Divorce decree: Both parents responsible for child's financial welfare
75 per cent of children of divorce live with their mother and more than a third of them ended up in households with incomes below the poverty line, according to recent U.S. data. And the Canadian numbers really aren't much better.
What's sad about this statistic is that children didn't ask to be put in this situation, says Lee Block, a post-divorce consultant and author of The Post-Divorce Chronicles.
Hers is a controversial take: Instead of focusing on where the money is being spent each month, focus on the lifestyle of your children. Is it fair for them to go without because the child support is not enough, she asks.
"If I had to pay support, I would not want the added stress of my ex having to worry about being evicted because the rent can’t be paid on time," she writes. "After all, is that good for the children?"
Because you're no longer married, it is equally both parents responsibility to financially take care of your children, no matter who the bigger bread winner is.
No matter how often the children are with you, you need to contribute at least equal to the amount of support that your ex is contributing towards the children.
Her central message: Nothing in life is free and we all have to work hard to make ends meet. "Being divorced doesn't make you handicapped; it just makes you no longer married, she points out."
Are you divorced? Does this sound fair? Is this how things work in your house?
By Gordon Powers, MSN Money
Posted by: aaa | Sep 29, 2021 10:02:31 AM
The real problem is, for the most part the baby boomer women got taught by their families to find a man, not a job. Today, the two generations below mine, the men expect the woman to have a job and carry their own weight with a paycheck. However, for older women, such as myself it is very hard to start over. You can't get a good job, after having your husband's children, the way the system works in Canada anyway. So, women (not just men) are bitter and like men, going through mid-life crisis, and tend to get angrier over time and therefore take men to the cleaners. I'm not saying it's right. That's the way Canada works though.
Posted by: Q | Sep 30, 2021 1:21:18 PM
When you get right down to it, we're all asking the same urgent question: Just where the hell can I go for a really safe investment? Unless you’re Warren Buffett, Bill Gates or the Saudi Royal family, forget gold. Globally, fiat currency systems are collapsing under the weight of their own BS and these days, even a 6 year old child can see they are nothing but “smoke & mirrors”, Ponzi schemes to enrich the few at the expense of the many. That would leave either select grade gemstones (investment diamonds “roughs & colors”, Tanzanite, Mogok sapphires, rubies and other rarities) or government bonds. So, if you're happy with a 1% return go with bonds...if not, then check www.Investmentgems.vpweb.ca
Posted by: Debbie | Oct 1, 2021 12:33:26 PM
Some of these comments are truly heartbreaking. I am happily married with 2 small boys, but I was a product of a divorce at a very young age. I saw both sides: A mother who did everything in her power to turn us against our father and restrict access, and a father who immediately after leaving us, took off for another province to avoid paying any kind of support. As a 34 year old adult, I can see how both were only thinking of themselves.
The root of all problems begins with first marrying the right person. All too often people marry someone even though they have issue with them to begin with. Problems never go away, they only get worse.
Second, if a divorce is necessary, take your head out of your ass (both husband and wife) and think of the CHILDREN first. I know some women, the first thing they want to do after shedding a husband is to go on a free for all. You brought the children into the world, grow the $hit up and think of them and their needs. Draining a man for all he has doesn't do anyone any good, ESPECIALLY the kids. (they learn by example, and they are more likely to end up in a dysfunctional relationship in the future). And for the guys, those that avoid paying anything because you are sick of the woman you married and subsequently divorced... put your childish feelings aside and look after your kids. That doesn't mean living in squallor, it means realizing that raising kids is a LIFELONG commitment.
I think everyone needs to be slapped in a divorce.
Posted by: Northern Ontario | Oct 3, 2021 8:45:41 AM
I am not a product of divorce so my comments are based solely on "outside looking in". Your divorce should lower the standard of living you were accustomed to. It is quite possible a family had 1 car and 1 home that was ideal for the family. Now divorced, it is expected that the same salary must now pay for 2 living accommodations and an additional car. The courts will keep this in mind. We all know that women in general are not as well off in their later years because our society has always given them less pay for the same type of work. Their CPP/OAS is less then men. Courts also keep this in mind. The courts base their figures on financial facts and not common sense. The adults need to use proper judgement (very difficult in some cases, I am sure) to ensure the kids' needs are met but that both divorcees have a decent standard of living. If income has changed for any of the adults, there should be an adjustment made by them and not the courts. Be civilized I suppose.
