Access Costs Produce Grim Choices

[dovan]

I am completely sympathic to all CP parents as I was a CP parent as well mine now all grown up and out on their own. I too had to struggle with min CS and no SS. I remarried and the children have a great step father even though we are divorced now. Yes it is right that the CP gets all the trials and tribulations that come with raising children from very young to when they get older. I was there for their first day at school, when they lost their first tooth, when they won their first game in sports or scored their first goal, when they felt hurt because their best friend moved away, when they graduated school gr 8 and high school, I was there through the heartache of their first loves. Something the NP missed for whatever reason from being too busy or just not wanting too. All of those are memories a parent can not get back no matter if you are a CP or a NP. I only received 60 a week for two children on the old CS guildlines and never took him back to court. Yes I know I had to claim the money he gave me for the children but to me it was well worth it maybe it would be classified a stupid to most. That is one side of the coin... the other side is what I was attempting to say without offending anyone is that there are NP that do want to have their children in their lives and do pay both or one CS and SS, that do share in the upbringing of the children and are good parents and yet the CP still wants more or denies the NP any rights as an equal parent. All I feel is that if most people really put themselves in the other parents/persons shoes they may think differently about their own actions be it whether they are a CP or a NP, I am speaking about people in general acting this way. On a more humourous side of the this maybe they should make a reality show of it called parent swap please take my last comment as joking.

[Kimberley]

got2 - you're right, it should be fair. My comments were more of a run down of information to those that continue to respond generalizing a group of people (CP, NCP etc etc) without considering that not everyone is the same in life. That being said, I will be more direct after following posts across other sections of the forum; copper, let me repeat what I have already typed - I AM the CP, 100%, 4 kids, $2700 in CS over a 41 month period, NO SS as I don't want it, and I have not even requested extra expenses.. just child support.
I AM the CP and child support or not, I get to watch my children grow and learn each and every day. I get to have paybacks for suffering teen hormones by sneaking in a kiss with my 14 yr old son, forcing him to try to wash his cheek with soap & water for fear that Mommy kissy cooties may infect him and he'll die a slow agonizing death, I get to tuck them into bed, and have 'who can talk about the grossest thing at the supper table' contests (and win), and their father gets none of this of his own pathetic choices.
So CS or not, I got the best part of it all, and the financial burden is more than worth it.

[got2bkid]

Kimberley,

You said "Not every CP is a greedy money-hungry heartless witch. My children have a human right to be provided for by both parents. We both agreed to having them to begin with, and being separated with his moving out doesn't relieve him of his duty to his children.
Trust me, I get the anger, the frustration, the stress, but remember when you are venting there are CPs on this forum who only want what is right for their children and are fighting for that when you comment and generalize CPs, NCPs, Exes, new spouses etc etc."

I agree with you and I realize that not every CP trys to get their ex to pay for everything. I feel for your situation where you are not getting any support at all.

Actually we are in very similar situations, your children are not getting the support they deserve, and my children are not getting the support they deserve.

In our case we do have a situation where the amount of CS, extras and access costs really are much too high. But I agree 100% with you when you say " My children have a human right to be provided for by both parents." So do mine and all kids.

The guidelines need to be amended so that parents who pay are only expected to contribute REASONABLE amounts, based on the cost of raising kids and shared between the parnets. And they need to take into consideration that the NCP has living expenses too.

I hope you realize that by sharing our stories, we are not trying to "take away" from the problems you are having. Your problems are very real, and most people are very familiar with the problems faced by single moms who do not recieve any support.

But I think this forum has room for our problems too, that family #2 is not acknowledged as existing when they assign money to family #1, and in many cases we have a real struggle just as you do.

I also think that it's very sad that his ex wife moved away, and now all the kids are suffering for it, their kids as they don't get to see their dad much, and our kids because paying 100% of the access costs leaves next to nothing for them.

There needs to be balance for both situations like yours and mine.

[Ihave2kidsIcannotsee]

My ex is always sending the kids away to summer camp regardless of whether it is feasible or not. I think she just wants the summer all to herself at my expense.

[copper]

I agree that not all CP's are after the money but a great deal of them are. It would be interesting to see how many CP's would still want to remain as the CP if the CS and SS was not available. Doesn't sound too rosey now eh??

