# Shared Parenting Could Mean Reduced Child Support

- Link: https://thechildsupporthustle.com/shared-parenting-and-possible-reductions-in-child-support-2/
- Published: 2024-05-06T14:23:36+00:00
- Author: MsRockMon

[⌊\"\"⌉⌊\"\"⌉[

Kenya N. Rahmaan

South Dakota is one of the most recent states to embrace the idea of enacting legislation
supporting shared parenting in the United States. Shared parenting, by definition,
is a method of parenting that allows both parents to actively parent their child(
CustodyXChange). 

Numerous studies have reported that children benefit when raised by two parents 
while residing in single-parent homes. The laws governing joint custody and shared
parenting are similar to child support guidelines in that state officials write 
and regulate them. These policies become complicated when deciding custody and visitation
schedules and calculating child support payments that benefit the parents and, most
importantly, the children. 

A study by Linda Neilson of the Stanford Custody Project (2014) revealed that 51
out of 1,406 children chosen randomly made better grades, were less depressed, and
were more well-adjusted behaviorally than the 355 adolescents who lived primarily
with their mothers. With this information being available and relevant in proving
that children are overall more emotionally stable, there is no reason that a solid
shared-parenting plan is not a mandate in all child support and custody decisions.
One could deduce that custody and child support are equally important, so judges
should consider both issues simultaneously. That is not true in the US. Every state
has policies identifying child support and custody topics as separate issues. For
example, Ohio’s law clearly states that child support and visitation are unrelated.

According to Brian D. Watts (2007), the duty to pay support is separate and distinct
from the right to parenting time with a child. While it is true that both parents
are financially responsible for their children, the expenses accrued by non-custodial
parents during visitation and overnight stays are often ignored by the government
when it pertains to child support and visitation. Even though South Dakota has updated
its legislation, researchers have not recognized one state with outstanding shared
parenting policies, nor has any severe legislation been considered to decrease or
eliminate child support. Almost all states have a shared parenting plan that allows
adjustments to child support payments based on time spent with the children. Eighteen
states adjust child support amounts based on the non-residential parent’s time with
their child.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), in Alaska, the
government offers a reduction based on a cross-credit formula, with a 1.5 multiplier
applied to a 30% shared parenting time threshold.   The cross-credit formula is 
the most commonly used method, and this formula can be incredibly beneficial to 
the non-custodial parent. 

 Jo M. Beld and Len Biernat explained in the Family Law Quarterly (2003) that states
apply a multiplier, usually 1.5, to the base support order before making an adjustment
based on additional visitation to offset fixed costs of the residence when the child
is not home. The 1.5 approach adjusts for costs the non-custodial parent expends
while recognizing the costs of maintaining two households. By using this method,
parents can consider the child’s best interest. The parents can maintain adequate
and comfortable households wherever the child has a ‘sleepover,’ and the livelihood
of the non-custodial parent is unthreatened by paying child support/fixed costs 
to the custodial parent. Additionally, it has been proven that as the amount of 
overnight time they ( the child and the parent) spent together during adolescence
increased from 1% to 50%, the young adults’ favorable ratings of their relationships
with their fathers also increased (Neilson, 2014).

 More overnight stays positively influence children, so the federal and state governments
should strongly consider implementing more robust and meaningful shared parenting
plans. The government needs to apply reductions to payments so that both parents
can provide financially and emotionally for their children.

 [⌊\"\"⌉](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/shared-parenting-and-possible-reductions-in-child-support-2/\"https://www.custodyxchange.com/topics/research/dads-custody-time-2018.php\")

If lawmakers introduce legislation to promote nationwide shared parenting plans,
they must include these findings. These positive outcomes show that children who
benefit emotionally should be worth more than a parent who helps financially by 
receiving child support payments from the non-custodial parent. Some states, like
Kentucky and Mississippi, do not have such thresholds, but most offer thresholds
ranging from 10% to 40%. Missouri, on the other hand, does offer threshold deductions.

