One child is mine, but feels like I'm paying for two.

[CJackson]

My jurisdiction is: Florida.

Sorry if this exact scenario has been responded to in another thread but I didn't see it.

I have a seven-year-old and my daughter's mother and I agreed to keep things out of the courts. In spite of that, I've made every attempt to give her money. And not half a*s attempts, but I mean actual attempts, like "hey, do you need anything? Does (our child) want anything?" Every offer was rejected. In addition to those offers being rejected, she asked me to surrender my parental rights.

When she finally did ask for money, which was to pay for our daughter's tuition to private school, she wouldn't give me the relevant information I needed, like where to make payments to, how much, how often they should be paid, etc. Instead, she stopped all contact with me and instead decided she could get more money from me going the way of the courts.

She recently had another child with her husband and has voluntarily unemployed herself. Because of this, they imputed her income at minimum wage instead of what she was making. Now, there's a huge disparity in what our obligations are.

That said, I'm essentially paying for two children, one of which isn't mine, as I know what I'm required to pay isn't going all to my child and, if she was working, I'd be paying less anyway (and I do believe THAT money would go all to MY child, not the one she has with her husband).

Is there anyway to fight this? I'm trying to reduce my obligation to a fair amount to pay for my child, the ONE kid I have, and I think it's reasonable that her income be imputed to what she was making as that's what I would have been paying before the other child.

And second, what about the issue of equitable estoppel? I brought it up when we went to court but made certain to tell the judge that the last seven years have shown I'm not trying to skirt my responsibility but that it's dangerous to allow a woman to refuse almost a decade worth of assistance and then, when she gets in over her head financially, say "ok, I want money now."

This entire thing seems like a racket to me. Any points or advice? Is it worth fighting?

 

[irish223]

This would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

My jurisdiction is: Florida.

Sorry if this exact scenario has been responded to in another thread but I didn't see it.

I have a seven-year-old and my daughter's mother and I agreed to keep things out of the courts. In spite of that, I've made every attempt to give her money. And not half a*s attempts, but I mean actual attempts, like "hey, do you need anything? Does (our child) want anything?" Every offer was rejected.

An ACTUAL attempt to support your daughter would be to go to court to establish a legal order for child support. This business of "Do you need anything" is half-hearted. Your responsibility is to provide support for your child, not 'help out' when the mother can't manage on her own.

In addition to those offers being rejected, she asked me to surrender my parental rights.

I assume you didn't. Do you have any visitation with your daughter?

When she finally did ask for money, which was to pay for our daughter's tuition to private school, she wouldn't give me the relevant information I needed, like where to make payments to, how much, how often they should be paid, etc. Instead, she stopped all contact with me and instead decided she could get more money from me going the way of the courts.

That is her right. She really should have done it 7 years ago, and you should have gotten visitation orders then too.

She recently had another child with her husband and has voluntarily unemployed herself. Because of this, they imputed her income at minimum wage instead of what she was making. Now, there's a huge disparity in what our obligations are.

You may be able to appeal based on her previous income. Did you bring this up in court?

That said, I'm essentially paying for two children, one of which isn't mine, as I know what I'm required to pay isn't going all to my child and, if she was working, I'd be paying less anyway (and I do believe THAT money would go all to MY child, not the one she has with her husband).

Really? So what percentage of the house payment, utility bills, grocery, clothing, and other household bills do you figure you're paying? How much of your daughter's medical and dental? Child support is intended to help offset the cost of all those things in the CP's household. It is NOT intended to pay solely for the food and clothing of your child.

Is there anyway to fight this? I'm trying to reduce my obligation to a fair amount to pay for my child, the ONE kid I have, and I think it's reasonable that her income be imputed to what she was making as that's what I would have been paying before the other child.

Noted above

And second, what about the issue of equitable estoppel? I brought it up when we went to court but made certain to tell the judge that the last seven years have shown I'm not trying to skirt my responsibility but that it's dangerous to allow a woman to refuse almost a decade worth of assistance and then, when she gets in over her head financially, say "ok, I want money now."

Hmmm.... How about this: Try to negotiate the lower payment (imputing with her previous income) by offering to pay back the past 7 years of child support (in the same payment amount) that you didn't have to pay because she never went to court for it.

