My wife's original divorce order declared both parents equal to both kids so no child support was ordered. Since that time her exhusband moved with the kids uncontested by my wife for two years. Because he had the kids full time he requested child support. The court ordered the child support two years ago but also split the kids time with both parents almost equally. Since this time I married my wife, we had a baby, her exhusband has gotten a better paying job and they have maintained equal time with the kids. Are there grounds for a modification to the child support based on the circumstances over the last two years and the fact that my wife still makes less than him. Based on the current child support my wife wouldn't be able to live and support herself on her own if she wasn't living with me.

Child support is not intended to support the custodial parent so the argument that your wife could not support herself without you is not an argument that will sway the Court.

If his income has "substantially changed," yes, file for increased child support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlos49

My wifes original divorce order declared both parents equal to both kids so no child support was ordered. Since that time her exhusband moved with the kids uncontested by my wife for two years. Because he had the kids full time he requested child support. The court ordered the child support two years ago but also split the kids time with both parents almost equally. Since this time I married my wife, we had a baby, her exhusband has gotten a better paying job and they have maintained equal time with the kids. Are there grounds for a modification to the child support based on the circumstances over the last two years and the fact that my wife still makes less than him. Based on the current child support my wife wouldn't be able to live and support herself on her own if she wasn't living with me.

---

It depends on your state; some will allow the deduction because she has another child she is supporting, while others will not.

Has her income decreased since the order was put into place? What state is this in? How many children is she supporting? What is she currently paying in child support and what is her gross income?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

Child support is not intended to support the custodial parent so the argument that your wife could not support herself without you is not an argument that will sway the Court.

If his income has "substantially changed," yes, file for increased child support.

---

You read it wrong :) The OP's wife is paying child support, not receiving it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this8384

You read it wrong :) The OP's wife is paying child support, not receiving it.

---

I'm supposed to actually READ the question before answering it?

Whoops!

And your answer is right - as always. Of course, you cheated by actually reading the question.

We really need to know what state this is in because each state has different laws and formulas for calculating support. If his income has greatly increased (by about 15% or more) that would warrant a modification if less than that it generally wouldn't. Some states will take the fact that she now has another kid as a factor and again some don't.

BUt from my understanding she was only paying support because he had the kids all the time for two years, BUT NOW they are sharing the kids equally!
And in the beginning when they shared the kids equally, nobody paid child support.
So given the history of there child support, I would suspect there is grounds here for a reduced payment!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dynocompe

BUt from my understanding she was only paying support because he had the kids all the time for two years, BUT NOW they are sharing the kids equally!
And in the beginning when they shared the kids equally, nobody paid child support.
So given the history of there child support, I would suspect there is grounds here for a reduced payment!

---

That's not what the OP's post said. He said that initially, his wife and her ex were sharing the children equally. However, her ex moved and requested child support because he had the children a majority of the time. It says that after the move, their time with the children was split "almost equally." Clearly, they do not have 50/50 placement/physical custody of the children.

So your assumption that there is "grounds for a reduced payment" cannot be accurate until we know a)how much time the OP's wife actually has her children and b)what state this is in.

You must change the custody through the courts in order to change the child support in this case because it is based on a different living situation. So back she goes for a custody change (legal) and to recalculate support.

Well she says how much time she has the children. Obviously take it to court! They are the ones who are going to decide!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dynocompe

well she says how much time she has the children.

---

... what are you talking about?

Quote:

---

Obviously take it to court! They are the ones who are going to decide!

---

This is terrible advice. You have no idea what the circumstances are, where the OP is from, what the current support order is, etc. Advising someone to file in court could very well be a waste of not only their money, but their time as well.

As you have been asked once today, please do not post "advice" like this on the legal boards. If you don't have a legally accurate answer, then don't give bad legal advice just for the sake of posting.

She says they now shre the children equally again. That is what I am talking about. So if you guys don't see the point she got across is, that he had the CHILDREN all the time, that is why he is getting child support.
NOW he doesn't have them all the time, but they share them equally, also this guy make wayyyyy more money now, and she doesn't.
They have a great case to lower there child support

dynocompe it is in bad taste and against site rules to create a new ID merely to come in and support your view points.

I have banned the other user name

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this8384

It depends on your state; some will allow the deduction because she has another child she is supporting, while others will not.

Has her income decreased since the order was put into place? What state is this in? How many children is she supporting? What is she currently paying in child support and what is her gross income?

---

The state is Massachusetts. Her income has not decreased. She pays 100/wk for a 13 and 10 year old. Her income is about 30k. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stinawords

We really need to know what state this is in because each state has different laws and formulas for calculating support. If his income has greatly increased (by about 15% or more) that would warrent a modification if less than that it generally wouldn't. Some states will take the fact that she now has another kid as a factor and again some don't.

