Britney Spears is ‘angry’ that Kevin Federline wants an increase in child support

4th Annual Hollywood Beauty Awards

Recently, we learned that Kevin Federline was asking Britney Spears and her people for an increase in his child support. Legally, K-Fed has full custody of their two sons, because Britney is still under a conservatorship and has been under it for a decade. Britney’s biggest defenders will say that the conservatorship is mostly about her finances, but… no, it’s not. The financial stuff is a big part of it, absolutely, but legally Britney cannot even make major life decisions for herself. Remember when she wanted to marry her manager? It became a legal mess, because if she was competent enough to get married than she would have no need for the conservatorship, and everyone agreed that she needed the conservatorship more than she needed a husband. All of that to say, Britney gets to spend a lot of time with her sons, and that’s because K-Fed has allowed it. And now he wants an increase in child support because of how much money Britney made from her Las Vegas residency. Apparently, Britney is pissed about it.

Kevin Federline can’t bank on ex Britney Spears’ salary. Since he has custody of their sons Sean Preston, 12, and Jayden James, 11, the rapper, 39, is requesting an increase to his monthly $20,000 in child support “to recognize the sacrifices he’s made,” reveals a source. “He could have threatened to cut off access to the kids, but has not.”

Spears, who raked in more than $137 million during her Las Vegas residency, doesn’t buy his reasoning. “She’s angry Kevin is asking for more money because she pays for everything,” says the insider, noting the divorced duo have a “strained” relationship. “Those boys are her world. She is an amazing mother.”

It’s a description she’s worked hard to achieve. Following her highly publicized breakdown in 2007, the pop star, now 36, was placed under dad Jamie’s conservatorship and full custody of her kids was handed to Federline. Still, “Kevin has always allowed for very liberal visitation,” says the insider. “He has been supportive of her recovery.”

As her health improved, so did her parenting. (Today, she and Federline split time 50/50.) “Yes, she has her career,” says the insider. “But her job as their mom is the most important role in her life.” And Federline believes it has contributed to her professional gains. Says the source, “Kevin thinks her success is in part because the boys have been in her life.” (After embarking on a world tour in July, she’ll return to Vegas for a lucrative residency at the Park Theater.)

But Spears is quick to see through her ex. As he has four other kids to support, “Britney feels as if she is paying for them also,” the insider says. “His rapping and DJ’ing don’t pay the bills.” And neither will Spears — or her dad. “Jamie isn’t going to meet an outrageous demand,” says the source. “He knows how important the kids are to Britney and won’t allow her to lose them. Jamie has assured her this won’t become an issue.”

[From Us Weekly]

I think both sides are making good points? Britney is right to feel like K-Fed is holding their custodial issues over her head to get more money to pay for his other kids. But K-Fed truly has been generous and patient with Britney and her team because he’s always wanted her to be a good and involved mother in their sons’ lives. I still believe that this will be handled quietly by Daddy Spears, even if Britney doesn’t want to give K-Fed more money. K-Fed has the ability to open up a whole can of worms if Daddy Spears doesn’t make a deal.

Meghan Markle and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge attend the first annual Royal Foundation Forum held at Aviva in London

Kevin Federline at Crazy Horse III

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

180 Responses to “Britney Spears is ‘angry’ that Kevin Federline wants an increase in child support”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Gutterflower says:

    Her poor face is so jacked

  2. Tonya says:

    why not, if he needs more as a dad with full custody of the kids…

    • Plaidsheets says:

      Needs more or wants more? The article I read earlier said it was 20k pee kid and she foots the bill for most of the what the kids need. At what point is it enough?

      I always wonder in these situations- what happens when the kids turn 18? Mom/dad is going to have a hard time replacing that kind of income. What’s the hustle then?

      • Nicole says:

        20K per kid is CHEAP considering how much she made in the last year. Seriously there are people that pay more than that for one kid.
        Reality is this is determined by income. And if they havent been back to court in years then it probably hasnt been adjusted.

      • Merritt says:

        @Nicole

        But if she is already paying more than 20K due to paying for other things that come up, there is some question about how much of this money will be just for Jayden and Sean. Money for Britney’s children should not be used for Federline’s other children.

      • FLORC says:

        Does she pay for everything? That seems highly exaggerated. I’m betting there’s a well monitored list by accountants, lawyers, her father, and Kevin. And this sounds like a rant from a still very unstable Britney.
        I’m not buying the narrative she earned more so he wants more and is using the kids as a smoke screen.

      • KBB says:

        Where did you read it was $20,000 per kid? When it was first reported years ago it was said to be $20,000 a month not per kid.

        ETA: I’ve looked through the recent articles and they all say $20k per month too, not per child.

      • Kosmos says:

        I’m not familiar with child support laws or rules, but just wondering how the one receiving the child support justifies needing a particular amount of money each month? Well, there is education and clothing, food, medical expenses, nannies perhaps, and a home large enough to house them. There are likely more expenses, but I’m not an expert. I’m not sure the amount of support should 100% depend on the other person’s income, but only what the child’s expenses would actually amount to. And here is maybe where they make up needs that don’t exist. Effort and sacrifice are not actually expenses, and if they have 50/50 care, then I think Federline must justify receiving more money for the two children only, not for his entire brood.

    • NotSoSocialButterfly says:

      He plainly stated the increase was to recognize the effort/sacrifice he has put forth while raising the kids. Therefore it is not directly for the benefit of the kids.

      • FLORC says:

        We can all mock the kfed days, but he is a stay at home dad and was previously earning money before this. That’s time devoted to the children. Like a stay at home mom post divorce would be allowed compensation in the same way.
        Because it’s kfed this is overlooked.

      • noway says:

        This is a problem, because it is child support not alimony. Which means it is for the well being of the children. What has changed other than her making more money that the kids need more money. Do they need more security or something. Plus if the kids truly spend 50/50 with their mother why is more child support needed. Seems he would need less. I wouldn’t call it generous about the custody agreement either. She is their mother and provided she is not crazy splitting the time with the kids is a good thing not bad. It’s called being a good parent, and mostly since she has been better they both do that. This is kind of a shame to have this out now.

      • Arpeggi says:

        Of course it’s benefitting the kids! Had he worked more, he wouldn’t have been able to take care of the kids as well has he had (and I can only imagine the uproar if he’d leave the kids for days/weeks alone with his current spouse for gigs) nor would his schedule enable him to regularly bring the kids to see their mom.

        So yeah, those sacrifices were for the kids and meant that his income only would not enable him to give his kids the same lifestyle had they would have if they were living with their mom. That’s how you calculate custody: making sure that kids have a similar lifestyle regardless of living at one parent or the other because great disparities can affect how much the kids will want to spend time with one or the other. He is totally in his right to ask for more

    • Lela says:

      Years ago before her res. started TMZ had a really good detailed article about the legal break down. Britney’s estate owns and pays for the house/upkeep that Federline, his wife and the 4 kids live in, she also pays for all travel related expenses for her kids to be shuffled back and forth, all security, she pays for school, health and extracurricular activities related to the kids and she agreed to cover some expenses related to the transportation of Federlines first 2 kids since he would be away from them so her boys could be closer to her. He essentially gets $40,000 a month to, buy food and pay for a car? I know a few years ago there was a dispute over schooling because Britney’s boys go to one of the best private school and apparently have an army of tutors and Federline wanted his other 4 kids to have that as well but Britney’s estate refused to pay for it. To me it does seem like he’s trying to support two other families on her income.

