How did/do you survive financially?

My matrimonial debts are included in my equalization calculation, but don't have much bearing on my spousal now that I have them all paid off. A lot of the debt related to my student loans, which I was unable to pay down significantly during the marriage because of her refusal to work.

On the one hand, paying all my debts down puts me in a better financial position overall, but at the same time it probably increases the amount of SS she can get from the courts. The frustration that I have - and I'm sure shared by many here - is that because I worked like a dog to support her while married and then sacrificed so much since then to be responsible and get my debt down, I now have to pay her all that much more.

My labour, her benefit. It's easy to understand how someone can get disheartened.
 
The math works out for my husband like this - husband makes $62,000. Ex-wife made 20,000 one year (the rest of the time she made less or was in school, her choice to do that as she was already employable). So I'll use the 20,000 year. After taxes, child support, extra-ordinary expenses and access costs, he is left with $30,200. Assume ex-wife makes 20,000/year = minus tax + CS + full CCTB + full TAX breaks, + full GST rebate = 42,000. Funny thing is, when the children visit here, we are supporting 4 children (their 2 plus our 2), when the children visit here she is supporting 0 children. The guidelines make no sense financially and do not account for the child care expenses non-custodial parents have above and beyond CS payments. Nor do they take into account any additional children in the payers home.
How do we survive? We both have to work and I have had to cash in a lot of my RRSP's to pay the mortgage/bills/access costs for visits. We live extremely frugally. We don't go on holidays and just enjoy the small things in life, like time together.
 
Garage sales are great and allow your money to go further. Why buy a new kid's bike for $150 when you can find them for $25 at a garage sale. I have also picked up used toys, slides, climbers, Tonka trucks, furniture at a fraction of the price of new items.
 
Bumping this thread a bit, since I'm just entering this new stage of life.

I am scared to death, frankly. I make just about $60,000 a year, and my CS will be $930, plus the ex has our young daughters in daycare and before/after school care, so I have to pay 70% of those costs as well. It'll take time before the child care subsidy is processed, so I get to pay $773 in daycare, plus $820 in rent on a new apartment.
Okay, so I make $2650 a month. And I now get to pay out $2523. And that's not even factoring in ANY other expenses.

And even after the daycare subsidy finally goes through, I'm looking at paying out $2100 a month.

At this rate, I'll have to end up moving in with my girlfriend, just to save cash.
 
Does anybody else use Freecycle? There are groups that trade things instead of throwing them away. The one in Kanata is the Kanata Freestore, and for Ottawa it is Ottawa Full Circles.
Good luck. 8)
 
I've been able to get stuff for the kids on the freecycle groups as well as get rid of things that the kids grew out of and/or we no longer use, they are great if you have the ability to pick up the items.
 
Stubbs, and all the others posting on the financial burden and the obvious unfairness of the calculations. You are not along, and I know that's not going to ease the financial burden that you have, nor change the existing family law rules, but you can take your financial statement with proof of bills and seek to have the child support reduced. Don't get me wrong, I know that this is a very hard thing to do and many have failed trying. If you are willing to take a stand and ask that the judge review your case on it's individual merits and ask that you get some reprieve to allow you to afford the basics like a decent home to bring the children to or a reliable car to facilitate these visits and more important facilitate the rising costs of getting to work to earn that pay cheque to pay your support.
It's a long shot but can be done without a lawyer or minimal lawyer involvement. This is a route you could consider. We were fortunate at one point on EI to seek to have support reduced below the table amount for a short time. Others have not been so lucky as you have read, but again it may be something you may want to look into. I wish you all the best.
FL
 
I would like to address the issue on CS payments by "responsible" fathers in this current economic downturn.
Am I alone in thinking that forcing CS payments through EI deductions is absolutely ludicrous in trying to rebuld this country'd economic situation.
I have been laid off now for close to 10 months, (auto sector), and the fact that I am still paying the agreed amount through deductions off my EI is somewhat disturbing.
How can the government kick start the economy if the "responsible" dads are living cheque to cheque with no monies to put back into the economy.
I might add, that my ex, who is still currently working in the auto sector made over 80G last year?
I am definately in favour of the whole FSO obligations, but if the government seems to think hat freezing Credi Card interest rates, and lowering the Bank of Canada rates will improve the crisis it's badly mistaken.
In order to kick start this crisis we need people buying goods and services, which at present, with the strict CS laws in this country, will more than likely involve 20% of the working class dads that have kept with their original agreements, but are on the verge of bankruptcy trying to maintain the payments.
In the UK if your unemployed for no matter how long a period of time your CS stops until you are back to work. No questions asked.
And this government thinks Canada will be the first to lead it's way out of this recession??
I find that hard to believe!
Petetion anyone ??
 
goinbrokeinont, I don't think a system of automatically continuing the same CS amount OR automatically discontinuing it is the ideal situation. I understand the difficulties posed by your situation and recognize its unreasonable. At the same time, if Canada decided to go with the UK system, you'd have the receiving parents (and the kids) suddenly and severely disadvantaged as well.

In your situation it wouldn't create a huge problem for your ex because she is working and making good money. For a mom who was also unemployed, however, losing CS altogether would be devastating.

I would think a solution which might work more fairly for all would be to treat CS more like SS if one parent loses their job. That is, instead of just looking at the straight up table amount based on your old salary or setting the CS amount to zero, look at it more like "needs vs. ability to pay". In your situation, your payment might be reduced to nothing or next to nothing until you're working again, if it's found that the ex's need is small relative to your ability to pay. If your ex was also unemployed however, then her need relative to your ability to pay would be greater, and thus a bigger ding off your EI cheque.

Any thoughts?
 
goinbrokeinont said:
...
In the UK if your unemployed for no matter how long a period of time your CS stops until you are back to work. No questions asked. ...
Click to expand...

This makes no sense - when you are unemployed, do you stop eating, paying the rent, buying the necessities of life? No, so why is it okay that you pay NO child support, certainly you are surviving somehow (EI in your case, or loans, savings, selling assets) and you are required to support your children as you are supporting yourself.

I agree with About_Time's post - CS should be based on income or if non happening, then on ability to /need of the child...
 
When a father in an "intact" family loses his job, they do NOT have his income coming in, as there is NO income. So why does the "separated" family still get an income that he doesn't have?! It makes no sense, he has to beg, steal and borrow to survive, and the child (and hence the mother) are still supposed to live "in the manner to which they were accustomed" when he HAD a job. It is absolutely ludicrious to expect only kids in "intact" families to suffer when a parent loses a job, but not kids from "divorced" unions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top