Part 1: Brad Pitt claimed he’s already ‘paid’ Angelina $9 million in child support

Brad Pitt and Quentin Tarantino film 'Once Upon a Time In Hollywood' on the streets of Hollywood

This is Part 1 of the Brangelina coverage. Part 2 is Angelina’s response to this.

I feel like TMZ is about two days away (at most) from actually calling Angelina Jolie a C-U-Next-Tuesday. TMZ has done this for year, taking the side of the men, painting various women as unhinged shrews, difficult bitches, nasty women and money-hungry c–ts. Sounds a lot like how Donald Trump approaches the world, and big surprise, TMZ is in bed with the Trumps too. Anyway, this is just my way of saying that it’s really obvious what TMZ is doing with this Angelina Jolie-Brad Pitt divorce situation and I find it really gross. The story is that Brad Pitt’s lawyers filed a legal response to Angelina’s request to speed up the divorce decree and formalize a child support structure. This is how TMZ reported it:

Brad Pitt’s lawyers aren’t mincing words … they say Angelina Jolie is a master manipulator and a liar by essentially claiming he’s a deadbeat dad, because they say he’s forked over more than $9 MILLION over the last 2 years. Brad’s lawyers have responded to Angelina’s latest attack where she claimed in legal docs he hasn’t paid “meaningful child support” since their split in September 2016.

In new legal docs, obtained by TMZ, Brad fires back … he loaned her $8 million so she could buy the home in which she currently lives, and shelled out more than $1.3 million in child support. Brad’s lawyers say Angelina and her lawyers have engaged in dirty tricks, calling them out for “a thinly-veiled effort to manipulate media coverage.” Brad’s lawyers point to Angelina’s legal docs that were filed earlier this week, in which she asks the judge to grant the divorce quickly so she can be a single woman again … leaving child support and other issues for a later date.

The attorneys for Brad are calling BS, saying THEY were the ones who called Angelina’s lawyers last week asking for exactly that … to grant the divorce decree quickly and then later deal with child support and property settlement issues. They say her lawyers said they’d discuss the matter with their client, and then Angelina made it look like it was SHE who wanted the quickie divorce.

The docs accuse Angelina of filing papers with the court that are “calculated to increase the conflict.” They say her gripe over child support is bogus and she knows it.

[From TMZ]

The only “fair enough” point I’ll give Brad is that he was legitimately asking for the divorce to be formalized before Angelina requested it. I know because Team Pitt leaked that sh-t to People Magazine and Us Weekly weeks ago, because that’s the way he’s been operating this whole time, with sh-tty leaks attacking Angelina for being so slow, so difficult, such a raging bitch, etc. I believe his lawyers approached Wasser about speeding up the formalization, and that Jolie made everybody wait and then she acted like she was the one who wanted it first. That’s the only thing I’ll give Team Pitt, even though I still don’t understand why that one thing is such an issue. His lawyers basically filed legal papers saying that Brad wanted to be divorced FIRST and now that Angelina wants to be divorced, he’s all pissy. Unless all of this is just about his IMAGE… oh, right.

As for the argument that Brad has already “given” Angelina $9 million… by his own accounting, $8 million of that was a LOAN. A loan is not child support. A loan means Angelina will either pay it back or she’s already paying it back. I also assume that he loaned her the money on the condition that she would get a house close to his, to more easily facilitate visitation. Which she did. As for the additional money… “sources” already ran and cried to Page Six about what that money went towards: security, travel, therapy. Why is it such a big f–king deal that Angelina wants to set down a structured child support payment system? Is it because Brad is only concerned about his image…? Oh, right.

As for Brad crying about how Angelina is trying to “manipulate media coverage”… five words: The Unicornfication of Neri Oxman. That was a mess and I guess we’re supposed to forget that it ever happened? Brad’s team has been leaking all kinds of crazy and dumb sh-t for months, I’m just sayin’.

Angelina Jolie heads out after an interview at the 92Y in New York

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

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

78 Responses to “Part 1: Brad Pitt claimed he’s already ‘paid’ Angelina $9 million in child support”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Maya says:

    Brad threw his 6 traumatised children out of their home and kept everything.

    When Angelina asked for help with a new home for them, he gave it as a loan with interest.

    Brad is below dirt and he doesn’t deserve the children.

