Sit down with your husband and have a very long talk. Keep it straight. You guys should make a list of your own house rules not the biomom. Tell him this is our house not hers. Yes its her kids she is concerned about BUT my house, my rules. Let her argue with you. You need to set things straight with your husband. I have the situation happening in my house but my husband hates his ex with a passion. She would send him letters saying how she wants teh kids in bed at a certain time, what movies to watch etc.e.c... I said no F**CK** WAY! I had a family meeting with all and stated. YOUR MOTHERS HOUSE HAS RULES. THOSE RULES STAY AT HER HOUSE. WE HAVE OUR OWN RULES HERE AND THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WILL BE APPLIED TO OUR HOUSE HERE. THIS IS NOT YOUR MOTHERS HOUSE. THIS IS MY HOUSE AND YOUR FATHERS. I DO NOT INTERFER IN YOUR MOTHERS RULES AT HER HOUSE AND SHE WILL NOT GIVE RULES UNDER MY HOUSE. The kids were completely satisfied. I told them. I know there are two sets of rules in each house and this can get confusing but they are separate houses, separate rules. Just like when you go to school they have rules there too. Its no different.
As far as the relationship with your husband and his ex. I wouldn't knock it too much. Dont interfer with that one. Its better to be friends than enemies and they can work togethr for their kids. I know you feel used in that sense. You feel its them even though they divorced such a long time ago and you are standing there holding an empty bag for what you have done for these kids. Plus you feel you've lost your husband in some sense. That the ex is interfering with your relationship. You've poored out your soul for these kids. Back off. You are not their mother and they will never have loyalties to you like they have with their parents. You can only be a best friend to them. Later on when they are adults things will change and sometimes it even gets better! teenage years are hard. I understnad your rules and your anger. You have to sit and discuss that with your hubby. And you need to discuss your feeling about his ex. Get them off your chest. Your jealousy is normal. Its not wrong.
What i've done with my ss is i go and turn off the ps and tell him to go see his father. I say sorry, i'm turning it off, your dad wants you.
Your husband has to push his daughter with her chores. You are getting angry and wasting energy. Go out, take care of yourself. Treat yourself to some good time. Then come back. Maybe go out privately with your husband and discuss alot of issues at hand. Tell him you love him, tell him your feelings.

Sounds like my situation. My sds are all grown but act like they are 12 most times. From what I can tell with my husband is it dosent matter how old they are they will never be made to do what they should do while living with you. I have 2 sons from my 1st marriage and my husband is much harder on them then he was and still his with his children. Just because they are grown dosent mean they should not have respect for me and my husband. They also think MOM is wonderful and I understand that Its their MOM and I would never say anything negative about MoM in front of ther girls. But now they are old enough to understand the things mom does (like buy drugs for the oldest daughter). I have found you cant correct what has been done. It does get better once they are grown and mature(still waiting with 1 sd to mature that is). They dont come over as much and spend time trying to cause a problems. I feel like walking away so much, but Im still here and can only pray things will get better. Please let me know how things go with you and I am always here to listen. Take Care Kasey

I agree with the rules portion above... Different houses different rules. In exception to ones concerning safety, these can be discussed between the adults involved and decided upon. As for the conversations between ex and husband, sorry I do not agree with staying out of it if it bothers you it deserves to be addressed. Yes it is important that they maintain a healthy parenting relationship but it should not affect your marriage. If it makes you uncomfortable something has to be done and not telling you is showing that he understands that the way he is handling it is wrong. With the children being 19 and 14 there is no reason they need to speak on a regular basis. I flat out told my husband, "Your ex is your ex for a reason. If you need a friend talk to me" If they are discussing the kids fine, even if they are just talking every once in awhile fine, as long as it doesn't make you feel uncomfortable. How would he feel if your ex and yourself began having lengthy phone calls for no reason concerning the children?

Great advice! thanks, you guys are great!
Organic Maria,thanks for all your time! wow. I know I will never be their mom, don't want to be, but the 14 year old was 2 when I came into her life. She has never known life without me. I guess I am jealous that I don't get much love. I will try to accept my place.

Kasey, I have tried not to say anything negative about BM, but I did say she was too protective(and not in the safety way)It is nuts not to let your kids go into your own backyard when you are not home when they are 9 and 14! Or not to let your 14 yr old ride his bike 6 blocks to the video store-alone!

