NCP dad in TN

[NotSoNew]

i ran your calculator. I just cant wrap my head around how it makes sense. i used made up numbers that you both make 2000 a month and have 50/50 for one child. i put no other factors in.

each parents obligation is 371 dollars a month, since the NCP has 50% of the time he gets a credit for 50% of this amount, and he owes 185 a month, but mom doesnt gain any financial obligation for not having the child 50% of the time, her portion remains unchanged at 371, so NCP owes CP 185 a month when their incomes and time is the same!

if NCP was labeled the CP and CP became NCP, then NCP would be the one getting the money and NOTHING WOULD HAVE CHANGED but their titles!What is the name of your state?

 

[NCP Dad in TN]

What is the name of your state?

Um.... Tennessee. LOL.

I know, it's strange. I when I ran the numbers, (using 2600 per month for each party) I even had in there my new child (which I receive credit for) AND the montly deductible for the health insurance for the kids. And it STILL has me paying her $$$.

Beats me, gliche in the calculator? Or gliche in the system?

 

[NotSoNew]

gliche in the SYSTEM, i mean i know when you get credit for days it doesnt equal the amount you pay for one days support. for example we pay 156 a week in support, divided by 7 is about 22 dollars a day, but if we got credit for 3 days our support wouldnt be reduced by 66 dollars, it would be less, but when it gets to 50/50 the numbers *should* equal out, but the system isnt set up that way.

 

[NotSoNew]

oh lol i wasnt asking the name of your state! it stuck that in there automatically

 

[CarrieT]

Um.... Tennessee. LOL.

I know, it's strange. I when I ran the numbers, (using 2600 per month for each party) I even had in there my new child (which I receive credit for) AND the montly deductible for the health insurance for the kids. And it STILL has me paying her $$$.

Beats me, gliche in the calculator? Or gliche in the system?

Ok I had a thought. I wonder if has to do with it being the children 'live' at the CP residence, and the NCP is assumed to have visitation only - albeit 50% - however, the 'thought' being that the children actually LIVE with the CP therefore the CP household requires more income to maintain it? Seems weird but thats all I can come up with.

Carrie

 

[NCP Dad in TN]

That makes sense... in theory. But I agree with you, 50% visitation, even though it's called "visitation", means the kids are in each home the same amount of time... each parent is responsible for the same number of meals, the same nights of homework, the same # of days the kids need clothes, toiletries, toys, entertainment.

Even for families with 50/50 parenting time, it's still considered "visitation" when the kids go to the NCP's house. It's kind of degrading if you ask me... .like the NCP is the lesser parent.

 

[CJane]

Even for families with 50/50 parenting time, it's still considered "visitation" when the kids go to the NCP's house. It's kind of degrading if you ask me... .like the NCP is the lesser parent.

Not necessarily. My order (not TN) is written to say 'temporary parenting periods' rather than visitation.

 

[NCP Dad in TN]

That sounds better than "visitation". Actually, our state, when they switched over to the Income Shares Formula, changed the title Custodial Parent and Non Custodial Parent to "Primary Residential Parent" (PRP) and "Alternate Residential Parent" (ARP). Whatever happened to just "mother and father"? lol.

 

[NotSoNew]

Ok I had a thought. I wonder if has to do with it being the children 'live' at the CP residence, and the NCP is assumed to have visitation only - albeit 50% - however, the 'thought' being that the children actually LIVE with the CP therefore the CP household requires more income to maintain it? Seems weird but thats all I can come up with.

Carrie

i see the thought process, but mostly thats crap, we only have step daughter ONE overnight a week and we maintain everything if not MORE Then the CP does for her at our own house. for 50% i dont see how they can maintain that the CPs household costs more to maintain! just another flaw in the system i suppose**************

 

[NCP Dad in TN]

Like it needed another one....