      • Tan says:

        If he wants the lives of the otger kids be as good as Britneys kids, I cannot fault him much, all those kids are in ssme household, growing uo together and two of them having everything doesn’t foster healthy sibling relationship and untill they turn 18, Britney’s boys have to live eith their hakf siblings. I am sure some compromise can be done.

      • Sophia's Side eye says:

        Then Federline should work more so that he can afford the best for all of his children. Britney isn’t a bank, and she’s not responsible for his other children, period. Also, if the kids are with Brit half the time then she is paying for everything for them when they’re with her, plus he’s getting 20 grand a month, and apparently a house. I feel that KFed sees that he has about seven more years to get as much money as he can before the gravy train runs out, and he’s forced to get a real job thus the request for more money now.

      • KBB says:

        He’s not getting $40k, he’s getting $20,000 total per month

      • Evie says:

        @Lela: Co-signing 100% Sean and Jayden are now 12 1/2 and 11 1/2 years old. They are not infants. And Britney has them about 50% of the time. In addition to the $20K or $40K monthly child support, she IS paying for the house that Kfed and his current wife live in which means that those two younger kids — who are the ones that need more supervision — are getting the benefit of Britney’s money. Additionally, Britney is paying for all medical, school, tutors, transportation, vacations, and other expenses for Sean and Jayden. So why does Kfed need more money?
        And you have to wonder what kind of child support Kfed pays Shar Jackson, mother of his two eldest kids, when he has no visible means of support. Kfed with no career and no prospects to speak of, realizes he has just 5 1/2 and 6 1/2 years to make bank from Britney. And that’s what he’s doing. He should get a job and support his kids like everyone else.

    • hey-ya says:

      ….personally I think he should be asking $200 000 per month….those other kids he has are also part of sean & prestons family…remember when jim carey was sued because his kid wanted a recording studio built…well britneys kids deserve the same level of support…she can afford it so why not…

  3. Swack says:

    Where I live, minimum child support is determined by a formula based on both father’s and mother’s income. Usually it is reviewed every so many years. So, not sure if that is the case hear. Know when my grandson went to live with his dad at 15, it was reviewed (no child support because both parents were basically making the same amount of money). When he lived with my daughter she had it reviewed once and the child support went up. All kinds of problems arose because dad was angry about it. My daughter had full time custody with visitation to dads every other weekend and one day a week.

    • LizLem says:

      IIRC, their child custody agreement during her 2007 breakdown was done so with minimal court involvement, as at the time her team was afraid her medical documents and personal aspects of her struggles would be revealed if they went through the court system. All that to say, they probably determined the amount of child support money between her Dad, Kevin, and their lawyers. In the state of California we do have a formula that child support payments are based off like you’re describing, but I do not believe this is what they did initially.

  4. Ms says:

    Isn’t it normal for child support payments to fluctuate when the paying parent’s income changes?

    • magnoliarose says:

      Yes, if they have it reviewed and alter it accordingly. Either more or less depending.

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      To an extent, but there is often a maximum amount of child support set by law. Britney’s payments to K Fed almost certainly exceeded the legal maximum. Plus it sounds like she pays for all of her sons’ other expenses (school, healthcare, extracurriculars, etc.).

      It must be very nice to have this level of tax-free income just for having some kids. Meanwhile out here in the real world most of us struggle to survive while working like maniacs.

      • Kitty says:

        Child support is determined by income, there is no cap on it, the amount she’s paying now is a drop in the bucket to what she’s making. Yeah, it’s a load of money we would all love to have but that’s not how the world works unfortunately

      • Sophia's Side eye says:

        But, there is a cap on it, kitty. Bearcat lawyer is correct. When you get over a certain amount of income, talking into the multi millions, the two parents decide, or if they can’t a judge decides, but the formula is thrown out. It only costs just so much to take care of kids, especially if you’re living in a house paid for by the other parent, as Kevin and his family are.

      • aang says:

        I think it’s bull that there is a maximum. I work with low income people and have seen dads living in their car or homeless shelters because NYS takes 25% of their minimum wage for two kids. If a poor person can pay 25%, a rich person should also have to. If anything very low wage earners should pay a smaller %.

      • Katrina says:

        Unlike many states, California does not provide a cap on child support.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      Yes. He’s not doing anything that isn’t routine.

      • Kosmos says:

        Too bad–I think the child support should be based on the child’s needs, period. Add on a private school and special things, but just because the other parent is a higher wage earner doesn’t mean they should fork out more. And by the way, Federline is the FATHER of those children, so if he stays home to take care of them and then has four other children, well, that is also part of his problem, not Britney’s. Being a parent means sacrificing and caring for the children–you’re not doing the other person a FAVOR, because they’re your kids, too. Hey, Kevin–stop crying and enjoy the free house and extras you already have because of Britney. If she were not such a high wage earner, you’d be living a different life.

  5. LInabear says:

    Does she really have an issue with helping him take care of his other kids on top of their biological ones? Why not do that if she can afford it? That argument sounds selfish to me.

    • Chaine says:

      Are you serious? She had nothing to do with his choices to get other women pregnant, in fact, if I’m not mistaken, he had the first two kids before he was even with Britney. All those other kids are on him.

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      It has nothing to do with her feelings. It has everything to do with responsibility. K Fed and his baby mommas are responsible for caring for the children they brought into this world – not Britney.

    • Jamie says:

      its not another child, Its his whole family. He has 6 kids. He barely works, his wife doesnt work. So britney who is already paying for all the expenses on top of the 40k (2 kids) a month. Doesn’t feel like she has to support his other 4 kids and his wife. She is obligated to supporting his 2 sons, that 40k should go only to her sons expenses and any extra should be put in a bank account for the kids, not spend on his other children.

    • Merritt says:

      It is not Britney’s responsibility to pay for children that are not hers. It is also not selfish for her to refuse to support other children. Federline should get a job to pay for his other children.

    • Jayna says:

      The guy could actually get a full-time job to feed his other kids. Give me a break.

      • Arpeggi says:

        But if he took a full time job then he might not have the time to take care of the kids. Nor would he have the luxury to stop everything he’s doing to fly the kids to visit their mom as often as he does now… If genders were reversed, I don’t think anyone would yell at a stay-at-home mother for that reason

      • Jamie says:

        @Arpeggi you are talking like he is a single parent. He is married with a wife. His wife is a stay at home mom. So either kevin should get a full time job or his wife should. One of them should be working to support their 6 kids. (with help from britney for 2 of them)

      • Arpeggi says:

        @Jamie 2 of those kids were born pre-Britney (I think one was born while the other was on the way when Brit and KFed got together); she had no issues back then with the fact that there would be 2 kids to tend for as KFed’s alimony would definitely go up once married to Britney and she would be a part of their life… Is the situation of having children with multiple partners messy and complex? Of course it is! And that situation is something that Britney is in part responsible of when she decided to start a relationship with someone like KFed and have kids with him. She married him, had two children with him and now she has to deal with the consequences of her choices.