The ‘Show Me State’ is on the low end, reporting a 10% threshold, but this percentage
is subject to increase in certain situations. Missouri guidelines allow for a deviation
when children spend ‘substantially’ equal time with both parents (NCSL). The benefit
of a possible variation, coupled with Missouri being one of 24 states that requires
a “friendly parent” factor when deciding parenting plans, only earns an average 
grade when litigating child custody issues. The “Friendly Parent” factor, as defined
by The National Parents Organization (2007), means that states have language in 
a custody statute that recognizes and rewards a parent’s willingness and ability
to facilitate and encourage a closer and continuing relationship between the other
parent and the child. 

It is unclear why every state does not require courts to implement a friendly parent
factor when deciding on shared parenting plans. This rule should be at the forefront
in all custody cases, especially since children are more stable when raised by both
parents, even if they live in separate homes. The modified Betson approach is another
method that states utilize when determining deductions to child support obligations
based on shared parenting time. This method is less common, as only New Jersey and
Arizona practice this formula when determining parenting plans.  

Based on Arizona guidelines, the Betson Method can be used after a court official
has determined that no additional costs have accrued when choosing a shared parenting
plan instead of the joint custody option. According to David M. Betson, a credit
is computed based on the number of overnights spent with the parent with the obligation.
Arizona does not consider a shared parenting threshold when calculating the child
support obligation based on the percentage of time spent with the non-custodial 
parent.

Instead, the size of the credit is the product of the obligation times the percentage
found in the lookup tables based on overnights spent (Betson).   The modified Betson
would be an ideal solution in the eyes of most because it meets and possibly exceeds
the best interests of the child and the parents.   The child will spend more time
with the non-residential parent while the parent can adequately provide when the
child is in their custody. Too often, society expects parents to provide child support
and maintain a standard of living for themselves and another family in cases where
the parent remarries.

The days of reducing a parent to nothing to satisfy unrealistic child support debt
must quickly become a thing of the past. By sharing parental responsibilities (excluding
money), the child(ren) can experience better emotional and physical outcomes. Surprisingly,
several arguments support denying shared parenting even when there are no reports
of violence, which would, and should, prevent both parents from raising their child(
ren). One argument is that shared parenting leads to different inconsistencies in
the child. Shared parenting proponents argue that disciplinary consistency is almost
impossible when a child is divided between two households.

Individuals can raise and discipline their children as they feel appropriate if 
they abide by the law. The standard should apply to all parents, no matter where
the child resides. It is a personal decision on how to raise children.   One parent
has no right to tell another how to discipline or when to discipline their child.

 [⌊\"\"⌉](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/shared-parenting-and-possible-reductions-in-child-support-2/\"https://www.custodyxchange.com/topics/research/dads-custody-time-2018.php\")

Equal protections enter the arena, as the question should be asked: Are married 
parents forced to disclose and negotiate their parenting styles to appease one another?
Short of having illegally, the answer is no. Another argument against shared parenting
is the issues that may arise when parents choose to remarry. According to Families.
com, parents who manage to co-parent peacefully are taken aback when the other parent
remarries.  

The other parent’s reaction, whether negative or positive, should have no impact
on their ex’s relationship with their child. Nor should it prohibit the child from
being raised by both parents. The reality is that many parents remarry, and if the
residential parent can remarry and move a new adult person into the household without
recourse or judgment, the non-residential parent should enjoy that same opportunity.
Research has shown that shared parenting is more likely to decrease the negative
impact of high ongoing conflict than sole residence parenting plans (Neilson, 2014).

