I understand both sides, but I still feel that subsequent children should not be penalized because an obligor has more children. Unfortunately, some parents become underemployed to skirt CS (but they are also making less money, so really I don't see the logic), but if a CP decides to make up the difference that's their choice.
If an family is not intact, it doesn't give the older children more of a priority financially, at leat not in my opinion. Each parent gets to make their own decisions about kids. If a NCP has more kids knowing it may decrease the CS they pay to exsisting kids, then as a parent they have a right to make that choice. Albeit not a popular one for the CP.
If an family is not intact, it doesn't give the older children more of a priority financially, at leat not in my opinion. Each parent gets to make their own decisions about kids. If a NCP has more kids knowing it may decrease the CS they pay to exsisting kids, then as a parent they have a right to make that choice. Albeit not a popular one for the CP.