Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Political Issues

Political Issues This forum is for discussing the political aspects of divorce: reform to divorce laws, men's rights, women's rights, injustices in the divorce system, etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 08:16 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,048
Berner_Faith will become famous soon enough
Default

Well I guess we will disagree on that. I went into my relationship knowing he had two kids, knowing he paid child support. I fully accepted this and have also accepted the fact that we buy our own clothes because what she chooses to dress them in is not what we dress them in, we have accepted the fact we will have to put them in activities with no contribution from her. That is just par for the course when you get into a relationship with someone who has kids.

The original question regarding CS isn't about what extras we decide the buy the kids, it's about the calculation and it doesn't matter how it is calculated, our costs towards the children would remain the same. Sure it would be nice to have a little more money every month, but that's where I come in and make more money, instead of relying on my partner to do so. I would rather work harder and get further ahead than have him miss out on time with his children just so she can receive more money.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 01:35 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 173
thefunone is on a distinguished road
Default

The original question regarding CS isn't about what extras we decide the buy the kids, it's about the calculation and it doesn't matter how it is calculated, our costs towards the children would remain the same. Sure it would be nice to have a little more money every month, but that's where I come in and make more money, instead of relying on my partner to do so. I would rather work harder and get further ahead than have him miss out on time with his children just so she can receive more money.[/QUOTE]

Berner - I think that that is admirable on your part - but some posters don't have the luxury (as it were) of having a new partner who is able to do what you do

....that 'little' extra can go a long way for us single parents...

As stated previously...if it can be done in Quebec what is holding Ontario back?
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 01:36 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 173
thefunone is on a distinguished road
Default

I can't be the only person that has ever wondered about this...
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 01:47 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,587
Serene is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Berner - I think that that is admirable on your part - but some posters don't have the luxury (as it were) of having a new partner who is able to do what you do

....that 'little' extra can go a long way for us single parents...

As stated previously...if it can be done in Quebec what is holding Ontario back?
This is not "little extras" especially when you are paying over $1500 a month for two children in child support. We have ALREADY paid for all these items and therefore are paying twice. That in itself is not fair.

Furthermore, these aren't choices to be made. If the kids don't come with snowpants - you have to buy them to be able to play outside. And don't forget we even get emails "go buy them shoes" or boots or whatever.

And here is the thing: Single parent or two parents in the household - our CS is based on the payors income. It is also equalized with SS so that the payor is "income sharing". However, the mom works and lives with her husband who has a respectful income. All that to say, the payor (my husband) actually takes home much less. And so be it, we are not complaining about the arrangement of SS or CS per say. However, he already is starting out with less and then is expected to contribute to another home to provide all the "day to day" necessities for the children and he does without argument. And then he gets to do it all again since the CS doesn't cover all those "day to day" necessities. And that isn't fair.

Of course, the mom in our situation is less than helpful. I also wish that the education for the children was prorated NOW. Parents should be told up front that they should be putting money away for their kids after divorce. We have been diligently putting money away and yet as stated above, dad actually has less to go around. Seems very backward.

Does anyone have a link for the Quebec model (in layman's terms)?
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 01:58 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 173
thefunone is on a distinguished road
Default

Amen...
I simply went to CanLii - went to Quebec - and simply searched child support determination - the first hit was the paper indicating how CS should be apportioned.

Regulation respecting the determination of child support payments


Item 4
It simply refers to different form to be filled out if the payor has the children between 20%-40% of the time

Sorry for the large font - it was the way it copied over
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 02:01 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 173
thefunone is on a distinguished road
Default

I buy clothes and other items for my kids because I don't want my kids feeling like they are 'visiting' daddy...that they have to bring clothes over to use...etc - having stuff for them at my place only re-inforces (I hope) that they have a home with me...that it is their home as well.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 03:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,048
Berner_Faith will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thefunone View Post
I buy clothes and other items for my kids because I don't want my kids feeling like they are 'visiting' daddy...that they have to bring clothes over to use...etc - having stuff for them at my place only re-inforces (I hope) that they have a home with me...that it is their home as well.
That is exactly it. Yes CS is supposed to go towards clothes, but if the kids have to pack a bag every time they go to the other parents house, it isn't really their home, it is no different then spending a weekend with a relative. Snow pants are probably replaced by most families 2-3 time a winter because they get destroyed or lost. My point was, as a new partner, I knew my partners obligations and those obligations will continue for many years to come. I can't just walk into the picture and complain about it. Whether he pays $1000, $1500 or $500, it wouldn't change the fact that we provide just has much at our house as Mom does.

Do I think the tables are fair? Not really, but there isn't much to be done about it at this time. And my point was, if one chooses to buy a house to accommodate all children having their own bedrooms, those housing costs do not change whether you have the children 25%, 50% or 100% of the time. Your mortgage is the same, your gas/oil is most likely the same. Hydro may differ with more bodies in the house. Food costs will go up with extra mouths to feed. The basic housing costs do not change.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 03:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 173
thefunone is on a distinguished road
Default

So....going back to my original post in this - how or why is it that Ontario can't provide a graduated system?
Do we have to seek or start a movement to address this issue?
If it is lawyers/judges/legal beagles who create the SSAGs and set the tables...can they not also see the impact this has on those that pay yet have a period of access where a reduction in costs would facilitate the kids having equal amenities at both homes?
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 03:43 PM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,245
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

I suspect the reason for having two divide points only (at 40% and at 60%) is probably logistics and inertia.

Logistics
If the system had a sliding scale with, say, divide points every 10%, then there would be nine of them instead of two, and there could be 4.5 times as many opportunities to fight about how much one has the kids.

Inertia
Lawmakers currently see a system in place that seems fair at first glance. It's not until you really get into it that you see where it falls down, due to its roots in the whole kids go with the mom while dad earns the money idea. Any lawmaker who does have personal experience with the system is probably either a payor who has no time to fight, or a recipient who has no desire to change anything.

Personally, I'd love to see 50-50 access with half-offset CS just be the standard. Deviating from it would have to be done by mutual agreement or by a judge with a valid reason, and situation specific access and CS recalculations could be done at that time.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2014, 03:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 173
thefunone is on a distinguished road
Default

I don't know if there would end up being 9...once the 40% is reached it would result in the CS offset and then if it continued it would just reverse the other way...
Still frustrated.....arrrrgh...

LOL
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Division of family assets. Cars and parts enthusiast Carnut Financial Issues 33 02-06-2013 09:47 PM
Family Law Is Warped When Looking4Answers General Chat 3 11-20-2011 12:13 AM
Occupy Family Court karmaseeker Political Issues 15 10-08-2011 04:22 PM
Wife to sue Ontario Family Responsibility Office for suicide of man who couldn’t pay Randy Hosking Political Issues 4 08-03-2011 11:03 PM
Divorce and Family Law needs Reform Brian Divorce & Family Law 3 02-21-2007 01:51 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:11 AM.