The arguments against shared parenting will continue to grow as more states embrace
the reality of changing separated family dynamics. If there are no signs and proof
of abuse, there should be no restrictions placed on parents who choose a shared 
parenting plan, no matter who initiated the action. The government bashes the American‘
fatherless’ society while perpetuating the rise of single-parent homes.   Parents
should have child support payments reduced based on the amount of time and money
they spend with the child(ren).  [https:// utu.be/OfRU7XV1xuk](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/shared-parenting-and-possible-reductions-in-child-support-2/\"https://youtu.be/OfRU7XV1xuk\")

Unfortunately, too many parents rely on child support payments as a source of income.
Because of this, any reduction in the support amount may force residential parents
to seek gainful employment.   The other parent’s monthly income is another reason
why naysayers of shared parenting plans refuse to adopt this reinvented co-parenting
option. Non-custodial parents often beg to spend time and help raise their children;
however, they are often labeled as deadbeats if they happen to be unemployed and
unable to pay child support debt.

Professionals have overstated that children need both parents. Studies and research
have shown that being raised by both parents is in a child’s best interest, yet 
states refuse to mandate shared parenting plans nationwide. Less than 25 states 
currently require ‘friendly parent’ factors in their statutes. The National Parents
Organization recently conducted a study to grade states on their shared parenting
plans. 

There were no states that scored an A. The other states earned grades ranging from
a B in states like Arizona and Minnesota to an F, which New York and Rhode Island
received. The family courts, child support enforcement, and parents relying on children
as paychecks will continue to oppose any legislation favoring robust parenting plans
that ultimately favor the non-custodial parents and the child. There is too much
money involved in executing these biased systems. Until we force the government 
to mandate effective, shared parenting plans and child support reform legislation,
the fatherless generation will linger, and children will continue to grow up without
the presence of their fathers. Any second that \’We, the People,\’ do not take action
is a second that we are failing children across the nation.

References:

Allen, M. (2011, April 1). What is a visitation credit? – St. Louis divorce support
| Examiner.com. Retrieved from http://www.examiner.com/article/what-is-a-visitation-
credit

Beld, J. M., & Biernat, L. (2003). Federal intent for state child support guidelines:
Income shares, cost shares, and the realities of shared parenting. _Family La  Quarterly_,
_37_(165). Retrieved from www.alacourt.gov/pdfppt/FEDERAL_INTENT.pdf

Betson, D. M. (n.d.). Work prod ct of Indiana judicial council review for support
guidelines- Shared parenting, visitation and child support. Retrieved from http://
www3.nd.edu/~dbetson/research/documents/SharedParentingFinal.pdf

Brown, P. R., & Brito, T. (2007). _Character stics of shared-placement child support
formulas in the fifty states_. Retrieved from Wisconsin Department of Workforce 
Development, Bureau of Child Support website: http://www.irp.wisc.edu/research/childsup/
cspolicy/pdfs/Brown_Brito_Task11.pdf

<

p id=\”a0\”>Custody XChange. (n.d.). _Shared pa enting – How can child custody work
when it’s shared? _Custody X Change: The Trusted Software for Parenting Schedules.
[https://www.custodyxchange.com/topics/custody/types/shared-parenting.php](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/shared-parenting-and-possible-reductions-in-child-support-2/\"https://www.custodyxchange.com/topics/custody/types/shared-parenting.php\")

Families.com. (n.d.). The Case  gainst Joint Physical Custody Parents Families.com.
Retrieved from http://www.families.com/blog/the-case-against-joint-physical-custody

National Conference of State Legislatures. (n.d.). S ates’ t eatment of shared parenting
time. Retrieved from www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/states-treatment-of-shared-
parenting-time.aspx

National Parents Organization. (2014, No ember 10). 2014 shar d parenting reporting
card a new look at child welfare a state-by-state ranking. Retrieved from https://
nationalparentsorganization.org/docs/2014_Shared_Parenting_Report_Card%2011-10-2014.
pdf

Nielson, L. (2014). Shared ph sical custody: Summary of 40 studies on outcomes for
children. _Journal o  Divorce & Remarriage_, _55_, 614-636. Retrieved from DOI: 
10.1080/10502556.2014.965578

Watts, B. D. (n.d.). Child cus ody and parenting. Retrieved from http://www.brianwattslaw.
com/Family/childcustody.html