In addition to CS and SS the CP can offer the children all types of expensive activities embraced by Sec7 expenses because they will not be responsible for the costs.
In most cases, had the parents stayed together, these cost's would have been discussed and, if the activity was not affordable within the family budget the child would not get to do the activity......Simple as that.
However, in most cases these things are not discussed between the CP and NCP........The first the NCP hears about it is when they are presented with the bill!

[Ihave2kidsIcannotsee]

NO not all CP are after the money but most are.

[Me_too]

Thanks Kimberly, you put into words exactly how I feel. Not all NCP are involved in their kids lives like they should be. Not all CP are greedy with money. That's why family law is so complex. If everybody had the best interest of the children in mind, there wouldn't be any heated discussions on money.

[dovan]

Kimberly, I apologize if you feel that I offended you. It is true that there are those such as yourself that is why I stated there are many CP that use the money for other things not related to the children.

[Kimberley]

From where I sit (other than the kitchen table) I see the situation from a very different view.

I am the CP of 4 children who range from ages 9 to 14 and I have had the children 100% of the time.
I am single with just my income to raise them while he and his CL both have full time jobs bringing in two incomes, and over the last 41 months that my ex & I have separated I have had:

• My van repossessed for non-payment forcing me to find an old rusty chugging vehicle to get to & from work etc with
• Took a drop of $4.25 per hour in pay just to even have a job
• Working a second job during the warmer months delivering more than 300 newspapers to bring in what I can to help pay the bills and feed the kids
• Did everything I could to heal the hurt my children felt as their father continued to move further away from the children (incidentally he is trying to claim the whole access cost issue when the kids & I have not moved the entire time, yet he keeps moving away - and not for job reasons either)
• Dealt with everything regarding medical and education without his input, as he refuses to partake in these things
• Dealt with finding things to take the kids minds off the fact that prior to my requesting that the court detail access to him in hopes that he would follow a court order, he made contact with them 6 times in 18 months
• LIE to my kids on his behalf telling them that he cannot visit them more than 2 days a month because he is working
• Heal their hurts while he increases the number of children he has by 2 more - one born Oct 2006 and another May 2008

Try buying anything for your kids when you have seen the total sum of $2700 since Aug 2005, the bulk of that only now appearing because FRO is on his case as much as possible. Not to mention the time I have to lose from work to fight him in court as he and his lawyer use every tactic to stall and break all the 'rules' in court in regards to filing and/or serving anything - waiting until the day of court which has passed the timeline laid out in everything I have read for filing and serving. In November 2005 he was able to purchase a 2005 Ford Explorer and in 2007 he traded that in to get a 2007 sports model vehicle.

Not every CP is a greedy money-hungry heartless witch. My children have a human right to be provided for by both parents. We both agreed to having them to begin with, and being separated with his moving out doesn't relieve him of his duty to his children.
Trust me, I get the anger, the frustration, the stress, but remember when you are venting there are CPs on this forum who only want what is right for their children and are fighting for that when you comment and generalize CPs, NCPs, Exes, new spouses etc etc.

[Ihave2kidsIcannotsee]

Hey I totally understand your feelings, my Wife feels sick every time we get something in the mail from court. It is a strain on a relationship at times to put up with this it never ends either always another court case coming up to prepare for more added stress to an already stressful life.

[got2bkid]

Well I am glad to hear I am not the only one who thinks access costs should be part of "extra" expenses, then who ever moves away will have to consider what their share is going to be. As for my husband, it was access costs in the first place that allowed his ex to move away. She originally moved 4 hours away to attend a course. It was in the middle of BC and in the winter, with his crappy truck with no heat and icy conditions (and couldn't always afford the gas), some weekends he could not drive the 16 hours to get his kids. She used this against him, as a reason to move back to the maritimes, saying he didn't exercise his access, along with an excuse that her family lived there. She moved to another province after less than a year, away from her "family" to attend school again. Anyway, it is kind of ironic that access costs helped put us in this situation where we can no longer afforrd the access costs!

I agree that when the CP remarries, CS should be lowered and put into a fund for the children. It is not right that the CP household gets 2 incomes plus another (tax free) 1/3 or more or ex's income. Then in the NCP home we have 2 incomes minus 1/3 or more of NCP's income. This becomes even less fair when each party has children. Children in CP home have more than they need, children in NCP home have to scrimp and save their whole lives. And not to mention that the when the first kids visit, the NCP household is supporting ALL the children, while the CP home has none of the expenses while the kids are away. If the CP happens to marry a man who also pays CS, it would even out for them, they also would get lowered CS to be put into a fund for kids.

