Are Joint Custody and 50/50 Custody the Same Thing

[mmmagique]

Why? You told that dad's forum that you already had a bunch lined up. Why not stick with those?

[SuperPop]

When both parents have similar incomes, a true 50/50 split will generally rule out child support.

If one parent earns $135k/year and the other earns $40k/year, the parent who earns more will likely end up owing the CP support despite a the actual timeshare.

And that can go the other way, too - the CP can end up paying CS regardless of the timeshare. Then we look at the shared-income model which shifts things around.

Such fun, isn't it?

Honestly, i've never really been that interested in learning about child support, i know its something i SHOULD study if i want to continue in the field i'm in, BUT, for me personally, for my personal legal case....Money's just money, if lost, it can be replaced, time with a child if lost is irreplaceable.

This is why i don't really like when parenting time percentage is used in child support calculations, too often, the childs time with one of the parents is restricted so the other parent can have more support. I'd support legislation for presumptive 50/50 custody and child support based solely on difference of income or a set percentage.

[Dogmatique]

Why? You told that dad's forum that you already had a bunch lined up. Why not stick with those?

I think he's talking about M's forum. Which, incidentally, rarely uses an IP ban

- - - Updated - - -

Honestly, i've never really been that interested in learning about child support, i know its something i SHOULD study if i want to continue in the field i'm in, BUT, for me personally, for my personal legal case....Money's just money, if lost, it can be replaced, time with a child if lost is irreplaceable.

This is why i don't really like when parenting time percentage is used in child support calculations, too often, the childs time with one of the parents is restricted so the other parent can have more support. I'd support legislation for presumptive 50/50 custody and child support based solely on difference of income or a set percentage.

I'd support "best interest of the child".

Are you forgetting or ignoring the concept of "status quo"? Believe it or not, that's in place for the wellbeing of the child.

[SuperPop]

I'd support "best interest of the child".

Are you forgetting or ignoring the concept of "status quo"? Believe it or not, that's in place for the wellbeing of the child.

Status Quo, in the event of unmarried parents has been used negatively against the 'male' for a long time. While i believe, it has more benefits then faults, i believe taking a 1yr old baby and saying "Mom had custody for that year" and deciding the next 18yrs on that is a bit of failed logic.

Status quo, isn't a bad system, but doesn't work in the cases of 'keep away parents' and actually is the complete opposite of the common court belief that the primary parent should try to 'foster a relationship between the child and the non-primary parent' because, the primary parent is too busy establishing 'status quo' to foster that relationship.

[mmmagique]

I think he's talking about M's forum. Which, incidentally, rarely uses an IP ban

I know. But he was on the dad's forum talking about the free advice place.

[Dogmatique]

Status Quo, in the event of unmarried parents has been used negatively against the 'male' for a long time. While i believe, it has more benefits then faults, i believe taking a 1yr old baby and saying "Mom had custody for that year" and deciding the next 18yrs on that is a bit of failed logic.

Status quo, isn't a bad system, but doesn't work in the cases of 'keep away parents' and actually is the complete opposite of the common court belief that the primary parent should try to 'foster a relationship between the child and the non-primary parent' because, the primary parent is too busy establishing 'status quo' to foster that relationship.

The fact remains that if you want a decent shot, you need to be married to Mom or have already been utilizing a 50/50 timeshare.

Being married when you conceive and have the child carries a hell of a lot more protection than not being married to the Mother.

When you're married there is an automatic presumption of paternity. Being unwed, there is not. The unwed father must first establish paternity before he even has standing to file.

So let's say that on average it takes 6 months to establish paternity in an unwed situation. That newborn has spent the entire six months in Mom's care and knows no different.

Is it truly in the child's best interest to have his life disrupted in a manner that can cause serious problems later on (for the child)? How is that in his best interest?

We're talking about infants here. And while there are genuine cases where the primary is suddenly incapable of maintaining that status quo, that's not too common at all.

The logic: In an unwed situation where the minor child has spent the majority of time with one parent, happy settled and thriving, why is disrupting his schedule so drastically in his best interests? And yes, that goes for both genders.

- - - Updated - - -

I know. But he was on the dad's forum talking about the free advice place.

Tru, dat!

[SuperPop]

That's why i talk so much about 'step up' plans. I agree, sorta, that it would not be in the best interests of a child to suddenly be taken away from the primary parent 50% of the time. But, if a 'step up' plan, the change is more natural, more gradual, it gives the child the chance to get used to the new situation.

[Dogmatique]

So we fall back to status quo.

One parent has status quo. Again, why is it the child's best interest to change things at all?

And that's not even touching the subject of age.

The reality is that a true 50/50 timeshare is simply not commonly ordered over the wishes of the primary parent. Even during an initial custody determination, the general stance is that 50/50 ONLY works when both parents agree and are capable of working it out. A 50/50 timeshare will only work if and when both parents are okay with it. Ordering it against the wishes of one parent rarely ends well. The courts recognize this.