If you have a child without being able to support yourself then that's your problem. If you fought for cuatody over this child and won while not having the money to take care of yourself and the child then that's your problem. Obviously you should support your child but if you're forced to seperate from them and they're no longer apart of your life after you fought for their custody then it's ultimately your decision to give the child money unless the court orders it.

There's no such thing as a moral obligation. He didn't have to give her shit, but he did. We're laughing at the fact that he gave her support that is surplus of what the court orders and she got greedy and ended up with less money. No one cares what you consider an obligation, especially when this person wasn't obligated to do anything but did anyway.