    Angelina hired the best in the business and they will not submit anything without evidence.

    Brad is angry because Angelina finally stopped coverering for him and she has decided to fight back. Not through media but legally through court.

    If Brad had any evidence he will submit it to the court and not smear Angelina in the public.

    • Clare says:

      According to Brad Pitt’s logic, my bank pays my (non existent kid’s) child support. LOL

    • sassbr says:

      Well, he didn’t kick them out, she left. I think he would have begged to have them come home but he f-ed up and then it all way too far in too many directions.

      • Lilian says:

        I’m not the best at math so correct me if I’m wrong but 1,3 million is 50 000 a month right? Is that not enough for half the expenses. Cos that would mean 100 000 per month for all the kids if they each contribute half. Or am I being dumb here?

    • jwoolman says:

      If they intend joint custody, the children will still have the old place as their home. They have several homes around the world, they must be rather flexible about such things by now.

      Seems like six of one, half dozen of the other as to which parent gets a new place not too far from the old place. Each one has to have space for the kids and their myriad tutors and nannies.

    • Many feathers says:

      Maya, I’m assuming you have a personal relationship with this family, and I can only assume this by your comment that he threw Ms Jolie & he’s children out of the home., or you were there at the time of this alleged event. There appears to be a lot of he says, she says. My concern is for the children, coming from a very hostile & broken home myself, seeing parents seperate breaks all illusions about love. Comments should not be made about Mr Pitt or Ms Jolie without evidence being produced, otherwise it is simply gossip or heresay, and THIS is what will hurt their children. Children are a gift, they should be loved & respected as human beings who are learning about humanity. Strangers judging their parents is not a sign of love, it’s a sign of disrespect.

  2. Chici says:

    I think the 8 mill is only a loan on paper for tax reasons, so she doesn’t run the risk of paying tax on it. Eventually when they do settle the finances they’ll just deduct it on paper to make it all good for tax compliance issues.

    • Becks1 says:

      This is actually what I think as well. If he had just given her 8 million it could have been complicated tax-wise. the loan is basically just a way to avoid taxes. Rich people do crap like that all the time.

      That said, it still makes Brad look really bad.

      • Child support is not taxed.

      • Becks1 says:

        I meant if he gave her the 8 million to buy the house.

      • Embee says:

        This (transfer taxes) is my area of work. And transfers between spouses (and they are still married, but the rule applies even to transfers between spouses incident to divorce) are entirely deductible. It’s not a tax issue. He could have given her the money without her incurring income and without consuming any of his unified credit (the amount of $$ you can give away tax free during life and at death).

    • smcollins says:

      @chici That makes too much sense, and that kind of reasoning is not allowed here! 😉
      But seriously, just when it seemed like things couldn’t get messier….

    • Clare says:

      hmmm I disagree – if it was a ‘gift’ disguised as a loan, they wouldn’t she (the recipient) wouldn’t be reporting it as a loan (with interest payment plan) to the court. I mean, of course there are tax loopholes, but Angelina’s team isn’t stupid enough to misrepresent financial matters to the court.

      Eitherway, what kind of arseholes keeps the family home AND its contents while displacing 6 young children. I don’t care how much you hate your partner, you don’t do that to your kids. He is just another in a long line of controlling vile men.

      • Sarah says:

        Even Affleck had the decency to move out of the house after carefully blowing out his marriage.

      • tracking says:

        Well Pitt is sort of stuck with this one. If he terms the gift as such, he pays the taxes (30% I think) so that means millions. If he terms it a loan, he looks like an ass, even if he had planned to forgive it when things died down. Lose-lose for him.

      • Becks1 says:

        The loan is to Angelina’s benefit as well. She doesn’t have to pay taxes on it either. And I imagine the “interest” is less than she would pay in taxes on that 8 million. I think its shady as eff for Brad’s people to be like, “he paid child support! look at this loan!” because that just looks bad but I imagine in general the loan is closer to a gift than an actual loan.

    • You don’t pay taxes on child support, ever. So, no it’s not that.

      • tracking says:

        SSE, that’s not true. Child support payments are not tax deductible, only alimony is. Pitt’s accountant set it up this way for a reason.

  3. Maya says:

    Angelina didn’t traumatise the children nor did she throw them out of their home.

