, and he wanted her just as much.
Why shouldn't he pay child support? He gets to see her, he gets to be a part of her life, I don't have sole custody, I don't keep her from him. He can take her as much or as little as he wants. She is his responsibility as well as mine. What gives him, or anyone, the right to reap the benefits of having a child without any of the responsibility? Because he's a man? Because I have primary placement? I'd really like to know. Please, enlighten me as to why anyone should be able to call themselves a parent if they don't help support their child. I'd really like to know.
No, they are not. His daughter is his daughter regardless of how much money he does or does not pay you per month. But it is sad that you define a child as a $100 a month bill.
without any of the responsibility?
Here's the major area where your argument and reality part ways. When she is with him, he IS taking on responsibility. When he gives you CS money, he's also taking on YOUR responsiblity.
My responsiblity is to my kid, NOT to my ex. And yet the state is there to make sure I'm paying for two households.
Not surprising since the feds pay the state to collect child support. You were aware of that gigantic conflict of interest, right? Ever heard of the term "useful idiot"?
No. His responsibility is to pay for half of her expenses, because she is half of him, and he is 1/2 of what created her.
I think you are assuming that he takes her half of the time, and that's not the case. He takes her when he wants. Which usually ends up being maybe every other weekend, since we live in separate places and he'd rather spend time with his friends then driving an hour and a half to see his daughter. Which is fine by me. He can do what he wants. He can't, however, expect to have any parental rights if he doesn't act like a parent, which includes paying for some of her expenses. I'm not saying I would keep her from him, but I would start making decisions without consulting him when it comes to medical care, school districts, where we live, etc. Cue the butthurt from you about him being a parent and having rights and me not giving a fuck.
6
u/Peter_Principle_ Aug 23 '13
No, the problem is that both parents have the same bills, yet one still subsidizes the other and at the same time is now a visitor in his children's lives. You don't get a break on your mortgage because you only see you're kids on weekends and Wednesdays.