I think the thing here is we're all applying our own situations to a completely different scenario. This is NOT about each of our situations. It's about ONE family and their dynamic. When I start to apply my situation to theirs, it doesn't make any sense.
I think if it were me, I'd want to work to have something to do and the extra money would probably make up a big difference in the drop in income.
It sounds like these people are not struggling to keep food on the table, shelter and clothes. My values are such that if this is the case, I'd much rather see the kids be able to spend more time with their dad and have a connected relationship with both parents than have extra money for fancier clothes, activities etc. Just my values, but people outweigh money for me every time the basic needs are being met.
Again, we can't apply our own circumstances....
This show is a highly orchestrated thing that gives you maybe 8 minutes all told of info about their lives. On the basis of that, we can judge? I think not.
I can tell you why *in general* it's a bad idea to push parents to accept voluntary drops in child support, and why the courts are not going to go for it. But to suggest that this lady can or should do anything, on the basis of the Dr. Phil show, is overstepping.
(My takeaway from that show: Wow, there's a lot of train wrecks out there. I sure am sane and together. Now I must find chocolate.)
I'm impressed, btw, at the restraint & relative civility on this thread, which hasn't gotten yanked.