DivorceNet®

"In my state, the older child's expenses would not be taken any more into consideration for calculation of the child support, than that of subsequent children in a married situation."

Then it's not fair. Are you sure about it? It's different between being responsible for all EXISTING children during marriage and creating new children (applied for both NCP and CP) since the new spouse knews before hand that such person aleardy is responsible for own kids. If he/she got into it, then he/she must accept the fact that the existing children be counted in CS. However, the newly created kids AFTER a divorce is at own expense and risk, therefore, they can't be counted.

For example: At the time of my divorce, my ex married to me and knew I already had own kid. Therefore, the kid must be counted. The same will apply to her existing kid if any at the time of divorce. There is no different between CP or NCP.

Now, if I or she remarry and have subsequent (new, not existing) children, then they are at each own's expense and can't be counted either for me (CP) nor her (NCP) for the CS of the set of previous kids at the time of our divorce.

If she will get divorce in the future, then her two sets of children must be counted for her next divorce. Only her first set involves with me. The same will apply to me. If I remarry, have new kids, and get another divorce, then the new kids are my own with new spouse and can't be counted between her and I.

I am pretty sure that I am correct, but having never having been in that situation, I could be wrong. If I look at my state calculator, there is no mention of children other than a place for 'existing' child support orders. Therefore, I don't even see (unless of decided by a judge) how the amount could be figured.

Forgive me as I am trying to wrap my mind this. In all the years I have been on this board, I never remember this issue coming up before. I want to learn.

Please explain this to me. Say that I lived in your state, and my husband and I were to divorce, and we split custody 60 me/40 him. We agreed to no exchange of child support. Then my husband gets remarried, has a baby, and divorces and a CS order is to be established for him to pay for new baby. Our son, first child in this situation is taken into consideration as my husband incurs expenses when he is with him. Now, am I figuring this wrong...or not only is my husband at that point getting out of a CS obligation for my son (of course we agreed), but at the same time in a way, getting compensation for his expenses through a reduced support for new child?

Belle, my state is the same way. It is only taken into consideration if there is a support or alimony order in place.

I wonder, if it's the other way around... I have a DD from a previous marriage, my ex has an order for CS, I get married, have a baby, and get divorced, and am to recieve child support from the other ex.

Now, does the amount I'm recieving via court order in child support from my first ex count as income when doing the calculation to determine the amount that the new ex will pay me for child support.

(This is a for instance, haha, I don't have a new future ex that I'm planning to have a baby with)

I am glad you are following me here...lol. It is confusing.

But let's look at this example. You have a DD from a former relationship. She get's support. You have a new baby, new baby gets support. I think this is different, in the fact that you would not be paying support for new baby, so the older child would not come into play in calculations. Now say you were the one who had to pay support to the Father for new baby, does your older daughter receiving support come into play? Can her expenses during your time, qualify for an adjustment off the amount you owe? Would her receiving CS negate that qualification?

I don't the answers. But the more I think about it, I am more than sure that our state does not take any children being supported directly by a parent, unless there is actually a child support order.

"Then my husband gets remarried, has a baby, and divorces and a CS order is to be established for him to pay for new baby. Our son, first child in this situation is taken into consideration as my husband incurs expenses when he is with him."

That is exactly what I was trying to explain. Yes, he must be counted for your ex's new divorce's CS since his next spouse married him when he was with a child already.

"Now, am I figuring this wrong...or not only is my husband at that point getting out of a CS obligation for my son (of course we agreed), but at the same time in a way, getting compensation for his expenses through a reduced support for new child?"

That's because you and him agreed to no CS, and since this is from your decision, you must accept whatever you think unfair/consequence to you as a result. Otherwise, you shouldn't have to agree at all and you didn't have to. He is entitled to count both children in his new CS for the new kid. Even if he didn't pay any CS to you, he still incurs expenses for your child, too.

"I wonder, if it's the other way around... I have a DD from a previous marriage, my ex has an order for CS, I get married, have a baby, and get divorced, and am to recieve child support from the other ex."

Yes, if ordered, and the calculation would include expenses (minus CS from previous ex) for your old kid since the other new ex knew in advance that you had a kid when that ex married you.

"Now, does the amount I'm recieving via court order in child support from my first ex count as income when doing the calculation to determine the amount that the new ex will pay me for child support."

Of course, it does count since it helped to reduce your expenses.

What state do you live in?

'(This is a for instance, haha, I don't have a new future ex that I'm planning to have a baby with)'

Yeah, me too...all just examples.

Wow...some of you have completely missed his point. And all of this nonsense about what occurs first or second is just that...nonsense. There is only so much money to go around, and everyone has to give and take. When a married couple "accidentally" has another child, do we allow the court to say "well, you can't lower the standard of living of the other child?". If I understand the posts correctly, several of you are advocating the parent suffer (i.e. lives with less money) when he/she "chooses" to have additional children, because it wouldn't be "fair" to the original child, AND, none of you would ever advocate the new child be deprived. Of course, the opinions follow bio vs. step profiles. Also of course, none of that would even be discussed with married families. We don't let judges or anyone else tell married people how much to spend on themselves vs. any of their children (or parents, or whatever). Somehow we accept that by divorcing we need a strict monitary system to run everones lives.

He asked a very logical question which points out the illogicalness of the support equations. Remember, the formula is trying to determine what portion of his income should be spent on new child. But, the formula doesn't even know how much money he has because it doesn't know about the older child.

Do you realize that after the formula incorrectly causes him to transfer a large sum of money to his new ex each month in the form of CS, that he can then go back to court with the first ex to get that CS revised based on the fact he has a new CS order with 2nd wife? If the numbers worked out, he could actually get the first wife to pay him CS which he then could use to pay second wife. How fair would you find that? At that point, however, the revised CS from 1st wife affects 2nd order and you go back to court ad nausem.

Bottom line is that no formula in the world will ever work.

No Don, nobody missed missed his point. It is quite relevant to bring to light the order of birth. All states are different and we are simply entertaining theories and trying to learn as why it is relevant in one state and not another.

And of course nobody tells a married family how to spend their money. Not what is even in question here.

And the OP would less than likely not see support on his end for his child (his daughter), if CS were to be exchanged. He makes 100k, she makes zero. The split in time is 40 to him/60 to her.

Right...no formula will work for everyone. My question(s) are how are these formulas derived? The theory that they are based on.