Dailies Contact Lenses - What would you consider to be a reasonable amount to pay the custodial parent in child support?

What would you consider to be a reasonable amount to pay the custodial parent in child support?

if you were/are the non-custodial parent? It is evident, that child support payments are disputed based on the amount that a non-custodial parent is ordered to pay. If you were given the opportunity to be involved in calculating your monthly payment for each child, how would you base your calculations. Example: a round about figure of say, $500 per child. If $500 was to be broken down into 30 days, the average daily amount would be $16 per day. Based on the example given, do you believe that $16 per day/ per child is a reasonable amount to pay the custodial parent for the child’s living expenses? And that is not including any incidentals such as, sports activities, school functions, entertainment, etc. Would you be willing to pay the child support without missing any payments and asking for any reduction in your payment? The above question is in no way, shape, or form discriminating against non-custodial parents that do pay their child support without complaint.

Public Comments

I like that you've included a disclaimer.. lol. You should figure your childs expenses, rent, utilities, phone included, food.. etc., divide it in half then divide that by 30 days. Add the extras and incidentals, divide that in half then by 30 days. That is the dollar amount you should be getting. In a perfect world.
Really, to me, the correct answer is based very much on where the children live - the cost of living. Cost of living is very high in most of New York, less so in most places in the South.
The amount of child support paid is based on income. Someone who makes $100,000 a year will pay a higher amount than someone who makes $15,000 a year. This is the only fair way to determine the amount. By the way, I wish I was getting $500 for my child support. I'm getting $300 and it's a drop in the bucket compared to the true cost of raising a child.
Everyone wants to crucify the non custodial parent to the point that they don't have anything. That person can be made to cover the cost of insurance even if the insurance would not be usable in another state. If a non custodial parent makes a lot, well then, yeah, sure, but your average Joe is barely making ends meet. I think people have taken on a "make him pay" attitude, and it's not always that easy. Plus the cost of hiring an attorney if the mother keeps taking him back to court every time he gets a nickel raise. I know a lot of people that pay. They take the bus, the ex drives an Escalade to cart back and forth the 6 income checks and tax write offs around. Do you know non custodial parents don't get any kind of tax break for paying? C'mon.
20% of your take-home pay! in Texas!
Their should be no child ransom payments at all or very little any way. 50/50 parenting is the answer to that if one parent has the child half the time and the other has them the other half then the necessity for child support is moot. Now when the parents live too far away or if the mother or father is abusive then some form of support is in order. And it should be applied to only what the child needs as the other parent does not get to have a say in anything legally then that parent should not be responsible legally for extras. And the needs of the child should be 25% to the noncustodial parent and the rest to the costodial. And I say that because the noncustodial parent has been rduced to a visitor not an equal parent so assuming the non custodial parent should pay so much as 50% is ridiculous. If I am going to be held responsible for half of someones monetary needs then I should be able to fulfill half of their emotional needs as well and that means more time to do so. Like every weekend and all summer. Besides the custodial parent gets to keep a higher percentage of her income and gets a tax credit at the end of the year. What do men get for paying 50% of the childs needs.
Fact-of-life #1: When a normal family that lived in one house must support two houses, everybody must suffer a large drop in standard of living. Expecting otherwise, unless wealthy, is worse than stupid. ___Having been on both sides of this fence (support payer and receiver), I think women's attitudes on this issue would change RADICALLY if they constituted half of the non-custodial parents paying support.
How about not divorcing in the first place ? A man doesnt become a father to pay child support. I feel that the children should stay with who can provide the most. You work hard to provide and then you get rewarded with twice a week visitation rights ? Wtf. Who has the money should have the children, that also eliminates any discussions of child support. Working women can be moms I dont see why working dads cant be. Its in the best interest for the child. If she was a stay at home mom and decides to divorce only the tiny bit he has to pay in alimony is lost that way and in the end far more is avaiable for the children.
you ll have to calculate it by the way youve lived when you were last together. if you had lived middle class so provide middle class needs that is not too extavagant. keep in mind that with age the needs are greater as with inflation money gets smaller.
This whole thing is a government forced experiment (the break down of family/marriage) so therefore it should be the government who bares the brunt of financial responsibility. Because it is government sanctioned social experiment, then the government should calculate an amount that allows both parents to regain their lives back and will need to pay and pay big or give back family and marriage to the people.