Sand stone, I LOVE the line about x for a reason! I will use that!

FINALLY The hubby and I did sit down and have a good talk. He seems to understand, Hopefully some things will change.

Good luck to you. I do agree with sandstone that the ex is the x for a reason and buddyfriendship should be with u first and not her. WHat i meant by do not interfer with the relationship with his ex was do not knock it but to express your feelings on it. Yes, tell your hubby it bothers you that he is buddies...i would think an ex would be a distant polite friendship but not buddish! And yes i would be pretty pist off at my husband was having buddy conversation with his ex behind my back.
It hurts to know that you will never have their loyalty. It hurts me when i think of it but i tend to keep an arms length from them emotionally. Helps me from being hurt and knowing that my son will have complete loyalty to me i am happy with that as well.
I think it my case for now, because the kids do not live with us permanently it helps with alot of situations.

Hi Tenyears. I completely understand what you are going thru. I've been in my stepkids lives for almost 14 yrs now. It's been bad but I have seen changes for the better! Is it still bad? Yes - but in different ways. Stepdaughter was 17 when she got pregnant the 1st time. My husband paid 3 times for her to go to school and she couldn't make it any of those times. She even had to move in with us b/c she didn't have a dime left and was fed up with her mom. She insisted on bringing a girlfriend to live with me, my husband, stepson, 4 yr old grandson! We went from a household of 3 to 6 in a week. We told them 6 mos. - no rent. Save as much as you can, help around the house, cook once a week. None of that happened. I was ignored, yelled at, etc. At the end of 5 months they were asked to leave b/c I couldn't handle the stress anymore and they obviously would not have had the money anyway at the end of the 6 months. They moved out (we had to pay her deposit) and just when we thought she was getting her life together we find out she's pregnant again. We haven't had to really help her financially in the last couple of years, but my husband cannot say he's done helping her and she's 25. I just spent the weekend with all the kids with his extended family and the stepkids are friendly to most everyone but me. Very stand offish and distant. I hated it but (now that the weekend is over) I tell myself to move on with this wonderful man I have and enjoy the good times until we're with them again which will be Christmas. Hang in there. My point is they WILL move on and you at least will have the down time to enjoy with your husband. My husband is totally different with our grandson than he is with his own kids and our counselor (we've been off and on for 10 yrs for ONLY stepchildren issues) said that he will ALWAYS have some guilt over the situation even though his wife is the one who had several affairs and ended the marriage. This guilt is what drives him to do these 'wrong' things often. I keep trying to guide him in different directions and sometimes it sinks in - sometimes not. Keep in touch if you need to talk.

There are so many variations of this story on this forum. I am finally convinced that this jealousy thing is at the cruz of it all.

I don't believe that men and women realize how their jealousies affect their behaviers. I was married to jealous people. It took me a long time to figure out that these people were using all kinds of justifications for their behaviers--never admitting their 'stinking thinking'--most of all, not to themselves.

Jealous people make the people in their life perfectly Miserable--and the sick part? They get great satisfaction from making other people Miserable!

I have nothing in common with a jealous person--don't feel sorry for them or anything at all--except detest the evil they do or cause to happen.

I hope that one day you are given the respect you deserve. Children do not realize how hard it is to be the one shoved aside. For me being a step parent is both fullfilling and my worst nightmare all in one. You never get the full respect of parent and yet they expect you to act as one. When they need something they don't hesitate to tell you. Yet very rarely show you the love that you need. It's so hard... All I can say is make a united front... Your husband and you, make your rules discuss them and stick to them no matter what... If he stands with you they are less likely to disrespect you. Right now though he is showing you disrespect by continuing to carry on a relationship emotionally with the ex. As I stated previously, they should have open communication when it comes to the children, but that is it... Old habits are hard to let go and she is using him as her emoitional tampon when she has issues. It does take time for things to change, just make it clear that you deserve the respect you are asking for. If your husband starts respecting your issues, so will the children.

