From: ssmith@xocolatl.com (Shannon Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: Re: Making a change
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 21:37:09 PDT
Distribution: world
Organization: Amethyst Systems

kaufmanj@UCS.ORST.EDU (John Kaufman) writes:

> True Joint custody: the idea that both parents have the responsibility of
>                     raising their children. "Visitation" is not parenting,
>                     children should be able to spend as much time as they
>                     want with either parent.

Likewise, each parent should put in their fair share of parenting. 
Right now, with a 2-year-old and a 1-year-old (just turned 1 a week
ago!) I am exhausted!  I am so very tired.... And yet, I can't say "I
can't afford to spend the energy on the kids, so I won't send the
energy check."  Parenting is sharing more than just financial
responsibility for kids, IMNSHO.

> Child support:      If we are to assume the legal system wants parents to
>                     share the finacial burden of children equally, then
>                     mothers should be able to show where their portion is
>                     going, not just claim its being used to house and feed
>                     the children. Child support levels need to be re-evaluate
>                     to get closer to levels that non-divorced parents spend o
>                     their children. Do parents in an intact family spend
>                     $1200 a month on three children for necessities? If so,
>                     there must be some families out there that make a hell og
>                     alot of money.
> \                   Fathers who are faithfull about keeping up child support
>                     should be given tax incentives to keep up the good work!
>                     The way the system is put together now, it encourages non
>                     support by placing extreme conditions on divorced fathers
>                     If I pay X dollars a month for child support when my
>                     children are with their mother, then shouldn't their
>                     mother (in all fairness) pay me X dollars a month when
>                     the children are living with me? If she can't do that,
>                     doesn't it imply that she is not putting up her share of
>                     the finacial burden when the children are in her care?

In my NSHO, everything you've said has enough merit to at least be
discussed.  I don't feel like dealing with the bookkeeping hassles of
accounting for every penny of child support, and yet I can see how it
might be squandered by others.

The sum of $1200/month for three children may sound like a lot, but
look--I have two children, and day care for both of them is going to
run in the neighborhood of $800-900 month.  Plus rent, utils, etc. 
It costs a lot more money to raise kids in two households than it
does to raise them in one.  *Everyone's* belt has to be tightened.

I agree that the parent with the kids is the parent who should be
receiving the support.  When the living situation changes, so should
the payment situation.  The exact arrangements should be left to the
parties involved, wherever possible.

I'm beginning to understand that *nothing* can be fair in this whole
broken-family arena.  Nothing.  But maybe, with a bit of work,
equitable is workable.

> I know these ideas and thoughts will cause controversy from both sides. I'm
> not trying to start flame wars, I am trying to get a feeling of where people
> stand on what is fair TO THE CHILDREN and to both parties who wish to parent.

I like the order in which you listed the parties.

> Perhaps at the time of filing for divorce both parents should sign a document
> stating their parenting intentions: perhaps some fathers would just as soon
> make support payments to the mother and let her have the responsibility of
> raising the child.

I'm sure some would prefer to make only a financial contribution. 
The father of my two is one such.  I maintain that that cheats the
kids too--it takes more than $$$ to rear a child.

>                     If both sign with intentions of sharing the parenting, the
> fathers should be guaranteed just as much time with their children as the 
> mother receives, as long as he supports the children whether they are with hi
> or not.

Should be the same rules for mom, too.

> Obviously there is much to discuss, and FAIRNESS is the guideline. No flames
> please, let's make a conscious effort to keep emotion to a minimum. There are
> an incredible number of divorced parents out there, and that constitutes a lo
> of voting power. We can effect changes but we have to be FAIR and united.
> 
> We also need accurate and verifiable statistics. Is that an oxymoron?
> 
> john kaufman

Thanks for the thoughtful, and thought-provoking, post.

---
Shannon Smith                     ssmith@xocolatl.com
Newsgroups: alt.child-support