[43] The mother’s proposal to set the child-care portion of the nanny’s income at 80% is very reasonable. Since she is a shift-worker, with unpredictable hours, it is reasonable and necessary for the mother to use a nanny, instead of an outside child-care provider. As a result, many of the nanny’s cooking, cleaning and laundry responsibilities are intertwined with her child-care responsibilities. The children in this case are even younger than those in Low v. Robinson (who were 9 and 5) and require more intensive child care. They are frequently in the home and housekeeping is essential to promote their well-being. The personal benefit that the mother obtains from the nanny is no more than the 20% suggested by her. The nanny is primarily there to care for the children.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.