View Single Post
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 11-07-2017, 12:04 AM
Rioe's Avatar
Rioe Rioe is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,231
Rioe will become famous soon enough

The main problem with no child support for a 50-50 arrangement is that the houses end up very unequal if the parents' incomes have quite the disparity. When the kids are teens and can choose where they live, they're going to pick the house where they have their own bedroom instead of sharing, and eat better food and have better toys. And why should kids suffer disproportionately at one house simply because the other parent has a much greater income?

And it's very hard to make the 50-50 shared extraordinary expenses work out equally, too. You'll end up with one parent who is greedier and/or poorer, who winds up manipulating things so that the other parent pays more.

I've always thought a more sliding scale for money based on access would reduce a lot of conflict, instead of there being a huge jump at 40/60.

But there will always be people who fight for majority access for many evil reasons that aren't at all financial. The mom who believes the children are an extension of her or a possession, the dad who wants to take the kids away from mom to punish her for ending the marriage, etc.

I do agree that making 50-50 a well-known default that everybody has internalized long before marriage is a good idea. It puts the burden of proof on the person who wants majority time to justify it, instead of it being case-by-case huge drawn out fights every time.
Reply With Quote