So when are we going to legally enforce child support/care?
For both men and women but given the events of today I somewhat mean men more.
But seriously. Why are we not throwing people in jail for missing payments? Why are we not garnishing wages after x amount of missed payments?
Since now it seems some states are going to force women to give birth, why can’t the man now be legally forced to support the child? Obviously not as in, physically being there especially if the man is an abuser/rapist but still financially.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
13 Answers
Most states already enforce chid support California has some pretty stringent actions it takes on deadbeat parents.
Do you have a specific lax state in mind?.
Not specifically. Just all too familiar with the stories of people not paying.
The laws in my state are better than 40 years ago but many businesses will pay these deadbeats under the table, or like many, they flee the state. High time to hold them accountable.
In New York State, they’ll take away your driver’s license and then throw you in jail.
There are already enforcements in all 50 states. And in many, failure to pay can result in jail time.
I think a related question would be: are we going to make the child support laws more realistic? Example: Let’s say I’m making $100,000 a year and I have to pay for child support. Let’s say that child support is $12,000 per year. But then I get laid off and my income goes to zero for a month and then I find a job that is only paying $50,000 a year. I can get my child support lowered, but I have to go back to court and often they will look at past history to see what your income was. And all that takes time…several months, even if you can get a reduction. So you are basically now several months behind in payments and there is no recourse.
Would it be better if, when your income changes significantly, you could go to the clerk of courts to show proof of the change (termination letter for example) and have your child support changed immediately? So in the above scenario, I could go to the Clerk and have my child support go to zero when I am laid off and then again when I get the new job and my child support payments would follow my financial status rather than getting tangled in an already over-burdened court system?
@seawulf575: If you’re laid off, you should be receiving unemployment, in which case your child support shouldn’t go to zero, it should go to a percentage of your unemployment beneffits.
What is needed is an interstate compact to have child support enforceable across state lines.
Right now, someone escaping a California support order can move to Nevada and not pay support.
@jca2 And that’s fine too…but it shouldn’t require having to pay for an attorney petition the court, getting a court date a month or two later, etc. It should be more streamlined. I’d be fine with making stiff penalties for gaming the system.. In my example, when I get the second job, if I don’t claim it within a week or two there ought to be a penalty.
Some states enforce by way of the court…..custodial parent simply notifies the court and they go after your money, and going forward crappy parent must make CS payments to you through the court.
Saw an ad this morning for my county’s Child Support Services. They mediate between parents and the support level gets adjusted immediately. Failure to pay is also dealt with immediately; they send a Sheriff after your ass. County found it cheaper than tying up the family court.
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
