Conference turris::womannotes-v2

    
    Well I am in a situation that this may affect me.  My
    boyfriend is a non-custodial parent.  I have heard so
    many different views on the laws.  At the point that we
    don't even know if the lawyers are sure.  
    
    Though if we do get married and she thinks she is going
    to get a part of my salary she has got another thing
    coming.  This is ridiculous.  The only two people
    who are responsible for supporting the child are
    the biological parents of said child.  
    
    Michele

    I've recently heard about this, and I think it's an outrage to expect
    a woman to help support children that her husband had with another
    woman before he met her!  
    
    I know a woman who told me she told her husband that if his ex ever
    tried to get 1/3 of her pay for child support, that she would divorce
    him, even though she loves him.  I don't blame her.  As far as I'm
    concerned it's completely unfair.  The court may as well tell the
    divorced non-custodial parent (usually male) that they are going
    to be prevented from remarrying until their children are grown-up.
     It's actually a potentially life ruining practice, if remarriage
    happens to be very important to a particular person.
    
    Also, as long as it is possible to force a second wife to give part
    of her earnings as child support for children her husband had with
    another woman, I can't help but think that only a fool would marry
    a divorced man with small children.
    
    Lorna
    

    College aid, however, is different from child support payments.
    
    Bonnie

 re: Lorna

 It's a more general problem than that.

 The Doctah

    Re .5, Mark, I don't understand your comment in reference to my
    reply.  What's a more general problem than what, and what do you
    mean by that????
    
    Lorna
    

 You only talked about it being unfair when a woman has to support her husband's
ex and kids. It is more general than that; it is unfair when the new spouse of
a non-custodial parent has to support the non-custodial parent's ex-spouse and
kids. 

 The Doctah

    Re .7, I *know* that, Mark.  Do you really think I would consider
    it fair for a man who marries a non-custodial mother to have to
    pay to support her previous children, but consider it unfair when
    a woman has to?  The reason I mentioned women is because usually
    the non-custodial parent is a male, so usually it is 2nd wives of
    divorced fathers who find themselves in this situation!
    
    Lorna
    

 No, not really. It just struck me funny, I guess. No offense meant.

 The Doctah

The various times that I have seen this question come up, I don't remember
seeing anyone mention a situation where the non-custodial parent's job
is homemaker, an unpaid position.

Situation:  Parents A and B have a child, and Parent A gets custody of the 
children.  Parent B remarries and is a homemaker.  Person C, who married B,
is the only person bringing money into B and C's household.  If only the 
parents' direct income is counted, then Parent A will be the only one who
contributes financially to the children.  Is this fair?

Say, for instance, that a woman has custody and her former husband remarries.
Say that he doesn't want to support the kids financially, so he becomes
a homemaker, and the law says that only the parents' income counts.  Is this
fair that while he and his wife are living off of the $30,000 that she makes
that his kids are not entitled to any money from him, as if he were destitute?

Should there be separate rules for parents who are homemakers?

       Carol

    If Parent B had a prior child-support payment (amount $X), Parent B 
    continues to be required to contribute $X, even after remarriage
    to Person C, even if B stops working.  If B and C have decided that 
    only C will bring in cash income to the partnership, then by default 
    C is paying, but it has been by the choice of the B/C partnership.
    Because of the way support guidelines are written, it is close to
    impossible for C to earn enough that B can stop working and still
    pay the mandated $X.  (I've never heard of a second marriage with
    child support where the non-custodial parent was able to be a full-time
    non-wage-earner.)
    
    The biggest difficulty occurs when Parent B marries Person C and 
    Parent *A* goes for an adjustment in child support $X.  In that case, 
    even if B has a wage-paying job, the amount of money which C brings to
    the B/C household will be included in determining how much B can
    afford to contribute to the support of children living with A. 
    It *feels* like C is paying for A's children.  I know of several
    couples who have *not* married until all children were past legal
    age in order to avoid this hassle, with all of the attendant problems
    associated with having someone not a legal spouse as a life partner.
    
    This is one of those places where I feel 'legal' justice and 'personal'
    justice will forever be at odds.  The emotional content of money
    is seriously underestimated when trying to resolve these kinds of
    disputes in a legal arena.
    
    Alison
    

Once upon a time I lived with a gentleman who was a non-custodial parent of two
daughters.

They were not 'children of the first wife' in my mind. They were children of 
the man I loved [and yes, hers too, not mine].  As such, I felt very strongly
that he was responsible for their existence.  And of course, I knew going in
that he was required by the Courts and obligated [by some higher concept of
Good] to see to their welfare.  Even if the marriage had been a mistake, we were
talking about living breathing young women, not detritus of a failed 
relationship.

His standard of living was somewhat increased by my income.  Why
shouldn't what he was able to provide for his children increase as well?

Absolutely nothing was taken from me by his providing more for his daughters
after my coming.  Certainly I found my own life more comfortable by virtue of
the new living arrangement.

  Ann

    re .12, Ann, I feel that if you wanted to offer financial assistance
    to the "children of the man" you "loved" then that is your choice,
    and very generous of you.  However, I do not feel that contributing
    to the support of children that the "man you love" had with another
    woman, is something that should be mandated by the courts.
   
    One of the main reasons I feel this way is that, from what I
    understand, the courts are currently not taking into account whether
    the ex-wife's salary is higher or lower than the second wife's salary.
     For example, from what I understand, the way courts have been deciding
    things lately, it is possible that a man's ex-wife could be a nurse,
    for example, earning $42K a year, plus 1/3 of her ex-husband's salary.
     Then, if the ex-husband were to remarry, a secretary, for example,
    who earns $22K a year, the secretary could be forced to give 1/3
    of her $22K to the ex-wife, who makes $42K.  I consider this an
    injustice and exploitation.
    
    I, personally, would never expect any man other than my daughter's
    father, to contribute to her financial support, and I would not
    expect to have to contribute to the support of any children that
    any SO's had prior to our relationship.
    
    Lorna
    

    I was a live-in companion when joint household income was considered
    and child support/alimoney was awarded based on both of our incomes.
    
    In some states there is a step-parent law which requires the step
    parent to fulfill obligations that the non-custodial parent does not
    fulfill.  I believe NH is one of them.

    re .10 duBois
    
    The courts have almost always been very unsympathetic to a
    non-custodial parent that deliberately reduces his/her earning
    status in order to avoid paying child support.
    
    fred();