To my mind, the costs of litigation and of fighting are so high – that I really can’t imagine deciding that I would rather fight than settle. But I guess it mainly depends on how the conflict is framed – whether you feel that there is an important principle at stake.
If you’re going to fight about something having to do with the children, they will know that you are fighting in court, and they will know that one parent thinks the other is screwing them over (or both parents think the other is screwing them over) and they will feel pulled-apart and tormented and guilty, over being the subject of the parents’ conflict.
If a couple has true joint custody – 50/50 time division with the children – NY State still requires some payment of child support.
There are several options:
- put in payments back and forth to each other – i.e., dad pays mom $100 on the 1st of the month, and mom pays dad $100 on the 15th of the month
- net out child support payments, based on incomes – if dad would have to pay $1,000 per month child support to mom, under the statute, and mom would have to pay $800 per month to dad, then dad pays $200 per month to mom
- analyze incomes and expenses, and allocate the shortfall equally
- put in child support to agreement and divorce papers, and enter into a “side agreement,” signed 1 day after, where the recipient parent agrees not to enforce the order for child support. This one is risky – because it’s really an end-run around the courts, and it’s hard to know whether it would be enforceable.
For someone who is very economically comfortable, but feels that there is a principle at stake – “if we both have the children 50% of the time, why should I pay child support?” – is it really worth fighting about in court? You will end up, very quickly, spending amounts on attorney fees that are similar to what you would spend by just paying child support. And – in general – the courts are not too sympathetic to parents who don’t want to pay child support.
Even in a 50/50 time sharing case.
But – there is, I think, an unconscious fantasy that you will teach the other person a lesson. That he/she will finally understand how hurt you were, or how wrong he/she is – when you show that you are willing to stake more money than is in controversy, to prove him/her wrong, and you right.
I don’t think anyone comes out of court feeling, “Wow, now I really get it, I was so wrong.” In fact – I don’t think anyone comes out of court feeling, “Wow that was so satisfying, that judge totally understood me.”
In the divorce context, that is.
And then there is this article (from the website of Geneen Roth, Vol. 6, Issue 6):
I recalled something [my ex] said during a fight we had in a spectacular restaurant. “Why not think of all the times we’ve celebrated and all the times we have yet to celebrate as a bank account from which we can draw funds?” he asked. “Let’s put aside this fight, take some celebration savings out now, and replenish the fund when we get home.”
I remember looking from him to the mushroom tart on my plate, thinking, I could let this horrible fight go. I could enjoy this tart, and we could have a wonderful time. Then I thought, ‘but if I let it go, I will be a wimp. He doesn’t deserve to have a good time after what he’s done. If I let go, he will win.’ I didn’t bother to ask myself what I would lose by holding on to my anger — I only figured that if he didn’t love me, the least he could do was suffer. So I said, “Forget it. It’s a terrible idea,” and ruined the evening for us both