I am finding the whole thing feels like a scam against my husband and my family (We just got another letter from his ex's lawyer in the mail today asking for yet more money and to pay more for "extras". I have been sick to my stomach all day, but that is fodder for yet another post). I think I am going to go throw up now. Either that or divorce the husband who I am in love with and who is the best father I know so that the courts will recognize that our children have a right to be supported by both their parents as well). (Of course I am not going to, don't WANT to, but sad that is the only way I know our kids will be recognized).

[dovan]

Child support was intended to be for the costs of children...but we all know that in some cases not all..... that this is not what these monies are going towards. There are many custodial parents out there that will live the good life be it whether they remain a single custodial parent or get remarried, and yet the non custodial parent is paying and in some cases living below the poverty line themselves due to the money they have to pay for child support and in some cases spousal support. I cannot see why a non custodial parent cannot bring a motion to change into court and bring this issue forward to have these types of costs equally shared by the parents. Due to the fact that the custodial parent moved somewhere that is not easily accessible to the non custodial parent and more so that the non custodial parent did not have any rights to not permit the custodial parent from moving that far away.

[Ihave2kidsIcannotsee]

I disagree however with Ihave2kidsIacannotsee saying the child support should be adjusted when the custodial parent remarries. I don't have a new partner, but if I do one day, I don't think he should be responsible for my children, or pay for them. They already have a father, and whether I remarry or not won't change that. What if my new partner also has child support to pay? Would that be taken into consideration? My ex doesn't have a partner, should he pay more child support when he has a partner? I don't think so, even if he marries a doctor! Bio-parents pay and care for their children. And while new partners are inevitably drawn in the emotinal turmoil of a broken family, they shouldn't be used to lessen the bio-parents responsibility.

Of course you would disagree you would love to have 3 incomes to spend on yourself? I don't understand if you remarry why should your ex give you more money and he gets remarried and has to live on 2 incomes while you get to live on three just because you have the children it is unfair. Notice I did not say the other parent does not pay anything but that it is lowered and that the money goes in a trust fund. What loving parent would not want to do this for their children instead of spending it all on needless items? If a man decides to marry a women that has children he automatically takes on the responsibility of parenting does he not? why is he excused from helping out financially? Sorry but your not thinking from the other side of the coin. If the custodial parents incomes combined is 100,000 and the non-custodial parent only earns 60,000 a year why should he/she be giving away money when he is needing it more then the other parents? What about when the non-custodial parent has more children? does anyone give him some extra income to raise them? No but he still have to pay a huge amount of support and keep his own head above water its not right infact I would go so far as to say it is a travesty of justice that this is allowed to happen.

[Suchislife]

I wholeheartedly agree that both parties should share the costs of facilitating visitation.
If this were the case, any party wishing to move a great distance from the other parent would have to take this into consideration when making the decision.
I thought it was the norm that both parents take part in transportation!
We have a distance of 60kms. between homes. I guess we are lucky that our court order states one parent drops the kids off at the other home and vice versa.

[Me_too]

I am a custodial parent and receive child support. I totally agree with you that access cost should be shared as an extraordinary expense, especially if the custodial parent is the one that moved away. I am a little surprised though that she was able to move so far, my agreement clearly says that I can't move out of the city with the children without the consent of my ex. If he was to agree for me to move, it would be wise from him to request a clause to ensure we split the access cost even if it's not in the guidelines... Not sure what the courts would do if there was litigation over this, but to me, it's common sense.

I disagree however with Ihave2kidsIacannotsee saying the child support should be adjusted when the custodial parent remarries. I don't have a new partner, but if I do one day, I don't think he should be responsible for my children, or pay for them. They already have a father, and whether I remarry or not won't change that. What if my new partner also has child support to pay? Would that be taken into consideration? My ex doesn't have a partner, should he pay more child support when he has a partner? I don't think so, even if he marries a doctor! Bio-parents pay and care for their children. And while new partners are inevitably drawn in the emotinal turmoil of a broken family, they shouldn't be used to lessen the bio-parents responsibility.