If your step children won't do chores, hire someone and have the bill sent to your husband. Tell him you can't do everything yourself, then let him decide if he wants to keep paying a maid or make his kids work. In every situation, you have a choice. There's never any need to bend over backwards or break your neck. If they refuse to clean their rooms, it's inevitable that they will eventually lose something of theirs at the most inopportune moment. When they come screaming that they can't find whatever it is, empathize with them and say "I'm sorry that happened to you." Say it sincerely, not sarcastically, then move on. Don't try to help them find it. If they're smart, they'll get the point and start taking better care of their own space. If not, they'll constantly lose their stuff... but it's not your stuff, so who cares? If you practice not letting their irresponsibility affect you personally, it will eventually help lower your stress and you'll be more equipped to treat them like friends.

I never yell at my step children. I let their Dad do it, and if he doesn't, I ignore the problem. After all, if they grow up to be slobs, or if they think money grows on trees, how does that in any way affect you? Why should you care? I try to be an example and I offer my advice when it's asked for. My step son has told me recently that he appreciates my influence... he said it just like that, and he's 15 years old. When he was 12, he hated me. Go figure.

As for hubby chatting with the X... that hurts. But believe me, it's better than having her angry and wanting to attack you in court every other week. He probably keeps her thinking they're cool so she won't try to use the justice system to steal your entire bank account as well as your retirement fund. Sad as it may seem, this is most definitely a reality in our country. Scorned women can usually get whatever they want from the father of their children, money-wise. Our court system leaves a lot to be desired in this area! Try to ignore your pride and let her think she's got a little "in" with your husband. Then smile all the way to the bank. You are saving yourself tons of money by allowing her to live in her little fantasy world. You may even want to thank your husband for being smart enough to keep her at bay. That way he won't think you're jealous and you won't come off sounding like the outsider. Men love to be complimented for their brilliance. Keep him on your team.

Women CAN NOT usually get whatever they want (or even what the children deserve) from a NC father, financially. The court's first consideration is that the father has enough to live on - which usually means he never, ever has to pay more than 40% or so of his income in child support, even if he has a dozen children. The magistrate told me that the CP is primarily responsible, financially, for the children, and the NCP is only required to contribute what he can reasonably comfortably afford.

Did you notice that you were responding to a two year old post?

That's not entirely correct, TOS. With my DH, at one point he was ordered to pay a ridiculous amount of CS that would have only left him with $23/ month. The judge told him too bad, get another job. Eventually we were able to slightly adjust it, but it's still quite ridiculous. We actually pay less than the order states because we have to pay rent and eat and silly little necessities like that.

"We actually pay less than the order states because we have to pay rent and eat and silly little necessities like that."

Are you saying that your husband is not paying the full amount of court mandated child support?

$23 dollars after what? Was he working full-time at a job that was appropriate for his education/skills? Did the court impute income to him? I don't think there is any state that would award child support equal to the NCP's entire net income-$23, unless the court imputed income. Of course if the NCP chose to deduct a lot of money for retirement, etc., that's not the court's problem.

We didn't think so either. My husband works full time, plus overtime. He's in a union.

Nope, we don't pay the full amount. We pay the original amount that was first awarded. He would have $23 after CS deductions. I have no clue what drugs the judge was on. We hired a lawyer to reduce the amount back to the original agreement. When we got the response from the magistrate, they stated that the original order was still in effect, but did not remove the other ridiculous order from the records. So until that's fixed, he owes thousands in arrears. The court is aware of the error, but the CS agency isn't. Really they don't care, just want the money.

BM managed to accomplish this mess because on the date that they were suposed to be in court, DH's paperwork said he was to be there at 2pm. Turns out, it was actually 9am and he missed the appearance. The judge had figured that he was just avoiding the hearing so he awarded BM the amount without ever seeing DH's income statements and work stub. He bought his paperwork with the times he was given to the magistrate, but they couldn't do anything at that point. We went back to court, see the last paragraph.
So yeah, poor BM only gets $500/ week instead of $783.

"The judge had figured that he was just avoiding the hearing so he awarded BM the amount without ever seeing DH's income statements and work stub."

The court has to have some evidence of salary before they award child support. I really doubt that the judge just picked that number out of a hat. And if he regularly works overtime, that IS included in his income.

In NY, there are no limits on how much of someones pay can be garnished for support purposes. If there are arrears, then they can take the entire check until they are caught up, but that would probably be reserved for situations where someone had a history of trying to avoid paying support.

