Why is child support based on what the payer earns, and not what the child actually needs?

[bleuroze]

The intent is to ensure the child has the same standard of living as they would if they had both parents.

Let's say you're a child. Parent A has custody of you and you are Parent A's only child. You visit Parent B every other summer. Parent B has two younger children with Stepparent. Parent B pays enough support to cover their share of your food, clothing, medical, housing, and other absolute basic expenses, but no extras. Parent A can not afford extras either.

You notice that when you're visiting Parent B, your younger siblings have their own rooms, with toys and game systems. They attend private school and are ahead of you in their academics despite being two and three years younger. They are also excited to talk about the vacations they took for spring and Christmas breaks. How does this make you feel? They have a much better life becaue Parent B makes enough money to give it to them. But Parent B doesn't make enough to give the same to you? Or chooses not to? Kinda makes you feel like you're less worthy because you're not in the home with them.

The intent of support is to give the child the same lifestyle as they would have with the parents together. In some cases, this means a stay at home parent, better education options, or just equality with other siblings.