S’porean Wants Ex-Wife to Pay Same Child Support Amount He Did As Their Children Now Lives With Him

A Singaporean man recently took his ex-wife to family court to get her to pay him the same amount of child support he previously did after their two children began living with him.

As reported by CNA, the couple divorced in September 2018 and have two children together, now aged 10 and 13.

Subsequent to the divorce, the children lived with their mother and the father was ordered to pay his ex-wife SGD2,640 or approximately RM9098 per month for child maintenance, which he did.

However, starting in October 2021, the children began living with their father for an undisclosed reason and continued to do so until today.

Hence, the ex-husband sought for the order to be reversed, meaning that the mother would have to pay him monthly child maintenance instead.

For illustration purpose only

In court, the ex-wife said that she shouldn’t have to pay the same amount as her ex-husband did previously because child support should be in proportion to the individual’s income.

Iterating that she just recently lost her job and is starting out afresh as a financial adviser with purely commission-based income, the ex-wife said that she should only pay SGD790 or approximately RM2720 per month. This amount is around a quarter of her monthly income and about 10 to 15% of the children’s monthly expenses.

In the case’s judgment published on Thursday (15 June), District Judge Adrene Cheong ordered the ex-wife to pay SGD1,000 or around RM3443 monthly to the ex-husband.

For illustration purposes

This is after noting the mother’s current financial status and how the father is in a “fortunate position to step up and step in to provide comfortably for the children” as “affordability is not an issue for the father”.

Furthermore, the judge also refused the man’s request for the child support payment to be backdated to November 2021 as it would be an “overly technical mathematical exercise that was not meaningful to parents who were committed to their children”.

The judge also reminded both parents to not treat their children as “an accounting expense that should be reimbursed”, stressing that it is not healthy for their relationship as co-parents and not what the law envisages.

For illustration purposes

She further told the parents to “exercise grace and patience” with each other to move forward in their co-parenting journey.

So, what do you guys think of the whole situation? Share your thoughts with us in the comments.

Also read: “I wouldn’t get married!” – S’porean Auntie Wins Internet With Candid Answer in Street Interview