Denied Visitation? Don’t Put Yourself On Child Support!

Kenya N. Rahmaan

Much too often, we hear or read stories about non-custodial parents (NCPs), primarily fathers, being denied access to their children. Thanks to social media, we are privy to exchanges between seemingly desperate fathers and their children’s mothers as they beg, hopelessly, to see their children. Recently, a YouTube video surfaced of a father pleading with the mother to see his child only to be met with the demand of $1,000 in exchange for a bit of time. While the video proved to be a skit, the scenario is all too real and common for NCPs. Many responders to these horrible accounts offer one solution, thinking it will terminate the denial of access. The solution is for that father to put himself on child support.

 

Filing child support against yourself is some of the worst advice that a father could take as an alienated parent seeking access to their child, especially when visitation is being ransomed in exchange for cash by the custodial parent. Firstly, voluntarily putting yourself on child support does not guarantee automatic visitation. From a legal perspective and according to Rebekah Selekman and Lauren Antelo (2020), parenting and child support are two separate issues for never-married parents. Child support caseworkers cannot enforce visitation just because the father has opened a case against himself.  

 

Evidence has proven that not only is the outcome for children better when both parents are involved in their lives, but child support is also more likely to be paid in full and on time when NCPs have access to their children. However, the two issues remain separate, and even when child support has been court-ordered, the custodial parent can still deny visitation. Based on the Essentials for Attorneys in Child Support Enforcement, developed by Michael K. Henry and Victoria S. Schwartz, a refusal of visitation by the custodial parent does not relieve the absent parent of their child support obligation. Take notice that even if a father voluntarily places himself on child support to establish, collect, and enforce a child support order, he will always be considered ‘absent’ from his child’s life.  

 

On rare occasions and after filing motions for visitation and involving the government, an NCP may find some relief when a court official grants access to the father. Over the years, a few courts have held that the appropriate remedy for a father denied visitation is to move the court for contempt against the mother and possibly a change of custody (Henry & Schwartz). The unfairness in administering child support and visitation has not gone unnoticed by the legislators and those tasked with creating guidelines for family court officials. In 1996, the Federal Government passed a sweeping welfare reform law entitled The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PWRWOR). The legislators acknowledged the need to facilitate the involvement of NCPs in the lives of their children (Selekman & Antelo).  

The need for paternal involvement in a child’s life, even when the parents do not reside within the same home, sparked the creation of the Child Access and Visitation (AV) program. According to the National Child Support Enforcement Association or NCSEA (2013), 1996 Congress authorized the AV program, which provides total grant awards of $10 million per year for states to promote various services and alleviate problems. One of the services, along with mediation for parents in conflict, was developing parenting plans. Even with the best intentions, the experts noted shortcomings in implementing parenting plans.

 

One challenge outlined by the NCSEA (2013) as to why the parenting plans would not be successful was that some new orders establish paternity and support for a parent who is unknown to the child and has limited childcare experience. These are weak excuses for denying NCPs the right to help raise their children. On the one hand, it is too easy for a disgruntled residential parent who is actively alienating the child from their other parent to decry that he is a stranger to the child. Additionally, if both parents are new to parenthood, they may have limited childcare experience. However, the mother is automatically considered the best caregiver of a new baby, which means that the father, in most cases, is denied the ability to show that he, too, is a qualified caregiver. This theory has been disproven and is biased against men and fathers.

 

There seemed to be a possible change in how visitation would be determined when child support orders were established by the court official decades after fathers had been fighting outcry over the unfairness within the family court system and the denial of equal access to children. The Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Act of 2014, which passed under the Obama Administration, added a provision concerning child support establishment and visitation. According to Susan Jones (2014), buried deep in President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2014 budget was a new mandate requiring states to include parental visitation arrangements in child support orders. Including parental visitation in new child support orders was encouraged by the Federal government during the initiation period, which was supposed to give states time to implement effective and efficient avenues that would seamlessly integrate the new mandate.

