[MomWontGiveUp]

I have two children for which I pay child support. The youngest will be turning 18 in the next year; and the oldest will turn 20. Jumping even further ahead beyond next year when my eldest turns 21, I assume the younger child will then begin receiving the full ordered amount, unless the CS Order amount is modified. The custodial parent does not have a job and is on assistance so my concern is that if I attempt a downward modification to support just one child, my assessment will actually go up, because the other parent has not been working for several years. Also - is there a window of time I should be concerned about with relation to my youngest child's 18th birthday? Ideally, I'd like to see the other parent removed from the order once both children are over 18.

[Fr_Chuck]

Yes if you ask for a modification, they will review all of the documents, income from both parents and it will be set according to their rules. If you have an attorney, they can normally give you an idea of what your payments could be.

[MomWontGiveUp]

If there's a review, then why wouldn't my ex also be ordered to pay support? After 18, one or both parents can be ordered to pay, but it seems that the "both" rarely occurs. *grumble*

[AK lawyer]

... I assume the younger child will then begin receiving the full ordered amount, unless the CS Order amount is modified. ...

Is that the way it works in Oregon? I am surprised that the CS order doesn't say so much for each child.

... Also - is there a window of time I should be concerned about with relation to my youngest child's 18th birthday? Ideally, I'd like to see the other parent removed from the order once both children are over 18.

If the order doesn't say something like "___ per child until each child reaches the age of 18", yes, you should ask for modification prior to the date you would like the support obligation to change.

[ScottGem]

First, when posting a follow-up question or info, please use the Answer options at the bottom of the page rather than the Comments.

The child does not received support. Support is paid to the custodial parent for expenses incurred in providing for the child. Your support order should specify when support stops. What does it say?

Your ex would not be ordered to pay support because they are the custodial parent.

[MomWontGiveUp]

Thanks, Scott - sorry it's been months since I posted this without a follow-up. I didn't see the replies.

In Oregon, child support to the custodial parent stops when the child turns 18. At 18, the child support goes directly to the child. This part is not written in the order, it's somewhere else in Oregon law.

The order says:

"Payments shall continue each month thereafter until a child is 18, emancipated, married or otherwise self-supporting, or until age 21 if the child is attending school pursuant to Oregon law, or until order of the court."

AK Lawyer - the order is for one lump sum so when the older child turns 21, he will no longer receive support checks and the younger one will then begin receiving the entire ordered amount, unless the order is modified prior to the older child's 21st birthday.

The problem with that is that it will require re-assessing each parent's income, to which... my ex has none (at least none that are recorded on a tax return). So... I'll be ordered to pay a higher amount for one child.

It's my understanding that it would not have been permitted to say that when the older child matures out of child support, the younger child will then receive one half. The reason it's not allowed is because the judgment is for one dollar amount.

[ScottGem]

Umm, did you hit the wrong button? You gave me an Unhelpful rating for my answer, then thank me.

I did do some research and Oregon law does allow for direct payment to the a child over 18 ONLY if they are attending school. This is unusual in the US and doesn't change Oregon's own definition that support is usually paid to the custodial parent.

But yes, I can see your point that going to court might actually increase your payments. I would strongly recommend consulting with a local attorney who is more familiar with the local laws and, more importantly, the local courts.

[AK lawyer]

...
The problem with that is that it will require re-assessing each parent's income, to which... my ex has none (at least none that are recorded on a tax return). So... I'll be ordered to pay a higher amount for one child.
...

No. You simply ask that the current order be interpreted.

And if the custodial parent cross-moves to re-determine CS based upon her reduced income, you oppose that and, if income is to be re-determined, argue that her former income be attributed to her based upon voluntary underemployment.

[MomWontGiveUp]

Yes, Scott... I must've hit the wrong button. My apologies!

[MomWontGiveUp]

Darn - I did it again and posted a new thread regarding this topic. Here it is: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/family...ol-675702.html

When I'm not here regularly... I forget the rules! :(

[ScottGem]

I removed the new thread. Please post follow-up here.

[MomWontGiveUp]

Both kids are now between 18 and 21. I'm considering modifying the support order so that it is 'per child' rather than one lump sum (which is the way it's set up now.) The benefit to making the modification now is that the total amount will go up slightly, so long as my ex agrees to impute his income at the amount he agreed to before. He still is not working, even though he is able. I believe he has just given up. He has advanced degrees and good work experience and is capable of earning more than I make. The imputed income is significantly less than what I make but still, much above minimum wage.

The laws in Oregon around 'potential' income say one thing but I'm afraid ex will get greedy when I propose the modification and ask to be imputed at minimum wage.

Once children reach the age of 18 in Oregon, they are entitled to continue support until age 21, so long as they meet the qualifications as a child attending school. One other caveat to this rule is that they cannot earn more than half of their support without disqualifying themselves from this exception. Both kids work and go to school. They both earn more than half of their support. Support is distributed (by the child support division) directly to each child, but they transfer their support to their dad.

Does anyone have any experience on imputed income? My ex isn't motivated to go to work since his parents support the majority of the living expenses.

The Oregon Rules are found here: http://www.oregonchildsupport.gov/la...s/050_0715.pdf

Any suggestions?

[AK lawyer]

...
Does anyone have any experience on imputed income? My ex isn't motivated to go to work since his parents support the majority of the living expenses.

The Oregon Rules are found here: http://www.oregonchildsupport.gov/la...s/050_0715.pdf

Any suggestions?

Note that "actual income" includes "gifts and prizes". In other words, it includes the support received from his parents.

And, of course, you could ask for imputed income on top of that, based upon sub-sections (5)(a) and (8).

[MomWontGiveUp]

Note that "actual income" includes "gifts and prizes". In other words, it includes the support received from his parents.

And, of course, you could ask for imputed income on top of that, based upon sub-sections (5)(a) and (8).

Thank you. That was my understanding as well. And I believe my attorney (at the time of the last settlement) implied that we would go for that if he did not agree to the imputed wage of his last job.

As a last resort, and it's not something I don't WANT to do but will if ex gets greedy is to petition to terminate, based on the fact that both kids are now earning money that exceeds half of their ordered support. The hardship will be on Dad, not the kids, since Dad is the one with his hand out. I'm sure his parents will pony up for the missing 'income.' :|