That is a double edged sword. Having them tied together could hurt as much as help...

One has nothing to do with the other. Your insinuating that if a father pays his child support she should never with hold visitation? Like its an admission fee.

One no BM who wants her kids to prosper should never with hold visitation from their father.

But let's remember something. BM's are not the only ones who view the kids as a pay day. Think about this sight and how many BM's have caved and agreed for the husband to take more time to "lower" child support. So it isnt right that a Dad take the kids more often in an effort to change their child support amount.

Here is what I think, whatever and whoever pays support should pay it, whoever and whatever has visitation should show up. Period Dot!

If they were, then Uberskank wouldn't have seen her child for two years when DH was the CP.

IMHO I don't believe parenting time should be withheld because child support is behind or hasn't been paid. A parent still deserves the time with their child.
I do understand that some states tie the AMOUNT of support to the amount of time spent, which makes sense. IF you are seeing your child 40% of the time you shouldn't have to pay as much as someone who only spends 10% with their child - simply on the principle of when you have a child with you in your home and care - you are providing everything needed (in theory).
IDK, it's such a delicate subject.

NJ is solely based on how many over nights you have which is factored. so its his pay, my pay, Minues the deduction for healthcare because I pay for it. They take his nights and my nights and wholla child support.

Now my schedule just change the ex moved and the kids entered highschool so their schedule has changed. We just got done with court where the ex agreed (he didnt have much of a choice really because the judge was calling in the kids if he didnt) that he was dropping school nights so he has dropped from 120 nights a year to 43. But I had to refile for the 3rd time in three months...why?

because my custody and child support are seperate issues (however based upon each other) I go back on Friday to have my support changed...again

I do not think they should be tied together. Someone who never sees their kids (or doesn't want to) shouldn't get off with not supporting them financially. And someone who is out of a job shouldn't lose their relationship with their children because of it.

Instead, I think that both sides of the fence need to be upheld as COURT ORDERS. Meaning, punish the withholding CP for the visits that are missed as harshly as you would punish the NCP for getting way behind on CS.

If states were getting money for how many days the children were with the NCP, they would probably be a lot more fair with their Family Court rulings.

No parent should be able to deny the other parent access to their child for monetary reasons.

No parent should be able to deny their child monetary support based on their unwillingness or inability to visit their children.

I still think the amount to raise a kid should be split in half and put in a bank account from each parent to support that kid! I mean the basics not extras. That way both parents are supporting the kid and each parent can decide what extras to be spent on the kid.

Things like rent/mortgage should be wash as they both have to have space for their kids no matter how much they see or don;t see their kid. Possibly a few other things as well. But that is my idea.

And no it shouldn't be linked to visitation.