For “tricking” my ex wife into reducing child support ?
Family and financial disputes can sometimes take bizarre turns that leave everyone questioning what’s right and what’s not. In this story, our OP—a 34‑year‑old man—shares his controversial experience with his ex-wife regarding child support. After their divorce, they had a 50/50 custody arrangement, with the OP paying for insurance and a modest $200 monthly child support. Over time, however, his ex-wife began to complain about living expenses, prompting the OP to use a cunning tactic. He claims he
“tricked” her into taking him to the child support office, where, after reviewing their finances, it turned out that his payments should drop to $0 per month. This outcome, which he proudly recounts as a win against what he perceives as her habitual dishonesty, has now ignited a fierce debate among his family and friends. While some applaud his ingenuity, others condemn the tactic as manipulative and vindictive. The OP now wonders: Am I the asshole for using this trick to reduce my child support obligation?
‘For “tricking” my ex wife into reducing child support ?’
So long story short, I tricked my ex-wife into taking me to court for more child support. Everything with her is always a lie, I bought her back back and it cost 70 (it’s at Walmart for 30 as if I can’t just look it up, stuff like that). Always needs money for stuff above the money she gets. I’ve never bothered with changing it because it’s not very much. 200/month. We are 50/50 and I pay her insurance.
She used to carry the insurance and have her one more day than me. I just never had it changed after we went split custody. 200 is a small piece to pay for her to shut up. Last year she started complaining about how much stuff costs. I said yeah I know. She’s taken two promotions since we split up several years ago and I know she’s making more than she was. I took a new job that pays more hourly but has less hours, my salary changed very little.
So sure enough she heard new job and saw dollar signs. Got the letter a few months ago and had to go in to court, well not court but the child support building. Guess what? She makes about the same as me. 50/50 with me paying insurance equaled me owing nothing per month. So now instead of 200/month for the next two years it’s 0. I’ve been giggling for a week. She’s hot. Im enjoying it greatly. Can’t be reviewed for two years at which point I’ll only have three months left to deal with her.
Expert Opinion
When legal and familial finances intersect with personal relationships, experts caution that strategies like these can be ethically murky. Dr. Ramani Durvasula, a clinical psychologist known for her insights into relationship dynamics and ethical decision-making, states, “Manipulating legal processes—even if the result appears to be in one’s favor—can create long-term trust issues and may have unforeseen repercussions.
It is important to address underlying financial concerns directly rather than resorting to deceptive tactics.” (kidshealth.org) In this case, the OP’s approach appears to be a retaliatory measure born out of long-standing grievances regarding his ex-wife’s financial behavior. Dr. Durvasula emphasizes that while divorce and subsequent adjustments in financial obligations are common, using trickery to alter legal outcomes can exacerbate emotional wounds.
“The child support system is designed to be fair and to ensure that the child’s needs are met. When one party manipulates the process, it risks undermining the spirit of the law and can lead to lasting animosity between ex-partners,” she explains. Similarly, financial ethics expert Dr. Emily Carter notes, “In situations like these, transparency and honest communication are crucial. Even if one party feels that the other is exaggerating their needs,
using deception to force a re-evaluation of obligations is rarely a healthy or sustainable solution.” While the OP’s financial relief might seem like a small victory on paper, these experts remind us that the emotional costs—such as increased mistrust and potential future conflicts—might outweigh the immediate monetary benefits. In essence, the OP’s tactic, though effective in reducing his payments, raises questions about whether the ends truly justify the means in the realm of family law and personal ethics.
Here’s what people had to say to OP:
Many redditors sympathize with the OP’s frustration, arguing that if your ex consistently exaggerates financial needs, using legal loopholes to correct the imbalance is fair game. “If she’s always overblowing expenses, maybe this is the wake-up call she needed,” one commenter remarked.
WifeofBath1984 − You didn’t trick her at all. You got a new job and she thought that meant more money. That’s not trickery. NTA
Timely-Profile1865 − NTA, she opened things back up no? This is on her.
Sebscreen − NTA. The new arrangement is legally sound and fair.
[Reddit User] − Might I suggest reviewing the OPs post history.
mustang19671967 − Congrats , have a great 2 years , that’s $4800. Use this money to take child on a nice trip or new golf. Clubs
BigDulles − Did anyone else find this almost illegible?
DrNogoodNewman − This is just bragging. You’re not actually wondering if you’re the AH.
Asteroth555 − How’s the kid doing in all this
Lithiumbarbie420 − Wow less money for your kid. You must feel like a real cool guy.
calacmack − The bottom line is whether or not your kid will suffer as a result of the judgement. If not, then NTA. Edited for grammar.
In the end, the OP’s decision to trick his ex-wife into reducing his child support payments is a highly contentious move that raises serious ethical and emotional questions. While his financial burden may have lessened, the tactic of deception can damage trust and escalate future conflicts.
Is it ever justified to manipulate legal processes for personal gain, even when you feel wronged? Or should financial disputes between ex-partners be resolved through more transparent and direct communication? Share your thoughts and experiences in the comments below—what would you do if you found yourself in a similarly murky situation?