Does the non-custodial parent have to pay child support if they have their child 50% of the time?

Each state is different. In California, I know for certain they do (although when custody is 50/50, it's hard to call one the cp and the other the ncp).

Search rbb's posts and you'll find an explanation (and me going bananas about how unfair that is).

Interesting. It doesn't sound fair does it? I wonder how it differs with the Canadian laws.

Fair is rarely the goal of CS laws it seems. I mean, they really take the "Act in the Best Interests of the Children" rule and follow it to the letter. The shared custody states feel the child is best off with equal living conditions in whichever household they reside.

For the fathers paying CS and only seeing their children every other weekend, they'd often prefer to see their kids more even if it means that they must pay the same CS. I believe the CS is usually less in the shared custody states, however. It might have something to do with the mothers being better able to work and earn money when they have 50% more time away from their children.

For the parents that have their children yet still pay most of the childcare costs...well...it's outrageous. It sounds like I'd be financing my ex-wife's visitation.

Later,
Bobby

What's up Bobby?!

I know, I haven't been here in a while. I'm having a hard time keeping up with all my cases lately. There is no shortage of cases needing enforcement, that's for sure.

To answer your question, miss jes, the non-custodial parent has to pay support when the formula says he/she has to pay support.

I've seen situations where the primary custodial parent pays support because her income is so much higher that the non-custodial parent's income, whose visitation is extensive (i.e., 40% range).

So, it depends on the guideline formula. In California we have a couple software programs that do the math for us (thank God!)