        By all accounts, KFed is a good father and a good ex and increasing child support above $20 000/mo considering how much she makes is not unreasonable. I’m actually not sure that Britney is upset about this, but someone in her entourage sure is.

    • Rachel in August says:

      This is about HER kids, not kids he had with other women. Seriously? And really, how much does K-Fed make on his own, without her support?

    • Chaine says:

      What K-Fed ought to be saying is, “You know what Jamie Spears, you and the Spears family are continuing to ride and exploit Britney. She is obviously still fragile, she should not have had to do this endless Vegas residency or prepare for another one, she needs time off to just live a quiet life away from the spotlight and be a mom. I do not need more child support and I do not want to be a part of continuing to exploit this mentally unstable person. I would like to help my sons’ mom get better.”

    • Va Va Kaboom says:

      And what if he decides to have another 4 children since Britney will pay for everything? Should Britney be expected to just keep paying out for his life decisions no matter what because she has it?

    • LInabear says:

      OMG calm down, I’m NOT saying Britney should have to pay for all of KFeds’ children’s expenses. Obviously, that would be ridiculous. But if SOME of her alimony buys a few of their meals and clothes? Is that really so terrible?

      • Arpeggi says:

        I totally agree. And what would people prefer? That Brit kids sit on one side of the table with all their cool toys and organic green smoothies while “the other” ones have 4th-hand half broken toys and eat lunchables?

        I can’t frown upon using some of the money to make send the kids’ siblings to the same schools and make sure they have the same lifestyle, especially if they all live together! I much prefer that than using the cash to buy cars or throw lavish grown-up parties. Personally, I’d wish for my kids’ siblings to have the best opportunities as well; they may not end up having trust funds but at least they’ll have a good education that could get them them in places so that they’ll never need the trust funds anyway. Plus a lack of resentment ensures brotherly love amongst all kids.

      • Va Va Kaboom says:

        Sorry, though not a ton, that “selfish” comment was infuriating.

        Britney believes he’s already using some of the money on his other children and she hasn’t said or done anything about it prior to this new request for more. Now, I have questions about how much she actually knows about K-Fed’s finances, but she clearly believes this to be true. It’s not selfish to draw the line somewhere.

        Assuming you didn’t simply miss the part where she thinks she’s already “helping out” with his other kids, exactly what else do you expect Britney to cover? You said she was being selfish, but your reasoning seems to end at her well earned income.

        If the discrepancy in his children’s childhoods really concerned him, Federline and his wife should do something about it like getting jobs. Then again, as you said, why should they “she can afford it”.

      • Jamie says:

        I would prefer kevin to be working to support his kids and not depending on britney to support his whole family. Its different to say oh its okay for some of brit’s child support to keep the other kids on the same lifestyle when kevin is also working his hardest to support them. But he and his wife is basicly sitting at home and using britney’s money to pay for all the expenses. thats not right at all.

      • whyhanie says:

        I’m pretty their current arrangement already cover some of the other kids’ expenses. I mean, I see their photos and the other 4 doesn’t dress shabbily. They live in the house. I dont think KF and his wife will make a different meals for 4/2 children right? Logically speaking that is. Not sure about their school arrangement but if BS/KF goes to better school, that because BS is paying for it. Maybe KF and his wife should get a job to cover for it?

      • Megan S says:

        You are acting like the other 4 children would be naked and starving without BS money. YES, it is absolutely a travesty that you would expect ANY female to support someone else’s life decisions with the sweat off of her (very fragile) back.

  6. Chaine says:

    Ugh, he is despicable. I don’t really understand the logic at all, her relationship with the sons helped make the residency a success, so he should get more money for child support because the kids love their mom and help keep her grounded? Gag.

    • Josephine says:

      If the genders were reversed, I don’t think many people would think much of it. His being there for the boys allows her a tremendous amount of freedom; at first, to recover, and then to pursue her career, in whatever form that might take. Her schedule no doubt dictates when and how often she sees the kids, meaning that he works around it. And I’m sure he’s happy to, and that’s the way it should be for the kids. But it’s no different than so many women who are completely devoted to child-rearing while the husband builds his career. And we really have no idea what the dynamic is, and how much he takes on on an emotional level given that she is considered a child herself under the law. It’s just money, and it’s super typical for child and spousal support to vary when income does.

    • Kitty says:

      Despicable? Really? He’s raising their sons pretty much by himself. Yes she can support them financially but Kevin is the decision maker I assume and has physical custody. Britney is heavily medicated and can’t even make her own finacial or business decisions without her father. There’s nothing wrong with Kevin getting more child support considering the money she’s making.

      @josephine….totally agree. If the roles were reversed nobody would bat an eye

      • Jamie says:

        I would bat an eye. No parents should have to support the ex’s other kids. Yes, if britney makes more money, she should pay more child support. But all the child support to pay for only expenses relating to britney’s children. All excess child support should be place in a bank account for the kids when they go up or college, not spend on raising kevin’s other 4 kids and his wife. He barely works, his wife doesn’t work, why is Britney supporting his whole family and not just her children?

      • Kitty says:

        How do you know he’s using it to support the other kids? Jamie spears controls Britney’s money and everything about it, you don’t think there’s a way to make sure Kevin isn’t using all that money to raise the other kids? I grew up in a similar fashion, my step father came into a relationship with my mother and he had three kids, my dad did not want to be paying for them. The money had to be accounted for and spent only on us.

      • Sophia's Side eye says:

        Kitty, he’s living in a house Britney’s estate pays for, he and his wife and all the kids. Money is inevitably going toward the other children because they love with Kevin, that’s a given.

      • Va Va Kaboom says:

        For all we know Jaime Spears is already fully aware some of the $20,000 a month is being used on Federline’s other children. He seems very… pragmatic so I can absolutely believe he’d ignored minor misuse of funds to maintain the good relationship of all involved parties. Just as Federline himself has probably dealt with a lot to for the same reason. To their credit, they’ve all tried hard to keep the peace.

        Remember it’s Britney, not her father, who’s reportedly upset by the request. She also has no control over her own financial decisions and doesn’t seem very interested in them either. So what’s the likelihood she’s intimately familiar with Federline’s finances other than vague impressions?

      • Megan S says:

        @Kitty – he is not raising them by himself. The article was clear they split physical time 50/50 and he is remarried to a woman who also does not work.

        I have no issue at all with the child support being adjusted to reflect the increase in her income. I do take issue with it being some great sacrifice that he graciously allowed his children access to their mother. I take issue with the fact that she has supported his entire family, including the new wife who had two children with no means of support from her side OR his.