    Stop with the both are equally bad narrative. It’s happened with Hillary & Trump and it is happening here. Angelina is human and made mistakes but she is nowhere near Brad’s horrible mistakes.

    • Sarah says:

      And we had the same thing with Amber Heard and Johnny Depp’s divorce. I don’t understand why so many women feel the need to cap for these mediocre white men. This is nothing short of embarassing.

      • Maya says:

        No I am comparing how people claim the woman is equally bad when she has made a lot less mistakes than the man in question.

      • Sarah says:

        Brad Pitt is no Donald Trump but then who tf even is? Emperor Zero truly is scum. But I do agree with Maya that the coverage, the insistance that both sides are EQUALLY to blame does remind me of the 2016 presidential election’s coverage.

  4. JustSway says:

    Of all the ways I’ve thought this could have ended, I never thought it would be so long, ugly and gross.

    • Naomi11 says:

      I thought everything would be amicable. Oh boy, was I wrong. Don’t they know that only the children suffer from the bad behavior of their parents.

    • Millenial says:

      Agreed. This is just depressing. Nasty divorces leave lasting marks on the children.

  5. bap says:

    TeamJolie! I trust her word she is a Good Woman.

  6. tracking says:

    So his perspective is that he forked over a huge amount of money, and that she never requested child support at any point during the divorce proceedings until this week’s filing (that box was left unchecked in her original divorce filing). Since this was not ever brought up with his legal team before, the public filing was designed in part to embarrass him. Which is understandable, I guess, since she’s been embarrassed by his PR tactics of late. Why they both didn’t handle the financial issue through the courts from the outset is a mystery to me. They’re both fabulously wealthy and had they both had the kids 50-50, he might not have owed her much if anything. But he will definitely owe her money since she has been the primary custodial parent for two years (how much more than 1.3m I don’t know–maybe 4x that if 30K monthly per child?) I don’t know how the loan will factor in. Any gift over 15K is heavily taxed, so it’s possible the 8 million was structured as a loan so Angelina didn’t have to pay those taxes. If she’s paying a tiny bit of interest, she’s still much better off with the loan, which can be “forgiven” after a period of time depending on the terms of their settlement. In the end, she is correct that assisting her in buying a house is not child support per se, and he’ll have to pay up. (The family home he kept is his property pre-dating the marriage and is presumably covered in their pre-nup). But I’m also inclined to believe him that he would have paid more had she asked at any point during the last two years. Messy.

    • magdalene says:

      The mental gymnastics some do is unbelievable. It clearly says in the attorney’s statement that Angelina is asking him to his 50% share, it also said in the filing yesterday that they had an informal agreement which he has not met his share. Why otherwise intelligent women refuse to see facts when it has to do with Jolie really astounds me.

      • Alice says:

        Same. The twisting of this guy’s actions to turn them into sth more plausible is astonishing. Dude didn’t pay child support. Over. It is untrue that even with 50/50 he wouldn’t owe anything because it would still depend in income of both sides. The court will always aim at providing the kids with as close a lifestyle they had as possible and this often means higher earner contributing through child support regardless 50/50. In their case, he won’t get shared 50/50 custody, maximum he can hope is joint, aka joint decision making plus generous access. Which does call for higher child support as residence remains with Jolie. Dude owns CS. Period. More or less, judge will decide but CS is the right of the *child* not a bargaining chip between parents.

      • Sarah says:

        Angelina Jolie is the Hillary Clinton of Hollywood. At this point, there is a Jolie derangement syndrome. Just imagine the comments if Jolie had gone into an alcohol-fueled rage in front of her children and in the middle of a flight and then refuse to let said children live in the family home. Oh and let’s not forget about the whole being investigated by CPS…

      • Clare says:

        @Magdalene, Because we are conditioned to always side with the man – especially when he is white, rich and good looking.

      • Lady D says:

        @tracking, I understand what you are saying, but he did publicly state it was a gift. Brad wanted everyone to think he just gave her 9 million dollars, while all along he knew and TMZ knew, it was a loan she is already paying back, with interest. He is such a douche.

      • tracking says:

        Lady D, likely because he intended it as such even though it was structured as a loan for tax purposes. His accountant would have seen to that, trust. As Lady T said on the other thread, this is semantics but only wealthy people used to exploiting these loopholes would immediately grasp that millions of dollars were saved by doing it this way. If Pitt publicly insists it was a gift versus a loan–even if intended as the former, which is very likely–the IRS comes for him STAT. This is a lose (PR)-lose (millions of dollars) for him. She’s hitting him where it hurts in either case, but he started the PR war so must take his lumps.

