I'll try smaller and simpler then -

***
to make her show what she spends the cs on......show the judge EVERYTHING that is spent on the child, which will not add up to what little cs she gets
***

That means %100 of CS is going towards the child. We agree. Brand would probably agree with it as well. We all agree. If that's what the OP's Ex is doing, then everyone still agrees.

So, again, %100 CS goes towards the child. We agree.

-Gil

PS - Let me know if this still doesn't make sense to anyone. CS = %100 CS to the child, not the parent directly. We agree.

agreed. The amount I pay goes %100 to the child when his mother is working. When she's not working, she's taking away from the support of the child and that's not right. Priscila has no idea what the amount is that I pay because IT DOESN'T MATTER! it is %100 for the child no matter what the amount. The only reason I have not posted the amount I pay is I know it will be attacked by people on this post and I'm sick of being attacked. So we all agree that custodial parents should have their own money and not spend the cs on themselves.

is 123 replies some kind of record? This was a good discussion, a little rough at times, people could have been a little nicer, yes even me, LOL. This discussion did help me a little, but it was more a discussion than anything, just wanted to say my piece about this matter. Thanks.

B

My understanding is that if the custodial parent is forced to work, then the expenses associated with that should be shared by the noncustodial parent. Expenses such as sitters. Is that correct?
People with jobs (and I worked for many years but don't now) seem to think that unpaid work has no value. Looking after a child is rewarding and wonderful, but it is also still work. It takes time and effort, and it is not dictated by you - it is dictated by the needs of the child, among other things such as the school's requirements, appointments, the child's social and emotional needs, etc.
The nonworking parent is giving up disposable income, ability to save for retirement, maybe medical benefits, even social security benefits in the future.
I just wonder why wanting to look after your own children is considered to be such a slacker thing by some people.
Brandon, if your child is happy, maybe that has something to do with the fact that his mother can spend a lot of time with him, knows him well, he doesn't have to be around a lot of sitters or strangers, and the stress of a career is not sapping her energy. If your child had a sitter, would you refuse to pay for food for the sitter while she was working? Would you refuse to let her use your home? Drive your car to take him somewhere or to buy food?

To answer your questions I gladly take responsibility for the expenses of raising my child. He is just as happy now that she is working. I get to see him nearly every weekend now so he doesn't have to be with a sitter, because she voluntarily works every weekend. And yes child care expenses are factored in to the expenses report provided to the court that some posters think they shouldn't have to provide to any one. I'm sure the judge would grant this expense in any case if the mother is working, as he should. I would never refuse anything that would benefit my child, I just want what's best for him and his mother and I disagree about what that is sometimes.