You call it 'assistance'. Maybe that's why the judge imputed her income at minimum wage. It's not assistance. You have a duty to share in the support of your child. If you had wanted to share that responsibility, you would have. Offering 'assistance' is demeaning to the mother IMO. Whether she needed or needs help is not the issue. Sharing in the support of your child is the issue.

This entire thing seems like a racket to me. Any points or advice? Is it worth fighting?

You haven't had to pay anything for 7 years, then the mother asks you for tuition. She won't provide the details, so you don't pay. That's reasonable, and without a child support order, you are not legally obligated to pay.

She decides to file for child support. That's reasonable too. She has every right to do that. After all, you said that you offered to pay for "anything she needs" then refused to pay the tuition. The one time she asked you to pay, you refused, so her only option is court.

You've been ordered to pay an amount that you believe is unfair. You may be able to appeal it. Talk to a lawyer.

You've wiggled out of paying support for the past 7 years, so you've really saved a lot of money over the years. In retrospect, I bet you wish you had just paid the tuition.

 

[CJackson]

This would be funny if it wasn't so sad.


An ACTUAL attempt to support your daughter would be to go to court to establish a legal order for child support. This business of "Do you need anything" is half-hearted. Your responsibility is to provide support for your child, not 'help out' when the mother can't manage on her own.

I assume you didn't. Do you have any visitation with your daughter?

That is her right. She really should have done it 7 years ago, and you should have gotten visitation orders then too.

You may be able to appeal based on her previous income. Did you bring this up in court?

Really? So what percentage of the house payment, utility bills, grocery, clothing, and other household bills do you figure you're paying? How much of your daughter's medical and dental? Child support is intended to help offset the cost of all those things in the CP's household. It is NOT intended to pay solely for the food and clothing of your child.

Noted above

Hmmm.... How about this: Try to negotiate the lower payment (imputing with her previous income) by offering to pay back the past 7 years of child support (in the same payment amount) that you didn't have to pay because she never went to court for it.

You call it 'assistance'. Maybe that's why the judge imputed her income at minimum wage. It's not assistance. You have a duty to share in the support of your child. If you had wanted to share that responsibility, you would have. Offering 'assistance' is demeaning to the mother IMO. Whether she needed or needs help is not the issue. Sharing in the support of your child is the issue.


You haven't had to pay anything for 7 years, then the mother asks you for tuition. She won't provide the details, so you don't pay. That's reasonable, and without a child support order, you are not legally obligated to pay.

She decides to file for child support. That's reasonable too. She has every right to do that. After all, you said that you offered to pay for "anything she needs" then refused to pay the tuition. The one time she asked you to pay, you refused, so her only option is court.

You've been ordered to pay an amount that you believe is unfair. You may be able to appeal it. Talk to a lawyer.

You've wiggled out of paying support for the past 7 years, so you've really saved a lot of money over the years. In retrospect, I bet you wish you had just paid the tuition.

There's multiple errors in your reply and I'd like to address them.

The reason I didn't go to court was because we - her and I - had agreed to keep things out of the court system. We both knew what would happen if we took that route. So to say it was a "half-hearted" attempt is, IMO, inaccurate.

I have had visitation with my daughter over the last seven years. Everytime I would bring up the point of wanting my daughter more frequently she would hold the threat over my head of going to court. Not a very appealing alternative when you're trying to finish up your undergrad and making about $20,000/year.

Everything that I've brought up here was addressed in court. Every bit of it. I explained to the judge why I chose not to fight it for the last seven years but also made it perfectly clear that I wasn't attempting to avoid child support. I wanted to pay because I did understand it was our child and I had a responsibility. However, going to court would have put me in a position of having to choose between paying my support order to avoid going to jail and, oh, keeping the lights on and buying food.

In regards to issues of housing, clothing, etc., I have no issue giving her money to pay for food or clothes or any of that. I do have an issue, however, when her and her husband move into a $2,000/month mortgage payment. It's worth noting her and I were never married and never lived together. I understand the initial intent of child support as I've read it is to ensure the child is entitled to sustain the same standard of living s/he had become accustomed to. The child had no "standard of living" in this respect because we never had combined incomes.