    • JeanGrey says:

      You sound too rational. You don’t belong here. Quick, leave now before the obsessed stans come out too attack you.

      (spoke too soon)

      • Aurelia says:

        Agreed, why are people saying he is cheap and a deadbeat? The guy paid his ex wife 1.3 million as his share of their kids expenses.

    • Bridget says:

      This is why you have a formal agreement – so that there are no questions. Brad clearly feels that he’s contributing a massive amount of cash – Angelina thinks that the loan shouldn’t count toward contributing. Yes, this should be clarified officially so that everyone is on the same page.

    • KBB says:

      She only wants him to cover 50% of the expenses for the kids though, so they’ve been provided over $18,000 each for the last 23 months. Could each kid really have $60,000 monthly expenses? Even with extravagant tutors and nannies and security, that seems absurd to me.

      • tracking says:

        We can only guess, but I’ve surmised that 1.3 million over almost two years probably just covers 1/2 of bodyguards and tutors (maybe plus therapy). That means many other expenses not covered. The sum will be more like 30K per month per child, or more, so at least double what he has paid so far.

  7. Clare says:

    I guess Jennifer Aniston is sat by a pool in Mexico having a margarita and toasting to having dodged this bullet.

    Sorry can’t have a Brat Pitt thread without mention of JA lol

    • Sarah says:

      I have always thought she did not want to have children with anybody, being Pitt or JustEdge or anyone else (and more power to her for doing what she wants and is best for her) but she must be really RELIEVED that she did not have any with Pitt when she was being pressured into motherhood by the entire Hollywood ecosystem.

    • Millenial says:

      Really puts the whole “sensitivity chip” comment into perspective. Brad has the Hollywood golden boy image, but he can be a real you-know-what behind closed doors.

      • Artemis says:

        JA has her issues (childhood trauma from her mother leading into insecurity in her adulthood) but that never meant she deserved the PR beating BP unleashed unto her. Anybody looking back on that period when BP left her for AJ can see that nobody else but BP could have caused that PR beating about JA not wanting kids and other private leaks. JA tried to put out her narrative with VF with ‘yelling at the ocean’ and crying during the interview but it was nothing compared to the happy family narrative BP and AJ were rolling out slowly and JA just looked pathetic even when she said she didn’t believe BP cheated (very gracious of her). BP was savage and used JA not wanting children to justify him leaving her because he knew it wouldn’t have been a good look otherwise and the public were so easily swayed by the hot new Hollywood couple. JA has been vindicated over and over again.

        AJ and BP have the ending that fits the beginning of their relationship. It’s cathartic. Maybe it will learn AJ to stop oversharing and putting men on a pedestal (revealing her insecurity and dysfunction in romantic relationship not honesty taking into account her 2nd marriage as well) and BP that sometimes you’ll lose more than your image, he lost his kids, the only true thing he might have in his life. When he is old and irrelevant in Hollywood, he will regret choosing custody over Hollywood as his main priority.

      • Avery says:

        @Atemis You said it perfectly!

  8. Darla says:

    All I can say is Pitt is making Affleck look goooood. Which divorce would you rather go through? I’ll take messy Ben. Who’d have thought?

    • Sarah says:

      I mean, at least Affleck left the house to Jen and the kids (as he should, given his numerous trangressions!).

      • Bridget says:

        Ben and Jen were married longer (important in terms of community property), and didn’t they acquire that home while they were married (again, important in terms of community property). Whereas the house in question was Brad’s predating his relationship with Angelina and was never joint property. Just pointing out the difference.

      • Lady D says:

        Agree with you, Bridget, the house was his, but keeping the children’s belongings? That’s just flat out low. The twins were 7 when they split, and I imagine they had treasured items. Most small children do. To keep what they value most from them to spite their mother, is beyond the pale. He should be really ashamed of himself, but I bet he himself has no problem with his actions to date. I wonder who’s cheering him on?