You always can do something. When an order is entered, you have thirty days to appeal. I agree that a judge would not likely have made an order without knowing the NCP income, unless that NCP had a history of avoiding support hearings. There was also time for appeal, and a very good reason for such, if NCP was given court documents with the wrong time of hearing on them.

I am wondering if the NCP is being completely honest with his new wife, about what has happened before she came along.

"The court's first consideration is that the father has enough to live on - which usually means he never, ever has to pay more than 40% or so of his income in child support, even if he has a dozen children. The magistrate told me that the CP is primarily responsible, financially, for the children, and the NCP is only required to contribute what he can reasonably comfortably afford".

Just exactly how much of a percentage do you think a NCP should have to pay in CS. Maybe you are confused, but child support is meant to cover a portion of what a child costs. If the CP does not want to cover the rest, which they should have to do since it is their child, than maybe they should send the child to live with the CP. You seem upset that the court system actually cares how much the NCP has left to live on and that the NCP does not have to pay for the child entirely on their own.

Don't get me wrong I am all for child support, but it seems to me that you think that dad or the NCP should have to pay for everything while the CP gets the benefit of raising the child and not having to pay for anything.

Give me a break

Oh no, I was right there when this all happened. He kept me involved in everything. I was at the court with DH. I was completely shocked, because I didn't think you could award CS without the other parent's income information. I knew that the courts are biased, but that was ridiculous.
We are on our second appeal, since the first one didn't even mention the modified CS order.

"The court has to have some evidence of salary before they award child support. I really doubt that the judge just picked that number out of a hat."

Very funny!!! Yeah, the judge ordered my son's dad to pay $310 a month. He didn't have ANY income information from him, yes he pulled that number out of his a$$. My attorney later exchanged information with his attorney, submitted a corrected calculation using both of our incomes and it ended up being $396-$518 a month (it went up over the years since they were calculating back support only) but the judge did absolutely make an order without any information. It happens. [and if you don't fight it, you get stuck with it]

mom1sm2,

"Just exactly how much of a percentage do you think a NCP should have to pay in CS."

I think it should depend on how many children you have. You really think that is unreasonable? In my state, if you have 1 child together, the amount is X. If you have 2, it is three percent higher. If you have 3, it is another three percent higher. If you have 4, or 5, or 12, it is still the same amount it would be with 3. What matters is not whether the children can eat, but whether the NCP has plenty of money.

In intact families with a lot of children, the parents do not each spend 60% of their respective incomes on themselves. If you have a lot of kids, you have to accept that the vast majority of your income is going to go toward supporting your children. You shouldn't be able to get out of that by divorcing your spouse. Why should the NCP have more disposable income after the divorce than before, while the children suffer?

I completely agree with that, TOS. Talk about a faulted system.

I can see how a judge might base a support order on full-time work at minimum wage, in the absence of other information, but $783 a week is clearly not based on minimum wage.

I think Kathline may be correct, that the husband was not being completely honest about something.

the courts first consideration is NOT if the father has enough to live on. As of right now with the amount of cs that DH pays if I were not here he would not be able to afford a one bedroom anything much less a big enough place for his kids to be there. He barely makes enough to cover insurance (which is required) and pay the light bill... NOTHING ELSE!! And just to fully clarify this situation he makes almost double now than what he made when the cs was established.

** and as you all know for a cumulative four years now the kids have not really lived with mom except on paper...but given our lack of funds we just havent had the option of fighting it. It is just better to pay it than to try and pay it and a court battle that will inevitably put the kids in the middle since there is no way she is ever going to willingly change the papers. aww well

But, I do agree it is faulted and fully acknowledge that some cp's are completly short changed by far

I get what you are saying TOS, but I still think that there has to be enough money left over for the NCP to be able to live and pay bills like rent so their children can have a place to stay and for a car payment so they can go to work and get their kids and such. I do not think it is fair that some parents pay so much in child support that the NCP pays for little of what that child costs and is also the primary parent. I agree that it is all relative to what you make, but some CP just get way more than they really need.

Why do you feel he hasn't been honest? I've been there from before the CS situation even came up. I'm the on that keeps track of the paperwork, I've been to lawyers with him, I've been with him in court. I've held him when he cried over being kept away from his kids. They weren't married so there was no divorce agreement or anything. I know what's going on, thank you.