        Sure, raise the child support because she is loaded…that is fair under the law.

        Let’s not pretend that KFed has profited off her of her mental health issues from day one. Why stop now.

      • Cine says:

        Here Is the question — kfed pays support TO 2 of his kids’ mother — where is that money coming from ? Seriously. He then had 2 more with yet a third woman — did he have any intention of supporting those kids ? Did his wife ?

  7. Valiantly Varnished says:

    Britney’s face is a cautionary tale of what being a heavy smoker and living a hard life can do to you. She is a year younger than me. And looks a full decade older than me.

  8. Bridget says:

    When she was engaged to her manager, he was going to BECOME ONE OF HER CONSERVATORS. How messed up is that?

    And of course she’s pissed. I don’t know anyone that just shrugs their shoulders when they’re asked to pay out more money. But child support is usually calculated by income, and she’s made a crazy amount.

    • themummy says:

      Oh my gosh, her medications did not make her ugly. Her joker mouth is from plastic surgery. She also is a die hard sun worshipper and a heavy smoker for probably 20 years now. Those meds do not make you “dead-eyed” (in VERY rare cases where this happens, this is due to incredibly heavy does of intense meds for people who are generally non-functional in life and are more or less continuously sedated–and that is absolutely not the case for Britney) or bloated in the face. I know because I both take them and prescribe them. They have side effects, of course, some of those side effects being quite unpleasant, but they do not basically deform your face. These are false stereotypes regarding psychotropic medications. When there are severe side effects that affect quality of life, the medications are adjusted or changed. Never in all of my years taking these meds or prescribing them have I ever had a patient come to me complaining that his or her face has changed, he or she is “bloated in the face,” or any of that.

      I would also add that while we know that Britney has some sort of mental illness (mostly because we know she has a permanent consevatorship), we do not actually know the nature of that illness beyond assumptions and rumors. We also have no idea which medication or medications she is taking. I think it is important to remember this. None of us actually know anything about her medical situation beyond the fact that there is a medical (psychological/psychiatric) situation of some sort. She is protected by medical privacy laws and thus absolutely no one knows her real situation other than her, her attorneys, the judge in her conservator case, and her conservator.

    • Evie says:

      Everyone keeps quoting the $137 Million Britney made in her Las Vegas residency. But that figure is the cumulative gross amount for her 4 year residency. On an annual basis, she brought in $34.2 Million each year BEFORE taxes, expenses and the salaries she pays dancers, choreographers, makeup artists, stagehands and backup singers not to mention her doctors, lawyers, accountants and her Dad who is in charge of the conservatorship.

      So Britney’s annual net income is probably closer to about $12 million from the Las Vegas residency. A very tidy sum by the standards of the average American worker, but still she’s not in the same league as folks Diddy, Beyonce, the Kardashians,Taylor Swift, Bruce Springsteen or Paul McCartney. In fact, Britney ranked #89 on Forbes magazine’s 2017 list of the Top 100 Highest Paid Entertainers. That ranking was based on Britney’s Las Vegas residency which ended late last year. She’s about to embark on a concert tour this spring. I think she has about 12 dates announced so far, but she’s not playing stadiums.
      If I were Britney, I’d stop working for awhile.

  9. Q T Hush says:

    Maybe Brit should retire altogether. Get her boys back, get loose from daddy Spears and just enjoy her life. I’m sure she has more money than most to retire comfortably. If she’s not making money KFed can’t get more money , sorry Mr backup dancer maybe you should get a job.

    • Plaidsheets says:

      I do wish she’d retire. I’m a fan and wanted to see her— believing that she had regained a bit of spark for her performances. Then, I saw her perform on the NYE special. She still looks artificially propped up.

      Retire, go be a mom, and stop supporting all those people (except the kids of course).

    • Harlequin says:

      I want her to retire as well, live in a big house with a farm, some animals and be with the people she cares about. However, (and I say this as the daughter of a woman who has been diagnosed with Bipolar 1 disorder with psychotic features) getting away from her father is a bad idea. The conservetorship is there for a reason, she cannot make decisions for herself. If she gets away from the supervision and stability her father provides, she will go off meds and that will lead to a repeat of the 2007-2008 breakdown.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Yes, I totally agree with your thoughts on the conservatorship. It has been continued for a long time, and must have been justified in the eyes of the court system which has high standards. It seems to be in her best interest.

      • Liberty says:

        This, totally.

        I always feel like she is railroaded by her conservators in a way, and can’t say no. Obviously I have no way of knowing this, and I am very likely wrong. I can only say that something has made me feel uneasy about this circus for years, I suppose ever since the head-shaving incident. And whenever I see a story about her, I tend to pause, and hope she is ok in terms of some semblance of….personal will.

    • hogtowngooner says:

      I thought the same, but then wondered if maybe having a career to focus on and build a routine around was something she benefited from. Maybe if she just retired and had nothing to do all day, her mental health might suffer. I can’t believe she’s still under conservatorship after all these years but I guess it’s doing some good.

      I remember the K-Fed fiasco and how much of a deadbeat he seemed to be, but I’ve always respected him for the way he handled things when Britney broke down. He took full custody of their children but even at the worst time, he kept her in their lives as much as possible. And he never blabbed to the press about any of it.

    • Bridget says:

      Britney needs a task. She famously gets into trouble when she has time on her hands.

  10. minx says:

    I love Britney but this is the guy she chose to have children with.

    • magnoliarose says:

      Exactly. He is today who he was back then and he already had two children when they got together. If I were Jamie I would quietly increase the sum and move on. They do not want her psychiatric history and behavior reviewed. Then he could keep sole custody and be under no obligation to allow her access. And no one would side eye him either once they knew the details. So I say let it go.

      • Jamie says:

        I say raise the sum and have an accountant track the children’s expenses and any excess money from the child support left over after the children’s expenses should be place in a trust for the kids and not to support kevin and his wife and 4 kids.

        I feel thats very fair. Britney’s money (40k for the 2 kdis) should pay for anything remotely related to her kids and if that is 30k a month, then 10k/month should be place in the trust for the kdis.

        Britney is not obligated to support kevin’s other children or his wife or him.

      • lucy2 says:

        I agree Jamie – I don’t have an issue with her paying more given her income, but if I were her, I’d want to know where it’s going, especially if she’s covering all other expenses.

        He hasn’t worked in ages, and neither his ex nor his current wife seem to either. They’re all living off of Britney, which is unfair, and a terrible example for all the kids. But I think most people around her live off of her too. It always seems like a sad situation.

      • Kitty says:

        My guess is that there is already an accountant for that purpose

      • oh-dear says:

        I imagine Kevin is realizing he only has a few more years of having financial support from Brittney and wants to maximize it will he can.

  11. Millie says:

    She legally can’t make her own decisions but “she is an amazing mother”? Ok. Pay for your kids, Britney.

    • VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

      If this is true, she’s veering into Halle Berry territory, IMO.

