Yes, but the argument is that some portion of those expenses would have to paid by the custodial parent irrespective of having the child in residence. For example, perhaps a custodial parent would have to rent/own a two bedroom residence rather than a one bedroom residence. If the average difference in cost between a one bedroom and a two bedroom house or apartment is say 20%, then the custodial parent should be responsible for 10% of that difference and the non-custodial parent responsible for the remaining 10%. So, to give a specific example, if an average one bedroom costs $450 a month and an average two bedroom costs $600 a month, the cost difference is $150. The non-custodial parent's share of that expense should be $75. This same methodology should be used to quantify the added expenses of being a parent rather than a single person. It should be extended to all basic utilities and expenses that a single person would reasonably have to pay irrespective of having a child in residence, such as electricity, water, heating costs and vehicular expenses.

Naturally, expenses resulting solely from the care of a child such as diapers, school expenses, and the food the child eats should be shared equally between both parents.

More often than not, however, this is not the case. In most cases, the non-custodial parent pays way more than what could reasonably be calculated to be those expenses resulting directly or even indirectly from having a child in residence with the custodial parent.

Many states fail to even quantify the child's expenses. Illinois, the state in which I live, is one example. In my state, child support is based solely on the non-custodial parent's income, expressed as a percentage of their gross earnings. Since it is not based at all on the child's needs, but rather on the father's income, in most cases child support elevates the living standard of the custodial parent (and granted the child also) but reduces the living standard of the non-custodial parent. In my own case I have found myself barely able to afford to pay my own expenses, which are meager by comparison, while my child's mother, who incidentally has four children by four different fathers, does not work and yet enjoys a standard of living which far exceeds my own.

Mind you, I love my child. I also exercise my right to have visitations with my child and always have. I am happy that my child enjoys an excellent standard of living. However, I don't think that children and their custodial parents should be so elevated to the detriment of the non-custodial parent. It's worth noting that, in addition to the monies I must pay in child support, I also like to buy things for my child when I am able. Those purchases, clothes, food while in my custody, and toys must be undertaken above and beyond what I am required by law to pay in child support. There is no system in my state by which I can deduct those expenditures from the support I pay.

What I find even more interesting is the statistical facts about who pays child support. Roughly 80% of non-custodial fathers pay child support while only about 5% of non-custodial mothers pay support. The reason for this is really quite simple. Women with children are 76% more likely to apply for public assistance and 93% more likely to receive it. Almost every state in the United States requires anyone applying for public assistance where a child is involved to name the child's father. The state then uses it's resources to track down the father, file a paternity suit and deduct the father's wages from his employer. While the laws are gender neutral in their language about who is responsible for child support, in practice those who execute those laws, the state's attorneys, the courts, the Department of Health and Family Services, seem to exhibit a gender bias in favor of mothers, often excluding custodial fathers from the equation. My brother, for example, who is the custodial father of his twins, has made repeated requests of our local state's attorney to pursue their mother for the child support she owes him (and his sons). But they have repeatedly ignored his requests. Because he doesn't receive child support from her, he struggles to provide for them. As a result, he lacks the disposable income to hire an attorney and fight to receive just support.

Based upon my own experiences, as well as the research I've done, there is in fact a gender bias where child support is concerned. It most assuredly, in my opinion, favors the mothers, not the fathers.