---

At the time the child support was ordered two years ago he claimed he made the same as her, about 30k. I looked up the starting salary range for his new job and it averages at 45k. So yes we believe it is definitely more than 15%. Of course we don't know for sure but that is why he wanted to get a new job. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this8384

That's not what the OP's post said. He said that initially, his wife and her ex were sharing the children equally. However, her ex moved and requested child support because he had the children a majority of the time. It says that after the move, their time with the children was split "almost equally." Clearly, they do not have 50/50 placement/physical custody of the children.

So your assumption that there is "grounds for a reduced payment" cannot be accurate until we know a)how much time the OP's wife actually has her children and b)what state this is in.

---

Originally when he moved 45 minutes away he said it would only be temporary and that all he wanted was 100/month for his fiancé to watch the kids. If I was with her at the time I would have never let them move with the kids. I would have paid the court costs. She had them every other weekend. He was known to live beyond his means and eventually moved back. That was when he filed for child support. Now she has them on Tue and Thurs nights and every other Friday, Saturday and Sunday (the whole weekend) which averages to 50/50 time except the fact that they go to his house after school for a couple hours on Tue and Thur and his contention is that those couple hours doesn't make it 50/50 time. What a joke! She was nice enough to not ask for spousal support and child support at the time of divorce (against the judges recommendation) and now he pulls this. His kids still call him the cheapest dad in the world even with the child support which they don't know about. He needs to man up and stop having my wife pay for his two new cars, renovatons, etc. By the way he moved the kids again across town. They will have to go to different schools yet again. Sorry just venting!

QUOTE=carlos49;2253571] The court ordered the child support two years ago but also split the kids time with both parents almost equally.[/QUOTE]
In my view the father was considered as a primary custodian in the court eyes and that was the reason a child support to be ordered.

According to MASSACHUSETTS CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES, A child support order may be modified if any of the following circumstances exist:
1) the existing order is at least three years old; or
2) health insurance previously available at reasonable cost is no longer available (or if available but not at reasonable cost); or
3) health insurance not previously available to a party at reasonable cost has become available;
Or
4) any other material change in circumstances has occurred.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlos49

The state is Massachusetts. Her income has not decreased. She pays 100/wk for a 13 and 10 year old. Her income is about 30k…

---

The minimum level of child support for one child is $ 80 a month in Massachusetts./men without any income as students in high school,are ordered to pay that sum/.
Take a look what EXACTLY was written in the court order.”Almost equaly” does not mean ‘Equaly” but in some circumstances it may be considered as “equaly”.It depends on what exactly is ordered in the court order .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlos49

Since this time I married my wife, we had a baby, her exhusband has gotten a better paying job and they have maintained equal time with the kids. Are there grounds for a modification to the child support based on the circumstances over the last two years and the fact that my wife still makes less than him. Based on the current child support my wife wouldn't be able to live and support herself on her own if she wasn't living with me.

---

Having another baby is not considered as a reason to decrease a child support order.
Obligations to a subsequent family may be used as a defense to a request to modify an order seeking an increase in the existing order but such obligations should not be considered a reason to decrease existing orders in Massachusetts.

Another important question is who pays health/dental/vision insurances.
Actually if we follow MS child support guidelines your wife has to pay at least $166 a week./if she is not considered as equal or approximately equal physical custodian of the children./ That’s the law .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by califdadof3

You must change the custody through the courts in order to change the child support in this case because it is based on a different living situation. So back she goes for a custody change (legal) and to recalculate support.

---

That's the only way.

And finally , out of the law context. I do not like to read such

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlos49

His kids still call him the cheapest dad in the world even with the child support which they don't know about. He needs to man up and stop having my wife pay for his two new cars, renovatons, etc

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dynocompe

she says they now shre the children equally again. That is what I am talkin about. So if you guys dont see the point she got across is, that he had the CHILDREN all the time, that is why he is getting child support.
NOW he doesnt have them all the time, but they share them equally, also this guy make wayyyyy more money now, and she doesnt.
They have a great case to lower there child support

---

You have been asked repeatedly to STOP posting incorrect info and now to stop using more than one user name. You argue your incorrect advice by giving MORE incorrect advice!

Something sick about people who create a second name and use it to argue with their first user name.

And this person is a Financial Advisor? I'm the First Assistant to the Easter Bunny.

Enough - what does it take to get suspended?

GV is great at giving the specific laws. So, now you have your own states support guidelines in front of you. Go take a good hard look at the support order and if you really thing that custody has changed to where the order is no longer valid then by all means have it go to court. But in your state the baby changes nothing your state views it as a choice on her part already knowing that she has support payments to make to have another child besides the ones she already has. (not that I disagree my husband and I don't get support so any children we have are on our bill) If your wife thinks she can win then by all means she can take it to court but as pointed out it can backfire if she is only ordered to pay $100 per week now it could go up to the $166 rather than down. Her income weighs in heavier than his because she is the non custodial parent. (Some states don't even include the custodial parent's in come in the support formula mine does not). Bottom line is it hasn't been three years, the baby does not change anything, and it doesn't seem the cp income has anything to do with support either. She can try to have the custody order modified and that will sometimes change the support if it is a substantial change. Or she can wait another year till the order is three years old.