Custodial parent should not be paid any lump sum amount for child support. Custodial parent should be given an advance of about $500 as a refundable deposit and every month non custodial parent should reimburse half of the child's expenses, based on the monthly expense report sent by the Custodial parent to the non-custodial parent. Disputes of fraud in the monthly expense report or non payment of the share can be contested in courts as is the present system when somebody stops payment of child support.
I believe the child support systems sucks and is broken and has been for a very long time. Parents need to wake up and realize that they are responsible for another human being and what ever that human being needs to survive is what is needed....whether it is sport shoes ribbons food or clothes a child well being and self worth is made up of the way the adults in their lives treat them....So adults need to stop being babies and raise their children but they also need to be an active part of those children's lives and not just hand over money
I am curious to know how non-custodial parents who's income is above the norm feel, when they have to pay child support to the custodial parent on top of marital assets that's more than what the average person makes in a life time? Hell, if I was given what the law requires, half of the marital assets that is say, a million dollars, then heck, I wouldn't need the child support. ooops sorry, I was thinking out loud. Anyway, I would hope that the non-custodial parent would still have the same job they did have while married. And would be able to know for him/herself what the household expenses were during the time of marriage to know exactly what he/she should pay for the child or children. In all due respect, I do feel that child support payments should be a deduction. After all, the wages in which the payment is made, are taxed. So, why shouldn't the non-custodial parent be able to file it? I do realize that IRS form 8332 Release of Claim to Exemption for Child of Divorced of Separated Parents, would require the custodial parent to sign. I am pretty sure that majority of the custodial parents won't sign the form. Unless it's agreed upon during the Divorce proceedings.
If I were going to set up a reasonable child support payment amount, I would use the federal government's cost of living index as a basis for discovering the actual costs of children by region. Keep in mind that in your example, the $16 per day is doubled, theoretically, with the custodial parent putting in half. In that case the total child support amount is $1000/month, more than enough to support a child. (why is it that the only child support that is ever considered is that paid by the non-custodial parent? Shouldn't the non-custodial parent be held to the same standards and receive the same punishment for failing to do so?) Also, some things that many seem to think should be a shared cost of child support have little or nothing to do with the things purchased. Take telephones, for example. The difference between the basic cost of telephone service with one person living in the home and 5 people living in the home is 'no difference at all'. Phone charges increase by long distance usage, which usually doesn't involve the children. Since the custodial parent would have the phone with or without the children, it is a choice of the parent who should accept the total cost and not figure it into 'child support'. It is similar with electric, water, garbage and any other utilities although by increasing the number of people in the home, the bills will increase *incrementally*, not equationally. (That means that the economies of scale should be used. It does not double the electric bill for two people compared to one). What I'm saying is that most household costs cannot be divided equally by the number of members of the household to determine the actual cost of each. For another example, when a child is brought into a home, the electric bill does not double. If it increases at all it will be a tiny fraction of the total cost. The USDA has cost of living calculators for regions, states and areas yet no child support figures are based on this information. The fact is, the states make a profit from child support collections from the federal government. It is in the state's interest to make and keep guideline amounts as high as possible, which they are glad to do to received the many benefits that exist to entice them to do just that. The federal government has found that extortion is an excellent method of forcing states to do the fed's bidding with such things as forcing all child support to be collected via garnishment of wages. The enticement was that failing to do so resulted in cutting off of block grants to the states. The states have begun adding on items that were formerly included in the child support (make-believe) formula. With things like life insurance on the non-custodial parent being mandated, child care being a separate entry, etc., child support payments have more than doubled since the 'family destruction act' of 1989. For example, my "child support" was $454.55 a month but after all the add-ons were included, it came to over $1,000, and that was just MY part. Whenever possible, custody should go to both parents as evenly as possible and the parent should provide for the child's costs while the child is with them with little or no money changing hands. Extra costs, such as clothing, glasses, medical expenses, etc., should be shared between the parents.