Idk if the judge based that amount on the previous court documents from the first CS case, but that first case was six months before the modification. The judge had no updated income statements or pay stubs. It is true that NYS does not have a limit on the amount of CS that is garnished from one's check. But with that one judgement my DH was automatically thousands in arrears, starting back from the date of the first CS order.

Mom of 4, that's exactly the case with us. If I weren't here to share the bills, DH would not have been able to afford to exercise visitation for his kids. In addition to the household bills, we supply everything they need at our home, because there is no sharing of kid items. Three kids can consume a lot of food, grow out of clothes like crazy, etc. So we have to pay this inflated CS amount on top of us getting what we need for the home, the kids and ourselves. I know that it was happens in situations like these, but BM's greed and vindictiveness makes it that much harder.
So TOS, do you feel that DH should just give BM his whole paycheck and sacrifice being able to get his kids? How is that fair to him or the kids? There are TWO parents to care for these kids, why should ONE get all the help and benefits and the other be a martyr?

"There are TWO parents to care for these kids"

This is exactly what I am saying.

Maybe I am feeling a little antagonistical right now... but really TOS and others what do you say to situations like these ... it seems june and myself have the same kind of siuation (in regards to cs)

mom_of_4,

Nobody cares if the CP has enough income to support the children. At one point, my full-time income including child support would have qualified me for a PITI of a whopping $950. You can barely rent a one-bedroom apartment for that around here. I am still expected to house and feed my kids and pay my bills. I don't get to say, "Oh, I don't have enough money to pay the electric bill," and get out of it. I had to borrow money, I had to work two jobs, I had to take out what little retirement money I had, I don't get to put a penny into retirement, I have to plan on working until I drop dead - why does the NCP get to say, "Can't afford it - I guess I won't pay." Why does the court get to tell him that he doesn't have to pay to support child #4, 5, or 6, if he "can't afford it?"

I think it is hard even for a wife, to know all the issues with CS. I accept Junge, that you did see all recent paperwork, etc. The mother may have submitted evidence, for example, that dad had previously had a second job, etc etc. I would never have a relationship with a man who owed back CS.

I am so with TOS on this. CPs do not have any excuses: oh I am not going to feed my children today because I don't make enough. they go and get second jobs, borrow money or go into debt. Nobody cares if CPs make enough money. NCPs have a great excuse: oops, can't pay, have no money. I guess they knows CPs would still feed the children. How convenient.

"Judge said: too bad, get another job." Exactly! I so agree with a judge. When i was not making enough, i got a 2nd job on the weekends, and then eventually found better paying job. If your husband has nothing left after paying CS, then he should get a 2nd job.

This is a tough one. I'll use TOS as an example why just because she most recently posted her situation.
When the family was 'intact', there was likely just enough money to support one house and care for the kids. Together the adults could chose what to scrimp on, what to splurge on, and how much to save for retirement so they could both be covered at the appropriate times. Then divorce happens and none of those needs change, but now there are two homes, and two seperate retirements to take care of. If the money just barely covered the family together, how can you expect it to cover the family divided?

I think at that point both parents have to be able to say I can cut this, I can give up that we can move here, etc. and find a way to make it work. Of course, this rarely happens as logic is not the foremost emotion in a divorce. You then have a situation where neither party has enough to go 'round on their own, and each party complains that THEY are getting the raw end of the deal. Really - is there a good end??

When DH and his ex split, she left him with the house, its mortgage and bills, the credit cards, etc. She moved to a new town, got a better paying job and within no time was able to afford to buy a new house on her own. Meanwhile, DH was struggling to afford a house he never could have qualified to by on his own, on his own AND pay support. Was this fair? Of course not. What they should have done was sell the house and found places to live they could each afford based on their new single status. It's only because DH had helpful parents (then got a helpful GF!) and of course then got custody, that he was able to keep the house. But my point is, is this all the courts fault? I don't think so. He could have sold the house and lived more within his new 'means', but it was important to him to keep something stable in his daughter's life. I do respect that, but I also believe that he didn't have much room to complain if he opted to keep a house Fanny and Freddie knew he couldn't afford on his own. Of course he'd be broke! But if CS was based on him being able to make that payment on his own he'd have $2 left to pay in support. Which should really be his priority - house or child?