      • Brandy Alexander says:

        Lady D, but I thought she packed the kids up after the plane and ghosted him? I doubt he told his kids they couldn’t have their toys and tuff. It seems more likely he kept the furnishings and decor, but the lawyers are spinning it to make it seem like he kicked his kids to the curb with the clothes on their back. Both sides are playing so dirty in this divorce, it’s gross.

      • TheOtherSam says:

        There were moving vans at Pitt’s in the weeks and months after the 2016 split so belongings were removed, I’m sure that included the many of the kids things. They were living with their mother pretty much full time so that’s the practical move.

        They have visited him so having a few things there makes sense as well. We don’t know how much was kept there and how much moved out – that’s speculation.

      • tracking says:

        Yes, there are a lot of assumptions being made (very emotionally) about Pitt kicking out his wife and child and withholding their belongings. But 1) we don’t know if he offered them the compound or not, but do know he owns it since it predates his relationship. Also he expected to have the kids over up to 50% of the time once he was cleared in the abuse investigation 2) we do know from her VF interview that she and the kids went back to the compound after the plane incident and Pitt did not, and 3) we do know, as TOS said, that moving vans were at the compound in that period. Given all of this, there is less than zero to suggest he didn’t let them take their things when they moved out. The court documents indicate he kept the compound and furnishings, which means Jolie’s next step was to buy a second home, which had to be furnished as well (costly since a mansion). This is just part of the process of documenting her expenses. Her new lawyers are experts in this, and will make sure she gets the maximum settlement possible from Pitt, don’t worry.

  9. Millenial says:

    I’m also surprised (and kinda sad) that Jolie doesn’t seem to have $8 million to buy a home. Girlfriend needs to get a Marvel franchise STAT. Take a page from Michelle Williams’ book.

    • tracking says:

      I’m quite sure she does, but simply asked Pitt for a contribution to a second home for his children nearby. Surely to avoid millions in gift tax, he structured it as a loan (which he could have forgiven at some point in the repayment process). They are both fabulously wealthy, but their lifestyle is very extravagant, and of course he needs to pay for his kids too. And Maleficent is a very lucrative Disney franchise.

    • JeanGrey says:

      Hmm. I kinda can’t see her getting involved in a Marvel franchise at this point.

      • Clare says:

        I could see her playing some kind of ‘mother earth’ Gaia type character. I don’t know if Marvel has one of those…but you know what I mean – a larger than life goddess type rather than lady in spandex kicking ass, if that makes sense?

      • lingli says:

        I was looking at her IMDB profile recently and – apart from the fact that she’s made fewer movies as an actress than I thought – her roles since 2005 have leant heavily towards the serious drama/action genres (with the exception of her voiceover roles in animated movies). I wonder how she’s viewed in Hollywood at the moment, if they’d be coming to her or if she’d have to ask the studios…

    • Myrtle says:

      Don’t you agree she was so so good in that movie Taking Lives, where she played the FBI profiler Ileana Scott? I LOVED that character, and she’s a character who could age well, always remaining interesting, smart and cool—as well as sexy, like Helen Mirren—into her 70′s at least! I wish some studio would start an Ileana Scott franchise, starring, of course, Angelina Jolie.

      • Millenial says:

        Agreed. I always thought she was a fantastic Lara Croft, the movies themselves were just not very good. And I’ve always loved her in the Taking Lives/Wanted type roles. I’d also like to see her in something like Wonder Woman (no idea what kind of role, maybe Gal’s long lost half-sister with dubious intentions kind-of-role).

    • Artemis says:

      On one hand, it makes sense BP would be asked to contribute to a new house. On the other hand, we NEVER know the true state of Hollywood finances. 6 children is a lot of costs! AJ doesn’t have the cash flow like BP. BP works consistently and produces award-winning films as well. AJ stopped working consistently a long time ago and her own directing efforts are not that successful or commercial. She donates her perfum ad money to charity. One would need to be frugal when your career is not popping by your own choice. Plus I always maintained that her VF interview during FTKMF could have turned magazines sour to interview her. They are not afraid to go against her. AJ is not in control like say Beyonce and cannot afford bad press at all post-BP. Now she’s dropped out of a film which can turn Hollywood against her as well but she probably has very good reasons to do so. She’s always been a consummate professional.

