travel related expenses. Who pays?

[happyinorbit]

What is the name of your state? Arizona
My former spouse has decided to move his family (second wife and one year old baby) from Arizona to Ohio.
His reason for moving is severe allergies which are apparently dibilitating enough to have missed several weeks of work in the last year. Basically, this is a move based on quality of life. Not coincidently (I believe) new wifes entire family is located in Ohio, which he readily stated was a deciding factor in the location of the move. I do believe he has accepted our children, ages 9 and 11 will not be moving with him. We have resolved most issues arising from this decision with the exception of child support. He has proposed to pay all travel related expenses in leiu of childsupport. At current he does not pay childsupport but does pay half the medical/dental premiums which I carry through my employer. He also pays half of any uncovered medical/dental expenses. We share joint custody(no custodial parent) and 50/50 visitation, rotating holidays, and liberal exchanges and deviations from the standard parenting plan. I have no intention of waiving child support, as I feel the added financial burden of 50% child rearing expenses being raised to 75-80% child rearing expenses should be his versus my burden to bear. I also do not feel as if I should bear any travel related expenses as I am not the one opting to move 2000 miles away. Is this a very reasonable position to take? I of course want the children to enjoy the same relationship they have had with their father, and push come to shove I will pay expenses. However, I dont feel as if I should consent to any travel expenses at this point. Do you believe a court will place the burden of travel expenses in the lap of my former husband, or will the court more likely decided that this should be a shared expense? I have read through severl posts here where the general response to this type of question is answered with, "the parent creating the distance generally has to pay". However in all those cases, the parent creating the distance is also taking the children. In my case the children are staying and I am uncertain if that is a pertinent factor.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state? Arizona
My former spouse has decided to move his family (second wife and one year old baby) from Arizona to Ohio.
His reason for moving is severe allergies which are apparently dibilitating enough to have missed several weeks of work in the last year. Basically, this is a move based on quality of life. Not coincidently (I believe) new wifes entire family is located in Ohio, which he readily stated was a deciding factor in the location of the move. I do believe he has accepted our children, ages 9 and 11 will not be moving with him. We have resolved most issues arising from this decision with the exception of child support. He has proposed to pay all travel related expenses in leiu of childsupport. At current he does not pay childsupport but does pay half the medical/dental premiums which I carry through my employer. He also pays half of any uncovered medical/dental expenses. We share joint custody(no custodial parent) and 50/50 visitation, rotating holidays, and liberal exchanges and deviations from the standard parenting plan. I have no intention of waiving child support, as I feel the added financial burden of 50% child rearing expenses being raised to 75-80% child rearing expenses should be his versus my burden to bear. I also do not feel as if I should bear any travel related expenses as I am not the one opting to move 2000 miles away. Is this a very reasonable position to take? I of course want the children to enjoy the same relationship they have had with their father, and push come to shove I will pay expenses. However, I dont feel as if I should consent to any travel expenses at this point. Do you believe a court will place the burden of travel expenses in the lap of my former husband, or will the court more likely decided that this should be a shared expense? I have read through severl posts here where the general response to this type of question is answered with, "the parent creating the distance generally has to pay". However in all those cases, the parent creating the distance is also taking the children. In my case the children are staying and I am uncertain if that is a pertinent factor.

Dad's living in fantasyland.

If a judge has to decide, dad will be paying guideline child support, and dad will most likely have to pay all of the travel expenses, since he is creating the distance.

Also, people often move OUT of the midwest...to places like AZ, because of allergies. I can't imagine any kind of allergies that he has that wouldn't be worse in Ohio.