Also, you've clearly misread what I stated about the tuition. I did not refuse. She asked me to pay it, I tried to, then she flat out refused to give me the information. It was her ignoring my emails, her ignoring my calls, her ignoring my requests for all the relevant information to pay tuition. So no, I was trying to give her the money she asked for.

I'm glad you find humor in this. I see nothing funny about it. As far as I'm concerned it sets a dangerous precedent. This idea that it's somehow "demeaning" for a mother to ask the biological father for assistance or support is, once more IMO, absurd. She never had to ask. Ever. I was the one always asking her.

Now you can make whatever claims you want about what I should have done. Given what my current financial situation was and, given the fact that I live five hours away from my child, visitation would have been a logistical nightmare. Not impossible, mind you, just difficult. Throw in a child support payment of somewhere in the range of $400-$450/month and it becomes an issue of "how do I go visit my kid and afford to pay my rent?"

So no, I've not "wiggled out of paying child support for the last seven years." Her and I had a mutual agreement to keep things out of court. She said it was for the "sake of our daughter" but I'm not sure how believable that is.

As I've mentioned, this sets a dangerous precedent. I find it patently unfair - yes, call me whatever you'd like, insult me as you see fit - for a mother to refuse assistance time and time again and then take it when it's convenient for her. And you can continue to say "if you wanted to pay for your child you would have done something about it." Sorry, but I feel like that's a blanket - and ignorant - statement. You have no clue the circumstances of my living situation at the time looking through a financial prism. To trivialize it in such a manner and say "it's that easy" makes me question the qualifications required to be a moderator on this forum.

I'm not trying to be snide or smart with you. I simply posed what I thought was a logical question to a logical scenario and was looking for insight. If I was looking for mindless ridicule I would have gone to the NOW website and simply proclaimed "I'm a deadbeat dad! Do your work!"

 

[irish223]

Mindless ridicule and insults??? Hardly. I simply pointed out the flaws in your logic and the problems in your legal arguments. If you would like to see what mindless ridicule and insults look like, I can direct you to another legal site where your original post would cause you to be eaten alive.

There's multiple errors in your reply and I'd like to address them.

The reason I didn't go to court was because we - her and I - had agreed to keep things out of the court system. We both knew what would happen if we took that route. So to say it was a "half-hearted" attempt is, IMO, inaccurate.

Just what did you think would happen if you went to court to establish child support and visitation? You would have been ordered to provide the support that you say you were willing to provide, and you would have had court ordered visitation that the mother could not legally deny you.

I have had visitation with my daughter over the last seven years. Everytime I would bring up the point of wanting my daughter more frequently she would hold the threat over my head of going to court. Not a very appealing alternative when you're trying to finish up your undergrad and making about $20,000/year.

Again, with court orders based on your combined incomes, the child support would have been fair, and you would have had guaranteed visitation.

Everything that I've brought up here was addressed in court. Every bit of it. I explained to the judge why I chose not to fight it for the last seven years but also made it perfectly clear that I wasn't attempting to avoid child support. I wanted to pay because I did understand it was our child and I had a responsibility. However, going to court would have put me in a position of having to choose between paying my support order to avoid going to jail and, oh, keeping the lights on and buying food.

How do you know that? Child support in Florida is calculated on the combined incomes of both parents, and divided between them according to their relative incomes.

In regards to issues of housing, clothing, etc., I have no issue giving her money to pay for food or clothes or any of that. I do have an issue, however, when her and her husband move into a $2,000/month mortgage payment. It's worth noting her and I were never married and never lived together.

It doesn't matter whether you lived together or not. Plus, your child support order is not based on her mortgage payment. It is based on your share of the support for your daughter.

I understand the initial intent of child support as I've read it is to ensure the child is entitled to sustain the same standard of living s/he had become accustomed to. The child had no "standard of living" in this respect because we never had combined incomes.

The bolded portion is incorrectly stated. In some state's statutes, a similar statement is made; however, it is usually stated as, "the same standard of living had the parents remained together." There's a difference. Also, I don't believe that statement is in Florida's statute, and many argue that this is not the purpose of child support.

