June 18, 2014

 

Most people know someone with a child support horror story.  The seemingly never-ending payments, license suspensions and jail are but a few headaches parents may face when dealing with child support enforcement.  But there is a silver lining and a glimmer of hope that one day, at least 18 years into the future, child support will end.  The child will have reached adulthood and the headache of child support pressure will be over.  Unfortunately that silver lining is never uncovered and the hope quickly fades when parents realize that child support debt does not end when a child reaches adulthood. 

 

In some cases, child support ends when the minor reaches the age-of-majority.  This refers to the legal age established under state law at which an individual is no longer a minor, (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2014).  The law is clear, however, there are many parents making payment that are state owned and are not financially beneficial to the child.  The NCSL (2014) explains that by the age of majority, the individual, a young adult, has the right and responsibility to make certain legal choices that adults make.   Based on this law, parents should not be forced to pay support to people of legal age that financially care for themselves.  Nor should they be forced to pay an imaginary debt comprised of fees and interest once the child reaches adulthood.

 

There are two situations that require payments after adulthood.  In some cases, the child support debt, or arrears, is owed to the custodial parent.  According to Daniel R. Levinson, former Inspector General, (2007), debt owed to custodial parents is settled only at the discretion of the custodial parent.  This debt should be waived when the child reaches adulthood because there is no long a need to provide for a child.  This situation could be more supported if custodial parents were forced to provide receipts of all money spent on the child.  This would be a more solid reason for reimbursement.  Unfortunately, the current law does not force parents to prove how child support money is being spent.

 

The second instance, and most popular, is reserved for the parents who owe money to the state and can only be forgiven by the state that holds the child support note.  Debt compromise is offered by just over half of the states and qualifying mandated criteria make it difficult for low-income parents.  It is complicated to track how many parents have successfully been granted debt forgiveness because there is little or no information provided by the participating states. The reason for this is that The Office of Child Support Enforcement Agency has not issued guidelines regarding the administration of state debt compromise programs and does not track or monitor those states that have implemented such programs, (Levisnson, 2007).  Another explanation for the lack of available data could be due to the limited number of parents who have successfully erased their child support debt.  Most of these programs require between 12 and 24 consistent monthly payments before a compromise will be granted. 

 

This can be a difficult accomplishments in populations exceed double unemployment numbers.  Making complete and regular child support payments may be easy for some, but for low-income parents, the choice between eating and paying child support for an adult child is a no brainer.  Parents should not be on the hook for child support debt owed to the state for a TANF grant, interest, and late fees.  The money does not benefit anyone or anything except for the government.   For those arrears cases where money is owed directly to the parent, receipts need to be provided documentation in order to account for every dollar spent on the child.  In its current state, the child support system is similar to an unlimited bank account.  The I.O.U. is one that never expires and the trap is set for citizens who happen to be parents to pay child support for an adult child for a long time.  The adult child seems to transform itself into the government.

 

References:

 

Levinson, D. R. (2007, October). State use of debt compromise to reduce child support arrears. Retrieved March 12, 2014, from http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-06-06-00070.pdf

National Conference of State Legislatures (2014, January). Termination of Child Support- Age of Majority. Retrieved March 12, 2014, from http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/termination-of-child-support-age-of-majority.aspx

 


Comments

jason
06/26/2014 2:22pm

your argument is very one-sided & obviously written by a guy. Who cares if they owe the state, parent, or the child until that child becomes a sr citizen?!? If the NCP owes, he needs to pay, plain & simple. Everything has fees & interest. Had the NCP arranged mutually agreeable child support, the custodial parent would have no desire to put said NCP on 'papers'. The only reform that the current office of attorney general should make is going after these non-custodials way more agressively than ever & more expedient so that there wouldn't even be such a large arrears owed from the onset. A man being negligent in all areas is why there is an arrears owed anyway. And reciepts?? Thats absurd! We KNOW the money gets spent. So what is the purpose of that?? Can 1 actually calculate the numerous sacrifices a woman makes on her body, mind, soul, social life, etc to bare a child??Again, this book has to be written by a male who was immature enough not to work an agreement out w the mother of his children for the sake of his children to avoid any court responsibility.

N.K Clark
06/26/2014 4:54pm

Interesting commentary, Jason. I do no agree with you but still, interesting. My major issue with the system is that the children, in most cases, are not benefitting from the program or the money. Statistically, the government is making significantly more money off of child support than the average family. The system is a hustle and I guess I was mature enough to figure it out. Good luck to you.


Comments are closed.