 

[Neal1421]

What is the name of your state? Arizona
My former spouse has decided to move his family (second wife and one year old baby) from Arizona to Ohio.
His reason for moving is severe allergies which are apparently dibilitating enough to have missed several weeks of work in the last year. Basically, this is a move based on quality of life. Not coincidently (I believe) new wifes entire family is located in Ohio, which he readily stated was a deciding factor in the location of the move. I do believe he has accepted our children, ages 9 and 11 will not be moving with him. We have resolved most issues arising from this decision with the exception of child support. He has proposed to pay all travel related expenses in leiu of childsupport. At current he does not pay childsupport but does pay half the medical/dental premiums which I carry through my employer. He also pays half of any uncovered medical/dental expenses. We share joint custody(no custodial parent) and 50/50 visitation, rotating holidays, and liberal exchanges and deviations from the standard parenting plan. I have no intention of waiving child support, as I feel the added financial burden of 50% child rearing expenses being raised to 75-80% child rearing expenses should be his versus my burden to bear. I also do not feel as if I should bear any travel related expenses as I am not the one opting to move 2000 miles away. Is this a very reasonable position to take? I of course want the children to enjoy the same relationship they have had with their father, and push come to shove I will pay expenses. However, I dont feel as if I should consent to any travel expenses at this point. Do you believe a court will place the burden of travel expenses in the lap of my former husband, or will the court more likely decided that this should be a shared expense? I have read through severl posts here where the general response to this type of question is answered with, "the parent creating the distance generally has to pay". However in all those cases, the parent creating the distance is also taking the children. In my case the children are staying and I am uncertain if that is a pertinent factor.

Not only will he probably have to pay all travel expenses because of the move, he may also end up paying more in support since you will no longer have the 50/50 visitation with him being so far away. I can't see a judge keeping the visitation as is with you all being 2000 miles away. Don't let him talk you into agreeing to his waiving child support for the expenses. I suggest you go to court if he doesn't agree to pay all travel.

 

[NotSoNew]

dad is in a fantasy land, and i was going to say the same thing that people normally move TO az for reasons like that LOL!

anyway i just want to add it is becoming a trend now for judges to order travel expense split 50/50 in relocation cases no matter who moves (mom is moving in our case and travel is 50/50) so just be prepared that it could happen but he will still have to pay increased child support PLUS travel!

 

[happyinorbit]

to address the allergy situation: It is a common myth that Arizona is great for people with respitory problems. Phoenix has some of the worst air quailty in the country. really bad for asthmatics and the like. Anyhoo....I'll take the advice on the travel expenses and roll the dice with the court. On the other hand, if at some point my children go to live with their father, do you believe he would still be required to pay travel expenses, since he is the one who has created the distance? And while I have you wonderfully caputured audience, can you weigh in on child care? Currenty the kids are not provided after school care. they are home a few hours alone after school. Howeve, if Dad takes them for the entire summer and needs to hire child care, will that cost be factored into the childsupport, or will it be his cost alone? I should add that I will be working from home, and should the kids be in arizona during the summer, there would not be any child care cost at all. Thanks Mucho Grande

 

[LdiJ]

to address the allergy situation: It is a common myth that Arizona is great for people with respitory problems. Phoenix has some of the worst air quailty in the country. really bad for asthmatics and the like. Anyhoo....I'll take the advice on the travel expenses and roll the dice with the court. On the other hand, if at some point my children go to live with their father, do you believe he would still be required to pay travel expenses, since he is the one who has created the distance? And while I have you wonderfully caputured audience, can you weigh in on child care? Currenty the kids are not provided after school care. they are home a few hours alone after school. Howeve, if Dad takes them for the entire summer and needs to hire child care, will that cost be factored into the childsupport, or will it be his cost alone? I should add that I will be working from home, and should the kids be in arizona during the summer, there would not be any child care cost at all. Thanks Mucho Grande

Yes, if dad raises the issue of child care it would also get factored into the child support calculation.....however it would be averaged over the course of the whole year.

Don't agree to dad having the entire summer. Insist on at least a few weeks of the summer for you. You deserve the opportunity to have vacation time with the kids too.

 

[happyinorbit]

Thanks! I am taking the first after summer release and the week immediately prior to the start of the new school year.

 

[VA_Mom]

to address the allergy situation: It is a common myth that Arizona is great for people with respitory problems. Phoenix has some of the worst air quailty in the country. really bad for asthmatics and the like.