      They have always employed a team of nannies and home tutors, that’s more than sending the kids to a private school for sure. No matter how frugal AJ lives, she still is in a Hollywood bubble with all the private travelling, expensive homes and lots of employees + she does wear expensive clothes. She has money for sure but those kinda costs will drain any savings so BP chipping in in more than necessary to maintain this lifestyle.

  10. M.A.F. says:

    “Brad’s lawyers say Angelina and her lawyers have engaged in dirty tricks, calling them out for “a thinly-veiled effort to manipulate media coverage.”

    And this piece isn’t one of those “dirty tricks”? Okay, Pitt’s team.

  11. Bridget says:

    We don’t know that he has an issue with a formal child support agreement, I would imagine he has an issue with being called a deadbeat.

    • Sarah says:

      I cannot stand Pitt (dating way back, from that time he was “dating” a teenager) but he is right that a formal agreement is much better for all parties involved, starting with the children.

    • tracking says:

      He was a dummy for relying on an informal arrangement, particularly in a situation where a gift structured as a loan for tax purposes could be used as PR against him. Not smart. I also think she simply was focused on custody to the exclusion of all else (including formal child support requests) until this point, especially because she had no great financial need, but her new litigators have expertise in finance so it makes sense this is happening now when it seems some form of shared custody is imminent.

      • Brandy Alexander says:

        I think it makes more sense that she went on the offensive after he was granted more visitation time, and it seemingly went well. I’m betting 50/50 custody is a lot closer then people here think.

      • Lady D says:

        I have no doubt custody will be granted 50/50. It’s Cali law, and he’s Brad Pitt. His name will carry weight no matter how it’s denied, or how unfair it may be.

      • kacy says:

        I think she hadn’t been managing the money for a while and just now realized how much of a gap she had as well as being pissed he’d get 50/50.

      • Coco for puffs says:

        @ladyD talking about weight his name carries determining laws of California.
        Let’s see how that has worked so far. Not much at all. He was still treated like any other persons with issues. The only leverage he had was the media and that is saying a lot of BS.

  12. TheOtherSam says:

    Why would Angelina want Pitt’s house? He originally bought it and lived there for years before he met AJ, it even pre-dated his marriage to Aniston. Most of the furniture and contents (except for AJ’s personal items) were likely his, pre-dating the marriage. I don’t even think Angelina wanted to live there, given she left him.

    She got herself a nicer place in Malibu and now has the very nice DeMille estate – an upgrade imo from Pitt’s compound up the road. Plus it’s all her own.

    The kids weren’t ‘thrown out’ of the family home, they weren’t going there much the past 2 years because AJ had primary custody and he had limited visitation. So most of their things were moved out to AJ’s – that’s practical.

    • kacy says:

      Agreed, and the 8 million dollar loan was probably for tax reasons, since without a custody agreement, it is then not tax deductible. This is getting shady.

      • tracking says:

        The financial issues do need to be worked out in order to move the divorce forward. So it’s one part that, and one part the latest salvo in a brutal PR war.

      • Hmm says:

        No the reason was for a piece of property on his estate that she owned

  13. ladida says:

    Why does Angie need a loan from Brad? I mean, she’s wealthy in her own right.

  14. nikki says:

    Harvey Levin is a pig. I refuse to give TMZ any revenue with clicks, or anything else.

  15. Persnickety says:

    Travel, Food, Restaurants, Mortgages, 4 Bodyguards, 6 nannies probably cost $4 million net per year. His half is $2
    million net. He gave her the $8 million loan, so it would not be considered a gift, and not included in the settlement. They may have budgeting issues. Brad may be encouraging a budget, and she is panicking because being famous adds to your cost of living. Its also hard to raise 6 kids when you’re both working in far flung locales most of the year. What a complicated divorce. I don’t know how it could work out fairly unless a family member or close friend offers to be the steady co-parent based in LA, while Brad and Angelina keep acting with each taking 3 month breaks to be with the kids.

  16. porcupette says:

    Oh god, you found one where he looks EVEN MORE stupid and unattractive!

  17. Sarah says:

    Their children already know the truth I think. They were on that plane after all.

  18. Naomi11 says:


  19. JustSway says:

    Y E S

  20. JeanGrey says:

    Exactly. I’ve seen instances where true deadbeats dads who play dumb with their child support payments get visitation and custody rights because one has nothing to do with the other. In my state they are treated separately. The custody issue is through family court and child support is through the support enforcement unit.