The biggest issue I see is that parents use CS as a way to stick it to the other parent and hit them where it hurts, so they lie and cheat to twist the knife as deep as they can. If parents focused more on doing the best thing for their child and less on revenge, I think support would be much more fair.

JNM, I think TOSs situation was much worse. Xs second wife had enought money that X could quit work. Now less total income, etc etc.

As to parents who use CS to stick it to each other, IRL I havent seen that happen. I have seen many moms who standard of living has gone down while dads has gone up.

Finedreams said:

"I am so with TOS on this. CPs do not have any excuses: oh I am not going to feed my children today because I don't make enough. they go and get second jobs, borrow money or go into debt. Nobody cares if CPs make enough money. NCPs have a great excuse: oops, can't pay, have no money. I guess they knows CPs would still feed the children. How convenient."

I have to agree whole-heartedly on this. My X got laid off in February. He's made a few sporatic CS payments since, but is almost up to $3000 behind in payments. I work full-time and DS and I live with FDH. FDH has had to be the one to make up the differences in my finances. Granted, I feel blessed to have been getting anything at all when he could've just as well decided to not send a dime (he's done that before, too). But it's still a hardship we have been facing and has put FDH in a bind as well.

One day X came over to deal with a situation regarding DS. After that was over, we were talking out in the front yard as X was about to leave. DS was inside playing video games so it was just FDH, X and I. X actually had the nerve to say, in front of FDH, "well I haven't been able to send any money because I've had to make sure my bills get paid first". If I was FDH, I would've decked him. Here is the bio-father telling the future step-father that he can't support his own son because he has to make sure his bills are paid, even though FDH is the one taking up the slack. To me, it was a slap in the face to FDH. But when I asked FDH about it later, he said it didn't bother him because he knows how X is.

That situatuion just proves the above statement that NCPs have an excuse; no money, no CS. When am I or FDH ever able to make that excuse???? Never. I'd like to see him treat his credit card bill or his motorcycle payment with the same regard as his CS. He'd have them banging down his door. But FDH and I are expected to take it in stride and never ask about it lest we seem "greedy" or "money-hungry".

There is a flip side to this also. When the Attorney General called us to mediation because it had been 4 years since the CS had been set and it was time for a modification, X had a fit and picked one fight after another with me. For 3 of the 4 years we had been divorced, he was making at least double the amount he was making when the divorce was finalized. I had no choice but to accept it and go on because, in our state, CS only gets modified every 3 years. So after the new CS amount was set, X told DS that he wasn't going to be able to be involved in DS's sports because he was going to have to have 3 jobs just to be able to make ends meet. Oh puuulease! He never even got a second one. As a matter of fact, he hadn't even been paying the new amount for 6 months before he lost his only job.

"Which should really be his priority - house or child?"

You can't separate the two. The children have to have somewhere to live - in my state, the building code specifies a minimum number of square feet per person in bedrooms. Renting a one or two bedroom apartment, which is all the "formula" would have allowed, was simply not an option. Yet I made too much money to qualify for subsidized housing, not to mention the fact that in my town they weren't even taking names for the waiting list because the list was so long. Is it really unreasonable of me to live in a 900 square foot, one bath house when I had at least 4 children at home? Often there are no other options for the CP - the children need housing, and they need food.

In my exH's case, it was not a matter of "supporting two households." He did not, even after finally getting a job, contribute anything at all to the household (mortgage or utilities) where he lives - and that is based not on speculation, but on the financial documents he filed with the court.

TOS, by the time I had reached that part of my post I was not refering to you, but to my husband. He had only himself and his DD to house. The home they had which he worked so hard to keep was not a neccesity, but a want. In HIS case, which is what I was speaking of, there was a choice. I think many times there is a choice, and people pick the wrong one.

In your case, your ex went straight from your home to that of another woman. This is not always the case. I was speaking as though each parent had to support themselves after the split. Heck, once DH and I got together he was much better off and we sold that house for one twice its size. He could quit work tomorrow, we could live off my income and thus collect more in CS from his ex. None of this was my point. I was trying to speak rather generally. Hard to do sometimes on this forum.

I was not trying to gloss over your situation as KK implied, rather using the expenses you specicified as examples in my own post.