DivorceNet®

Ugh! I've been making voluntary support payments, but that was based on income ex said he was making (although I never saw a pay stub).

We're supposed to settle in a week, but I'm afraid the court will award him MORE money than I planned for, simply because he lost his job. He's also a recovering drug addict and in Chapter 7 bankruptcy. He'll lose his car (I think... since Oregon's exemption amount for a car is $2000) and his house and has no way of collecting unemployment since he only held a job for about 3 months out of the past four years.

The only reason I've been given why ex will GET custody awarded is because the kids have asked to live with him. If they were younger, given his issues, I don't think it would be considered.

Even if Oregon took everything from me but the $974 they consider "self-sustaining income", it's not enough to support three people!

I suppose I'll know soon enough, but wondered if anyone had any experience with a situation like this, since unemployment is running rampant in this economy these days.

You do have some leverage. His financial situation isn't very good. Use that to negotiate something better for yourself and your kids. If the kids live with you, can you afford them without any CS coming in?

no kidding, the court will tend to place the kids with the stable parent who is able to provide for them. if the kids want to live with him because he spoils them, then it might be a fight you don't want, though.

the court will impute minimum wage to him, at least. they won't allow him to claim zero income.

Stable is a key thing, but income has nothing to do with it. A stay at home parent with no income has nearly a 100% chance of being the primary parent. If income was important, that figure would be just the opposite.

Yep - you're absolutely right. Because dad is at home all the time, the courts see that as a plus. Unfortunately, no one has ever investigated to see what the quality of that home is - or how dad spends his time while there (usually sleeping during the day and up all night).

Stable? If it weren't for ex's parents paying for EVERYTHING, he would have no where to turn. I have to admit that I'm bitter that they keep sending him money, instead of letting him grow up. Sure - they feel they're doing it for the good of my kids, but... are they really doing what's best?

I wish you were right about the courts putting the kids with the stable parent, but that's not always the case. Besides - how do the courts define "stable?" When kids are teenagers and have an attorney acting on their behalf (doing whatever they direct her to do). Another thing working against me is that kids attend school in dad's neighborhood. They'd have to switch if they lived with me. I think that had more to do with the kids' decision than anything.

Kids are finding out that Dad isn't all that reliable. They're being fed - but that's about it. Apparently, I'm feeding him too :|

I could afford to have the kids live with me an not collect child support. In fact - I'd prefer it that way! I want as little to do with ex as possible and would never rely on receiving support from him. His employment history is too unstable.