Strange. I just had some relatives move to AZ on advice from their doctor. They are doing much better now. Maybe it all depends on the type of allergies.

 

[Zephyr]

Strange. I just had some relatives move to AZ on advice from their doctor. They are doing much better now. Maybe it all depends on the type of allergies.

I don't know- can one be allergic to sand?

 

[Zephyr]

very funny with the allergy talk. Guess what? Dad informed me today that he is now not moving to Ohio, but to Flagstaff instead ( 2 hours North of Phoenix)?? I am assuming the same rules apply for travel? ie. he has to do all the driving? Further, if we have a 50/50 visitation arrangement, will the court try to keep the visitation at the same percentage buy rearranging the normal schedule? For example, if dad has kids 182 days per year equaling twice per week and alternating weekends, will the court make us do something like dad has 182 days to fall over the summer, other school breaks and alternating weekends? Did I explain that clearly??
PS- its not the sand we are allergic to......its the damned heat.

that is very well what could happen, are you against agreeing to that kind of schedule?

 

[pypercat]

Two hours would be too far for a 50/50 split without disrupting school schedules IMHO. It's highly unlikely that the kids would be relocated on the basis that the parent has a strong tie to the new location, unless it were proved that leaving the kids in their current location would be harmful or the kids had a strong tie to the new location and wanted to relocate. At least that has been my experience.
Good luck!

 

[Zephyr]

I am not specifically opposed to the 50/50 arrangement. It has worked very will for us to this point. However, we live just less than a mile apart so there is no substantial wear and tear on the kids due to travel, and since we reside in the same community there is strong continuity between homes due to the entire community environment always being consistent. ie. both family's shop at the same store, attend the same gym, childrens friends from both parents neighborhood attend the same school as the children, etc. I worry a little bit about the constant travel, every other weekend two hours up and two hours down, and also having to give up school vacation time with the kids and I guess the general disruption of everyones lives. It seems an awful burden on the children to maintain 50/50 with a two hour distance. But of course I realize the importance of a continuing, meaningful relationship with their father is priceless. I just wonder if less time would be damaging to them or the wear and tear would be more damaging to them. Also, I understand that if a parent can show a clear tie to the new community they have a better position in which to try to relocate the child. Without interfering with the childrens relationship with thier father, I also want to protect my rights and relationship with them as well. Does all this sound incredibly selfish??

no it doesn't sound entirely selfish, you are looking at things that may happen in the proposed scenario, you just need to keep in mind that neither one of you will probably end up with everything you want....

my son and I live 3 hours apart he's up here every other weekend, every extended weekend from school, etc( actually in april I will have my son 20 days of the month because of my regular weeknds, spring break, and another extended weekend off from school), he seems to be adjusting well, dad and I meet halfway for every exchange etc. working so far although it is not what either of us would call ideal

 

[LdiJ]

I am not specifically opposed to the 50/50 arrangement. It has worked very will for us to this point. However, we live just less than a mile apart so there is no substantial wear and tear on the kids due to travel, and since we reside in the same community there is strong continuity between homes due to the entire community environment always being consistent. ie. both family's shop at the same store, attend the same gym, childrens friends from both parents neighborhood attend the same school as the children, etc. I worry a little bit about the constant travel, every other weekend two hours up and two hours down, and also having to give up school vacation time with the kids and I guess the general disruption of everyones lives. It seems an awful burden on the children to maintain 50/50 with a two hour distance. But of course I realize the importance of a continuing, meaningful relationship with their father is priceless. I just wonder if less time would be damaging to them or the wear and tear would be more damaging to them. Also, I understand that if a parent can show a clear tie to the new community they have a better position in which to try to relocate the child. Without interfering with the childrens relationship with thier father, I also want to protect my rights and relationship with them as well. Does all this sound incredibly selfish??

A judge won't give dad ALL of the children's non school time....so don't think that you have to give all of it up.