Posted by: Fed-up of the whiners! | Oct 3, 2021 2:55:17 PM
To: Posted by Susan - September 28th: What makes you think that the women don't have jobs? Everyone I know is divorced and as it turns out, the women have better jobs than the men. Both of my sisters-in-law are in the medical field and both of their ex-husbands have "better things to do" than pay for the kids. Both dads have chosen not to see the children because they believe that the moms are out to get them. Neither of them pay alot (if at all). My brother was court ordered to pay $600/month for his 2 kids but he only gives her 2 or 300 every couple of months. She has not persued legal action because of the kids. She has never denied him access to the kids but he figures he shouldn't have to pay if he has nothing to do with them. What a LOSER! Both these women are VERY HARD-WORKING single moms whose kids have been given every opportunity through support groups and community activities. In fact, they have had more extra-curricular activities than my 2 kids and my husband and I have been together for 22 years.
* Every situation is different, so don't stereo-type if you don't have all the facts!*
Posted by: clear and focused | Oct 6, 2021 1:38:18 PM
Well, Well... For all you people who may have glanced over my previous posts, may I say... I told you so!!
The synchronicity here is palpable... as you will note the date of my posts precedes this article.
When will humanity wake up??
http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/pregnancy-drug-des-raises-daughters-cancer-odds
Posted by: Mel | Oct 7, 2021 8:00:00 AM
pat it sound like grade 3 was the best 5 years of your life
Posted by: annon | Nov 1, 2021 10:24:11 PM
Child support guidelines in Canada are designed to punish those who pay. A quick search on the Federal Governments website will explain how the guidelines came into effect and how truely corrupt they are. Child support is on gross income, 65% of your income is subject to taxes and child support, for one child. The model itsself is based on many assumptions…..the payer has NO expenses for the children yet they are to provide food, clothing, toys, beds, etc. etc. etc. the very same things the recipient has to provide. The model also states both the recipient and payer are single, yet statistics show most families are blended. The guidelines also state payments are to reflect payers income to be sure the children and spouse have the same standard of life they had before the seperation. So this means absolutly there is built in spousal support! With child support not reflected in tax assesments the payer is paying huge amount of taxes, while the recipient pays none. Yet if the recipient is on social assistance it is income, if the recipient is trying to build credit it is income…….child support is income and should be treated as such. The government decided it is not income simply to pad their pockets……1 billion dollars in five years to be exact!
I am a “second” wife, I completely agree with the concept of child support. They are his children, he should HELP to support them. My husband pays support for his 2 children, I have a child as well from a previous marriage. My sons father died when he was very young, I recieved no death benefits of any kind, I never went to social services. I worked full time. My son is 15, non verbal, not toilet trained, doesn’t sleep more than 5 hours per night, has servere eating dissorders….he is autistic and is considered severe on the spectum. I have worked full time his whole life…..until recently. We live in Saskatchewan where the disability supports are only availiable to low income families. For 4 years I received services which included child care based on my income alone because my husband is not my son bio father. This year they decided it has to be household income……..they have cut us off. I have had to quit my job to stay home with my son, I cannot pay $9 per hour in child care when I only made $11…..I cannot even pay the deductions off of my cheque! After taxes and child support from my husbands income we are left with less than $24000 per year to survive. BELOW poverty line! Even though it states in the guidelines and laws “the guidelines have to be flexable to accomodate more complex situations” this little exerpt is ignored in family courts today. 3 years ago my son got sick and almost died, It took months to diagnose and a full year to recover, during this time I could not work. My husband did the best he could to keep up with the required payments but soon fell behind, we ended up in family court and tried an undue hardship claim. It was denied……the ex-wife and her spouse make combind income far greater, almost double than ours! the judge said “second families are no excuse to lower the required payments” How’s that for you? my son almost died and our claim was denied. Because child support is tax exempt, I have lost all of my support for my DISABLED child, because the child support guidelines are so high my child lives in poverty. There is a reason these men don’t pay their child support…..if anyone in the media had the time or gutts to examine this important issue they would find the reason is THEY SIMPLY CANNOT PAY THESE ABSURD AMOUNTS and still financially support themselves. It is time for the government to wake up and review these guidelines and laws, so that they can be equal and stop treating these payers like criminals. I ask you……can you survive on 35% of you wage or less? Yes, support your children, but the payments must be more reasonable.
Posted by: annon | Nov 2, 2021 12:27:42 PM
Activist group on facebook, it is an open group check it out! Canadians for Family Law Reform