Also, you've clearly misread what I stated about the tuition. I did not refuse. She asked me to pay it, I tried to, then she flat out refused to give me the information. It was her ignoring my emails, her ignoring my calls, her ignoring my requests for all the relevant information to pay tuition. So no, I was trying to give her the money she asked for.

Okay, let me rephrase. She asked you for the money for tuition. Aoparently she wanted you to give the money to her. You asked for the information so that you could send the money to the school. She wanted the money on her terms, you wanted to send the money on your terms. Either way, you didn't give her the money, despite that fact that several times in your post you say that you were more than willing to give her money if she would accept it.

I'm not saying you should have paid her. I have no opinion on that. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency in your statements. I also have to say that all of these problems could have been avoided if you had gone through the courts in the first place.

I'm glad you find humor in this.

Actually, I didn't find humor in this. As I recall, I said it was sad.

I see nothing funny about it. As far as I'm concerned it sets a dangerous precedent. This idea that it's somehow "demeaning" for a mother to ask the biological father for assistance or support is, once more IMO, absurd. She never had to ask. Ever. I was the one always asking her.

That's the point. She shouldn't have to ask, and she shouldn't have to accept any offers. Yes, that's demeaning. It paints you as the person who will take care of things if the mother can't, rather than as an equal partner in supporting your child. The support should have been provided, period. You have an obligation to provide support for your child, not ask the mother if she needs you to help out. Whether the mother needs your help or not, it is in your child's best interests for you to provide your share of the support for her.

Now you can make whatever claims you want about what I should have done. Given what my current financial situation was and, given the fact that I live five hours away from my child, visitation would have been a logistical nightmare. Not impossible, mind you, just difficult. Throw in a child support payment of somewhere in the range of $400-$450/month and it becomes an issue of "how do I go visit my kid and afford to pay my rent?"

I don't know where you get your figures, but I believe they are way out of line. If your income was $20,000 and the mom made minimum wage, then your obligation would have been about $270/month. If the mother made more than minimum wage, then your obligation would have been even less.

Also, if you had gotten court ordered visitation, you could have asked that transportation costs be split between the two of you. You could have also asked for longer weekends before your daughter started school, for school vacations, summer vacations, etc.

So no, I've not "wiggled out of paying child support for the last seven years." Her and I had a mutual agreement to keep things out of court. She said it was for the "sake of our daughter" but I'm not sure how believable that is.

If that was the mother's idea, then I suppose she had her reasons. Perhaps she wanted to avoid court ordered visitation. However, the fact remains that you did not have any court ordered child support obligations during that time.

As I've mentioned, this sets a dangerous precedent. I find it patently unfair - yes, call me whatever you'd like, insult me as you see fit - for a mother to refuse assistance

Again, that word.

time and time again and then take it when it's convenient for her. And you can continue to say "if you wanted to pay for your child you would have done something about it." Sorry, but I feel like that's a blanket - and ignorant - statement. You have no clue the circumstances of my living situation at the time looking through a financial prism. To trivialize it in such a manner and say "it's that easy" makes me question the qualifications required to be a moderator on this forum.

I don't remember saying "it's that easy." I did say that you had an obligation to support your child. I did say that you do that by establishing a support order. I also said that you could have established a visitation order. If you had done your homework properly, you probably would have found that your child support obligation was not as horrible as you thought. Many, many people manage to pay child support on an income of less than $20,000/year, and many also manage to find workable solutions to long-distance visitation.

I'm not trying to be snide or smart with you. I simply posed what I thought was a logical question to a logical scenario and was looking for insight. If I was looking for mindless ridicule I would have gone to the NOW website and simply proclaimed "I'm a deadbeat dad! Do your work!"

Well, I simply showed the lack of logic in both your question and your scenario. You seem to think that you shouldn't have to pay court-ordered child support because you didn't have to pay it before. You don't seem to realize that you could have been ordered to pay 7 years ago, and the fact that you weren't does not negate your obligation now. You also don't seem to understand how child support is calculated.

You really should focus on how much money you've saved over the past 7 years. You should also be thankful that the mother did not attempt to get a retroactive award of child support. By Florida statute, she could have been awarded child support for the past 2 years as well.