    • Merritt says:

      She is paying for her kids. I think her teams wants to be sure she is not paying for Federline’s other children, which is fair. Britney is only responsible for her kids, she should not be supporting Federline’s entire family.

      • Millie says:

        To me, it sounds like Britney is trying to find a reason not to increase the money that her own children are getting in spite of the fact that her own income has increased. If a man were trying to pull this act, we’d be calling him a deadbeat dad.

        There is no reason to believe that the child support is going to KFed’s other kids. If she’s really concerned about the child support being used for reasons other than the support of her own children, surely she has a legal recourse that would involve KFed being required to show where the money is going. That being said, if the money is being spent on things like the home where her kids and their primary caregiver live, she has no right to be upset about his other kids also staying there too. He has the right to raise his children for his other relationships too.

      • Jamie says:

        you don’t need reason to believe anything other than fact.
        Fact is, They are living in a house own by britney’s estate, free. Fact is neither kevin nor his wife nor his other ex wife works. Fact no one is starving or living in poverty. Fact the only income is britney’s. So yes britney is supporting them.

      • magnoliarose says:

        @Jamie
        He was never married to the first mother, but she may be working. She has a degree. I think the focus Britney’s answer is based on the two younger kids.

      • Millie says:

        @Jamie

        I don’t dispute any of the facts that you have listed except that I don’t know what source you’ve read that tells you KFed and family are living in Britney’s property. If my husband and I were to seperate tomorrow, because I have a much bigger income than he does and because we would have joint custody, I would reasonably be expected to contribute a certain amount so that our children have comparable living conditions between our two households. The money that I would give him does not mean that I own whatever property he ends up purchasing/renting.

        I’m not disputing that Britney is financially supporting her children. What I’m saying is that the amount of support should reasonably be expected to rise should her income rise as is the case now. We would expect a man in the same situation as Britney to pay more.

        The fact that neither KFed or his wife works or that no one is living in poverty is irrelevant to child support and how much of it Britney must pay.

    • Megan S says:

      She has paid for her children and twice as many that aren’t hers for many years now. While we do know that she remains under conservatorship, we have absolutely no idea why. We do not know any diagnosis, any medications, any behaviors etc.

      For all we know they leave it the way it is because it benefits everyone financially to do so.

      Thousands upon thousands of men and women that struggle with mental illness are AWESOME parents, probably more than you know.

  12. VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

    How many people would be on here saying he’s a golddigger, etc if he was a woman whose ex was making a substantial amount more money and he didn’t want to increase the child support? On top of female K-Fed having full custody of the kids? The judge will obviously make a determination, etc….but if she’s made a substantial amount more money than usual, then that absolutely needs to be factored into the child support. Child support is about the kids, not about how one parent feels about the other. Especially since the child support that Britney does pay vs. her overall fortune is a literal drop in the bucket.

    • Luca76 says:

      Exactly! Not saying KFed is a saint but those are the breaks.

    • rrabbit says:

      I called him a gold digger back then. As far as I see it, he left his fiance and his two children to bang Britney.

      I have Federline approximately where I have Donnie Four Wives.

      But yes, if Britney really made $137 million on those Vegas shows, she absolutely should pay more child support than 20k. As long as there is some process in place to ensure that the douchebag doesn’t simply spend that money on drugs.

      • Jamie says:

        she actually pays 40k, 20k per kid.

      • VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

        I am not a fan of either. etc–but I’m fairly sure that if he was a drug addict, he would not have custody. All it takes is one pee test to go wrong.

        And still–that has zero impact on child support. He may have left his fiancee/kids to get with Britney………who chose to have kids with him………and then he was the one who took care of them while she got herself sorted out. From other comments I’ve read on here, he gave her access to them even when he wasn’t court ordered/legally obligated to do so. I think that says a lot about what he felt was best/important for the kids i.e. being able to see their mother.

      • Sherry says:

        She’s not making that much personally. That money is more than likely a gross amount. She has to pay taxes, benefits and salaries to all of those people who run “Britney Inc.” I’m sure she’s just getting a salary from “Britney, Inc.” Now that salary is probably pretty good, but it’s not even close to the $137 million mark.

        If KFed were making money as a DJ, he wouldn’t be asking for an increase. As others have noted, he’s not making any money, his wife doesn’t work and he has 4 other kids he’s expected to support.

        Britney paying him $40K a month (tax-free) for their kids is more than enough for all of them to live quite well in Calabasas. How is he going to support his family when those boys turn 18 and that money stops?

      • lucy2 says:

        I don’t remember specifically why, but back then I always had the suspicion that he and the ex cooked up the Britney scheme together, that he was still with her but they saw $$$ in the opportunity for him to be with Britney.

      • KBB says:

        Jamie, can you link to where you’ve read she pays $20,000 per child and not per month? I have not been able to find that anywhere.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        ” I always had the suspicion that he and the ex cooked up the Britney scheme together, that he was still with her but they saw $$$ in the opportunity for him to be with Britney”

        This makes no sense to me. You think it is impossible for a guy to have fallen in love with pop mega star Britney based on her own merits? She proposed to him first, remember.

      • KBB says:

        @Lucy They got together during Britney’s “Toxic” era. I think most men would have jumped at the chance to sleep with her in 2004. That was the best she’s ever looked and she was fun and exciting and yes, lived a life of luxury. A lot of people would find that intoxicating.

        I think it’s unlikely there was any agreement with his ex. He left her high and dry because he had the opportunity to date Britney Spears. If his ex was in on it, why would she have badmouthed him to the press? What if Britney dropped him because she didn’t want the bad publicity?

    • Bridget says:

      People have called KFed a gold digger for years. The only reason why it died off is because of the way he came through when Britney had her breakdown. But Mr. Popozao was a national joke for a long time.

    • magnoliarose says:

      This is my argument. Same for both genders. I rarely hear anyone tell a woman to get a job. As in the Mel Gibson case. Then the argument becomes her job is raising the children! Gender equality means equal in all things. My sister is the big breadwinner in her marriage and is allowed to do this because of her artist husband who has his studio at home and is the primary caregiver for their children. Perhaps this would be more common if there wasn’t a stigma attached to men who are the stay at home parent so the mother can focus on her better career.
      It plays into toxic masculinity too.

      • VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

        I’m really wondering at some of these comments. I don’t believe child support should be scrutinized the way some are suggesting. Child support is for the housing and raising of the kids. So I could see wanting an accounting of where the money is going if the kids were showing up to school without basic necessities OR if K-Fed’s other kids, for example, went to a fancy/expensive private school while Britney’s kids did not………but saying that an accounting needs to happen because there are other kids in the house? Seriously? Especially since child support is based on income percentage and then PER KID. IMO, I just think it’s ridiculous. I’d say the same thing for a woman. I don’t think the paying parent should dictate where that money goes. If they don’t like it, then they need to present their case to the court with evidence. But it smacks as a control tactic to me.