 

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requested nearly half a billion dollars to adopt policies that would increase visitation for non-residential parents. According to Jones, all 50 states and the District of Columbia would have been required to include parenting time responsibilities in all new child support orders beginning FY 2019. After significant pushback from GOP leaders, President Obama’s proposed mandate was reduced to a recommendation. Although jurisdictions have included the recommendation for a parenting plan when new child support orders are established, there must be evidence that states enforce the proposal regularly. https://youtube.com/live/zB4gKYEGJyQ

 

Not only have most states failed to implement the ‘strong recommendation’ parenting plan inclusion with new child support meaning government refused to alert parents of the new policy. The result means significant numbers of parenting plans, which professionals determined to be in children’s best interest. Congress (2014) declared that establishing parenting time arrangements when obtaining child support orders is an important goal and shouldbe accompanied by strong family violence safeguards. Using ‘should’ instead of ‘must’ means that states do not have to include visitation. Since there are no penalties or deductions from the incentive monies when jurisdictions refuse to include visitation, the system will remain unfair towards NCPs’ visitation. The lack of accountability and penalty will occur even when a father puts himself on child support first.  

 

The main reason for this change in the bill is due to the new budget. According to Selekman and Antelo (2020), President Trump’s 2020 budget allocates $34 million over ten years for states to establish parenting time at the time of child support orders establishment, a state option. Even when some progress the parents achieve some progress toward equality and shared parenting and visitation, there are always legislators that will pull the rug from under the feet of NCPs. Make no mistake. Child support reform and shared parenting issues are not partisan issues. They are money issues. As of 2019, for every $1 spent nationally on the child support program, the average return on investment (ROI) was over $5.00. The return was much higher in South Dakota and Texas at $10.47 and $11.68, respectively (OCSE, 2020). 

 

Instead of placing oneself on child support because of parental alienation, fathers can pursue other avenues to ensure access. Since unmarried fathers aren’t automatically granted joint custody, it is critical to establish paternity. A presumed father doesn’t need to go through the child support system to establish paternity. Resources are available so that the child support office does not need to become involved in the process. Once paternity is established, visit the local court website and search for ‘joint custody’ and ‘shared parenting’ forms. The website should include instructions and filing fees. Finally, file the paperwork with the court.

 

According to FindLaw.com, if the parents cannot agree on visitation or custody arrangements, either one may ask the court to grant his or her request through a contested hearing. Accomplishing a custody arrangement can happen without filing a child support order against yourself. Fathers, and all NCPs for that matter, must remember that court officials may deny shared custody requests under certain circumstances. According to FindLaw.com, evidence of domestic violence or drug problems could be used against a parent having custody or visitation with a child.

   

It is important to remember that if the NCP pays support without a legal court order through the court system, always get a receipt when using cash. Without a child support order, a NCP supporting their child with money, the custodial parent can deny receiving support during a visitation hearing. For this reason, any payments must be made in a trackable form with ‘child support’ written in the memo.

 

If a parent must pay cash, they should always get a receipt or risk being accused of abandonment, possibly denied visitation, and find themselves sued for court-ordered to pay support. Even with proof of providing, a child support official can still consider the payments a gift and court order the NCP to pay child support. https://www.https://thechildsupporthustle.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/two-housholds-child-support.jpg.com/dear-judge-child-support-is-not-a-gift/ Parents must be aware that there are alternatives to visitation rights besides putting themselves on child support. Doing so is equivalent to putting oneself on probation or parole for 18-plus years.

 

References

Henry, M. R., & Schwartz, V. S. (1986). Essentials for attorneys in child support enforcement. National Institute for Child Support Enforcement. https://books.googleusercontent.com/books/content?req=AKW5Qacx31niS6t-Z21pd7LxUeCQrTuJ63lOEiiVF4QQMiJUIHI_7wvfELwx43fpguJzogK-bfWbQH2wMhYTI4UbX8V1oYfqYWIccbaQD9DdEHdtMv5Mi_iAS88Fb0OkN6MraltYWquj6iUsC5YqbsyW6E8ExVN8WuuUfGDHNfGbtKWjMz0QT4aB351zPdC12CL8A04bo2c6NqfC_UklYRTzZj94tTYRyGBiQkXAdyUSNvwT5GKUDP-ADh_5Pz8dcXOCzbfNhSpqXOZipAeQuR0o8opo0V2kAA

Parenting time orders. (2013, July 31). NCSEA. https://www.ncsea.org/documents/Parenting-Time-Order_7.31.13.pdf

Selekman, R., & Antelo, L. (2020, March). Coordinating parenting time and child support: Experiences and lessons learned From three states. ASPE | Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/private/pdf/263506/Child-Support-Parenting-Time-Brief.pdf

<

p id=”a3″>Wagon, J. B. (2017, January 30). Trump leaves Obama’s last-minute child support rule alone. Governing. Retrieved March 6, 2024, from https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-child-support-obama-trump.html