      • Kitty says:

        @virgilia. The parent giving the child support should get a say in how the money is used. I think Kevin deserves an increase if he wants one, it’s the law. But saying that he should be able to spend that child support money on whatever is ridiculous. My mother left my dad for a man with no job and three kids…my dad was pissed and he had to pay out a lot of child support. The first thing he did was get an accountant, I don’t see why it would be a problem. he didn’t want to support another mans children when he shouldn’t have to. You’re right, the amount is determined by income and how many children, but not how many children that aren’t your own.

      • HK9 says:

        @magnoliarose-Your sister is married to her husband and people who are in a relationship can do this quite well. Correct me if I’m wrong but if it’s true KFed & his wife don’t work she knows they’re living off her money end of story. If his wife works and brings in money for their family then fine. Brittany’s getting paid more, and the cost of living increases so he should apply for an increase. If KFed was smart, he’d get a job (or work on the career he’s got in a viable way) to demonstrate he doesn’t want to be dependent on her. Every woman, unless their ex is a billionaire, has to eventually create a stream of income for herself at some point and KFed should not be special in this regard.

        I know of several women who are now retired who for most of their adult life have been provided for very generously by their ex. However, these exs die, and when they do, they find themselves in situations where they own a house, but they don’t have the money for the upkeep, etc. They all worry about their finances as they age. The point is, no matter what, there will be an end to the way he’s being financially supported and he needs to plan for that.

      • Erinn says:

        I’m also curious if any of the people wanting a record of EXACT expenses have blended families. If so, are ALL expenses kept separate? Are they giving a running total to their ex on what was spent on what? Are they making sure to never spend a dime from support on something -even something tiny- that their other children will be using as well? If the kids get an x-box from their dad – do children from another partner have to go sit in another room and never touch it? When they outgrow clothes do they go back to the other partner or does the younger kid in the house get hand-me-downs? Because if we’re following the narrative I’m seeing in this comment section I would have to assume that the kids are kept separate at all times under the same roof.

        There’s a lot of hypocritical comments happening here.

        At the end of the day – Brit is NOT stable. She doesn’t have custody of her kids – and if she were capable of gaining it I’m sure she’d have been back to court. But here’s the thing – she’s not even allowed to make her own decisions. Her father is parenting his 36 year old daughter because she’s not stable enough to live her life on her own. If she can’t take care of herself she should in no way be allowed to have complete control over the kids. And if her income has increased – support should 100% increase.

      • VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

        @Kitty
        Honestly, I just disagree. I had a caveat–basically if the child support is being used in a way that it cannot support the children in question…..then I think yes, a full accounting should be made. But that child support is going into the house, period. I think the parent who receives it should be able to care for the kids and apply for increases, etc as the paying parent increases their income…….without being watched over like they’re criminals. Obviously, this isn’t a blanket situation, but I think saying that everyone essentially should be audited on their child support and what they spend it on opens the door for even more controlling behavior.

        In your case, with your dad–Yes, it’s a sucky situation that is hard to swallow……but that’s life. If you and your siblings(?) went without the necessities, or weren’t able to do an activity/sport that with child support, clearly should have been affordable, then yes–I think a full accounting should have been necessary/ordered. If your mom had wanted an increase in child support because she wanted more money for her boyfriend’s kids and your dad’s income hadn’t changed…then a full accounting should have been done. Otherwise, I think it can be problematic.

        But again–this is a cautionary tale for people……be careful who you have kids with. Because sometimes you have to swallow it.

    • HK9 says:

      The test of the ‘golddigger’ label will be when the kids are grown, and the support stops if he’s able to support himself financially without using Britney for $$.

      • magnoliarose says:

        I think he was a golddigger. But then the meltdown happened, and it changed the whole scenario. When he was first going for custody, everyone thought he was doing it for money, but then the truth about her mental health was revealed.
        He should have some sort of plan like you said above. If he doesn’t then it is his own fault for not preparing himself.

  13. Shannon says:

    Could he REALLY threaten to cut off access from the kids, though? With them already seeing her quite a bit and no abusive situations arising, it seems like it’d be pretty tough for him to refuse to let her see them. I would think that could easily be killed in court. Courts generally like to keep kids in contact with both parents if possible – it takes a LOT for a parent to lose any right to see their child(ren). So he may want to play it like he’s being super-generous by letting her see them, but that’s not necessarily so. Yes, she had a breakdown but that was years ago and, conservatorship or not, she’s clearly a loving mom who wouldn’t hurt them and I’m sure they love her. It’s honestly nearly impossible to do that.

    • KBB says:

      She could fight it but she’d have to lose the conservatorship. The courts would not give her joint custody if she’s saying that she can’t be responsible for legal or financial decisions. That’s why he still has full custody.

      The conservatorship is also protecting her from that leech Sam Lutfi who tried to force her to testify under oath. IIRC, he was trying to say he was owed money for being her manager. He claimed she promised him a large percentage of what she earned at the time.

    • magnoliarose says:

      She doesn’t want to open that door.
      Yes, he could keep them away from her for very good reasons. She was a danger to her children and doing strange things and abusive things that got them removed from her in the first place. She didn’t even have visitation rights initially. She was ordered to attend parenting classes, and she was neglecting their basic care as in food and safety. They were injured in her care and were coming home exhausted.
      When more abuse claims were filed KFed stood up for her when it wasn’t in HIS best interest to do so. She is never alone with them even now.
      He has been generous and on her side but if they don’t want to give him more money that just might change.

      • Lady D says:

        That was also ten years ago, magnoliarose. Wouldn’t the courts take her behaviour for the past decade into account? She’s had counseling, support, medication therapy, etc., plus the boys are a lot older now, too. One is almost old enough to make his own decisions about where he wants to live, in a courtroom.
        For the record; I think she should be paying more child support, too. In the past 3 years she’s paid out approx $1.5 mill to the kids, while making $137 mill. She shouldn’t however, have to pay for his other children.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “That was also ten years ago, magnoliarose. Wouldn’t the courts take her behaviour for the past decade into account? ”

        The conservatorship has been extended by the courts. It sounds like the courts are making evidence based decisions about her current situation, not what happened a decade ago.

      • Lady D says:

        Right. I forgot about that. Thanks:)

      • magnoliarose says:

        What Tiffany said. :)
        I don’t know why they extended it, but it would hurt her case in court. It is basically saying nothing has changed or improved for her to be responsible for herself.

    • Sophia's Side eye says:

      I believe she could get generous visitation, she wouldn’t need to have custody. Seeing she already has generous visitation outside of court orders a judge would have no problem signing and order making it legally binding. There is precedence here.

    • Veronica says:

      It’s not a fight you really want to take to court for the kids’ sakes, but honestly, that’s a pretty shitty thing to threaten her with either way. They aren’t just ‘her’ kids, she’s also THEIR mother. Using them to further economic gain is not acceptable by any stretch to me. Asking for more money because your partner’s income went up is fine. Suggesting that you should get more money because you acted like a decent human being and didn’t bar your children from their other parent is not.

    • Megan S says:

      @ Shannon – in essence, No. He has sole physical custody of the children, that does not give him the right to refuse visitation to the non-custodial parent. The myth of Kfed being so magnanimous to allow his mentally ill wife to see her children is gross.

      We are patting this man on the head because he is parenting his own children and helping to maintain a healthy relationship with their mother who has a mental illness. I don’t get the hero worship. He is being a FATHER.

      Note: I think he should get more child support based on her income, that’s the law. It grosses me out a little that she is paying for every seed he has ever sown.

  14. KBB says:

    I think she should pay him more, as long as it’s within reason, relative to her income.

    If it had been a mother, like Denise Richards for example, that did everything possible for her ex husband and their children while he was dealing with mental health and/or drug issues, I’d absolutely think she deserved an increase in child support if he was making more money.

    Kevin was never vindictive, he never punished her or held them hostage for more money and I don’t think he’d do that now. I guess it’s sad when that’s considered a good thing rather than standard, but that’s where we are.

    • ChillyWilly says:

      Very well said! I think people still have the mindset of The Man only being a real man if he provides for his family financially. Britney makes the money and is not mentally competent to be the primary custodian of their boys so she should pay him just as a rich husband would pay his ex-wife. If women really want gender equality we also need to do away with stereotypical standards/labels/roles for men as well.
      On another note, I really hope Britney is happy. The hell this poor woman has been through is etched on her face and shows in her eyes. Mental illness is a hell I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. I will always have a soft spot for Brit and her songs are awesome for working out to!

  15. Huckle says:

    if Kfed were the woman, the reaction would be the same I’m sure. She will be pissed bc she pays for everything already plus child support. She’s the earner btn the two, so she’ll end up paying an increase. But she’s allowed to bluster about it if she wants as even before an increase it’s still a lot of money.

  16. HeyThere! says:

    Hmmm, I’m going to say that since a massive increase in income means the partner gets more money, it seems fair. I would say ‘good for her’ if it was the other way around. ***Shrugs**

  17. CityGirl says:

    Child support is to provide support for the children you have with the absentee parent. It is not for the support of your other children nor is it to compensate a parent for their sacrifice in raising their own children!!!
    Maybe I woke up on the wrong side of the driveway this morning, or maybe as a child of an absentee parent, Kevin Federline’s arguement completely offends my sensibilities and should be denied by family court judge.

    • Kitty says:

      Child support is determined by income, hers has increased dramatically so he has every right to ask for an increase. And everyone keeps saying she shouldn’t be paying for the other kids….does anyone realize that you can get accountants for that sort of thing. My folks had one when I was a kid because my dad didn’t want any money going to my step dads kids.

  18. Marie says:

    I loved Britney and I’m still fond of her. I hope she finds dome happiness

  19. aenflex says:

    I don’t beleive Kevin Federline truly cares about Britney and her well-being. I believe he cares about the paycheck; she is his cash cow.

    If Britney truly pays for the kids’ extracurricular stuff, medical, toys, trips, etc, then $20k per month is more than enough for him to raise them, with regard to meals, housing, and whatever else Britney doesn’t pay for. I’m sure she pays for a lot, and has fat trust funds for the boys as well.

    You know he’s living high off the hog for himself with the money she pays for child support. She had to be experiencing a desperate mental breakdown for him to get custody, he’s no peach and never has been. He liked her rich and crazy.

    I don’t care what all about the genders of the thing.

    • oh-dear says:

      I think he is a very complicated character involved in a very complicated situation that is made more complex by the fact that his co-parent is a multi-million dollar earner.
      He has been far more kind and supportive than most in Hollywood and outside it, and I don’t think that is fake. Could he be an opportunist? Yes, as I think many in and around fame are, but that doesn’t preclude him from also being a kind person.

    • KBB says:

      Whether he cares about Britney or not is irrelevant. She had children with him, he has full custody, and she should pay child support based on her income. When she stops touring and doing shows in Vegas, it will be adjusted again to reflect a decrease in her income.

      She can drop the conservatorship and petition for joint custody if she doesn’t want to pay him more child support.

      She could double what she’s paying now and it would still be a drop in the bucket for her.

  20. Anastasia says:

    So she pays for everything else, PLUS $20K per kid per month?

    And that’s not enough?

    Wow.

  21. Jess says:

    I don’t think Kevin really works, his wife doesn’t either, or she’s a teacher and makes next to nothing, that’s a good indication of how that money is being spent. Britney’s money shouldn’t be spent raising other children, even if she has plenty to go around it’s not her responsibility. So what if his other kids don’t have the same advantages, it was his choice to have two more children with another woman. My god that would open up a shitstorm for other cases if child support could be raised to benefit someone’s else’s children. Sounds like he gets 40k just for child support, plus she pays for literally everything else, that’s plenty.

    • VirgiliaCoriolanus says:

      Well………when JLo’s ex, Marc Antony’s ex wife applied for more child support, she got it. She is a former beauty queen I believe (she was a “Miss” something), and they had two? kids together; one is disabled. Marc Antony pays for their school and all of the medical bills plus child support. But he was paying a shit ton more to the twins he had with JLo than he was to her. So she applied for more, and she got it.

      Them’s the breaks.

      • Jess says:

        That I can understand, you can’t pay one ex more for the same amount of children. I would’ve asked for more and been pissed as hell, especially since Jennifer has her own millions and really doesn’t need the support, unlike Dayanara, I think that’s her name?? Wonder if she had more children after divorcing Marc, off to google lol.

    • KBB says:

      I’ve said this elsewhere in the thread, but I can’t find anything that says she’s paying $20k per kid. Given how much she makes, $40,000 seems reasonable, but all I have seen is $20,000 per month.

      And as far as I can tell, her payments in child support haven’t changed since 2008 when their custody arrangement was finalized. Child support is determined by income, and she’s still paying based on her 2008 income.

      This is a woman who spends $25,000 a year on pet care and $125,000 a year on massages. She can pay more than $20,000 a month for her two kids.

      • Jamie says:

        There is nothing wrong with her paying more if she is earning more. But there is everything wrong with her support his whole family including his other 4 children and his wife and ex wife.

      • Jess says:

        I’m sure it equals a lot more than 20k either way though, she probably also pays for their school, insurance/medical bills, clothes, lavish vacations, travel expenses, etc. Seriously, what else is left that Kevin needs money for other than food?!? I get that she’s making more so the support probably should go up, but it looks suspicious when Kevin has 4 other children and doesn’t really work, and saying her success is because she has access to the boys is weird, like he’s been oh so generous to allow a mother the privilege of seeing her own children, that she pays a shit ton of money for? She was extremely successful before kids too, that was just an odd thing to say.

        It’s also painful for us common folk to think about getting that much child support. I get 300 bucks a month, 400 if I’m lucky. I can’t imagine asking for more than 20k or what I’d even do with that much, lol.

  22. Amy Too says:

    His arguments seem like they work better for spousal support. He wants more money bc he’s been nice to her and let her see the children and he thinks that the children he provided her with and allows her to see have contributed to her success. These seem like they would be reasons why he personally would want to be compensated. Child support is not spousal support. If she already pays for all of their major expenses including the house that he and his wife and other kids live in, plus she pays $40,000 per month to cover anything else like food, clothes, and gifts, then I guess I don’t get where else he could even spend the money. People are saying extra money could be put into a savings account for the children, but I would assume that she already has huge trust funds and accounts set up for them. It’s not like she provides nothing, cares nothing about them, refuses to see or acknowledge them, and does not plan to support them ever again in the future (like in her will or with trust funds). I guess that child support is based off of the parent’s income, it if he already has more than enough money to buy everything they could possibly want or need, plus the kids are set for college and their futures, why does he want an increase?

    • Evie says:

      @Amy Too: Kfed got a hefty settlement when Britney divorced him. Plus, he’s now remarried, so she’s not obligated to pay him Spousal support.

      Kfed and Shar Jackson reportedly share custody of their two children, although Shar Jackson is the primary caretaker and they live with her. Does Kfed pay Shar Jackson child support? And if so how much and where is he getting the money for that since he has no visible income other than the child support he receives from Britney.

      Anyway you cut it, Kevin’s days on the Britney Gravy Train will end in 6 1/2 years.

  23. Cee says:

    Give him the money and keep on enjoying so much time with your sons. Or actually fight for the money to be fed into two separate trusts for each kid. Federline has been generous enough to allow for so much time spent together. Britney doesnt even have custody on herself let alone her children, so she needs to handle this fast and quietly.

  24. Britt says:

    Poor BrittBritt. Leave Britney alone!

  25. Beer&Crumpets says:

    If the support cap has been reached, then this is all a moot point. If not, though, then the same rules (the c.s. formula) that apply to everyone else should also apply to Britney. 20k a month for 2 kids sounds nuts to me, but if support is figured out based on income and her income has increased, then KFed should also see an increase in support. Yeah, it’s going to benefit people other than the kids it’s meant for, but …. I mean… that happens a lot, I’m sure. Rules is rules, even for BritBrit and KFed. *shrug*

    • KBB says:

      Yep, it was based on her income in 2008 which was negligible compared to what she’s pulling in now.

      How did she not anticipate her child support payments changing when she started making tens of millions more a year? She’s lucky it took him this long to ask for more.

      And $20,000 a month for her kids is probably relatively small in proportion to her other monthly expenses. Given what she likely spends each month on material goods, leisure, luxury travel, skincare, massages, security, etc., her child support payments are probably miniscule compared to all that.

  26. Veronica says:

    You know, I have no problem with her child support going up along with her income, but, uh, the part how he could’ve been a douche and cut off all access to the kids?

    F*ck. Off.

    Children are not leverage for you to get more money out of your partner. You don’t punish them in the attempt to punish your ex-partner.

    • KBB says:

      He went above and beyond to accommodate her. Six months after she was involuntarily committed, she was getting three visits a week and one overnight with them. I also remember him letting her have extra nights fairly early on.

      There are parents that fight once a week visits just out of spite when there are no extenuating circumstances. Hell, we don’t even know if Brad Pitt is getting to see his kids that often and it’s been a year and a half!

      He shouldn’t get more money because he didn’t fight her on custody, he should get more money because her income has gone up exponentially since 2008 when the agreement was first made. I think the point he is making is he didn’t fight her on visitation and she shouldn’t fight him on this.

      He could have asked for more years ago, she’s lucky he’s only making that move now when the kids are almost teenagers.

      • Veronica says:

        She didn’t walk out on her children, abuse them or him. The woman had a MENTAL BREAK DOWN after years of industry and parental abuse, for which she then went and received treatment for. Extenuating circumstances, yes? Above and beyond? Barely. Women are expected to pick up the slack of their absent male partners all the time without the benefit of their partner paying tens of thousands in child support. I’m not patting him on the back for dealing with life the way all the rest of us do.

        I think she absolutely should pay more. That’s how child support works. I’m not fighting him on that. But “acknowledging sacrifices” is not at all the same thing as “threatening to cut off access.” One is what a parent is supposed to do. The latter is utilizing the power you have over your children against your ex. My point is that whoever made that statement is not helping his case.

      • KBB says:

        I said there are parents who fight about it when there are no extenuating circumstances. That being in contrast to Britney’s situation where there are, very obviously, extenuating circumstances.

        I don’t think he was or is threatening to cut her off. The person was just stating a fact. If he were the type to use the kids as a weapon against her, he would have already done so. But he hasn’t done that, he has done everything to facilitate her relationship with the kids.

      • Bridget says:

        Britney didn’t just have a mental breakdown. She completely lost custody and can no longer govern her life. At the time, there were SERIOUS questions around her parenting judgement (remember when she wanted to bleach her 4 year old’s teeth?) and their safety when alone with her – remember that she was committed after locking herself in the bathroom with one of her sons. She is literally not considered a functioning adult under the eyes of the law. She has no custody. Her extensive visitation is because Kevin was willing to work with her, and still is. For her to be under a conservatorship still means that there is significant evidence that it is needed.

      • Candion says:

        Veronica you need to do some research. Bridget is correct. I also recall reading when law enforcement showed up to take the children to safety, Britney was found naked and the children were neglected by not eating and being taken care of. She was not being a responsible mother to those kids at all.

  27. hkk says:

    if they have the kids 50/50 he needs to take a hike. 20k a month plus everything else she covers… yeah. Agree with those saying she is not a bank!

  28. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    I have to laugh at smiles struggling to get around botoxed upper lips.

  29. Anonymous says:

    My sister is under a full conservatorship. She suffers from Bi-Polar disorder. My husband who is a lawyer is the Conservator. It unfortunately is a long term situation. We live in California.

    I think people misunderstand the situation Britney has been in the last 10 years. Conservatorships are under review. A 3rd party reviews the mental state and competence of the person objectively and often. The courts are in constant contact and there are social workers, mental health professionals and family counsellors etc who are appointed by the court. Her father who is her Conservator does not decide if she is mentally competent to care for herself. The situation is not under his pervue.

    Stories of her wanting her father to be her Conservator for financial reasons is completely false as no such Conservatorship exists. They only exist in examples of extreme mental incompetence.

    These reports about her having 50% time with her children really mean the conservatorship has 50% time. Statements that she has visitation are correct but the visitation is between Kevin Ferderline and the Conservatorship. The Conservator decides when, how long, frequency.

    She would not be allowed to be alone with them or make ANY descisions regarding them. Britney has zero legal rights. Like a child.

    She is essentially playing house with them. Terrible to say but accurate. She is not safe or competent to care for those children. Her contact with them is heavily supervised as the court monitors require.

    Anything Britney says has no legal weight including her opinions.

  30. Lea says:

    I highly doubt Britney even knows about this. It seems to me that she is really sheltered from anything that could upset her.
    I don’t know much about child custody in the US but I find it suprising that Britney doesn’t legally have shared custody of her sons.