Child Support Guidelines Research Articles

Do child support guidelines result in lower inter-judge disparity? The case of the French advisory child support guidelines

Do child support guidelines result in lower inter-judge disparity? The case of the French advisory child support guidelines

Do courts know how to incentivize? Behavioral response of non-resident parents to child support obligations

In the case of divorce or separation, there are two kinds of maintenance regarding (minor) children: One parent provides food, housing, etc., the other parent compensates in the form of monthly payments. This study explores whether non-resident parents have responded to changes in the payments as laid down by the courts. Results for parents younger than 50 years old show that a €10 increase in monthly child support obligations decreases the likelihood of having an additional child by about 0.39 percentage points (about 3% at the sample mean). There is only weak evidence of a positive (re) marriage incentive. Furthermore, changing obligations do not have an impact on other post-separation behavior including child care and labor supply. To my knowledge, this investigation is the first causal analysis of unintentional side effects driven by courts’ changes in German child support guidelines. The potential endogeneity of child support obligations is addressed by using the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) data from 1983–2013 and applying individual fixed-effects instrumental variable models.

JUDICIAL DISCRETION IN THE DETERMINATION OF POST-DIVORCE CHILD SUPPORT: A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN MAINTENANCE ACT 99 OF 1998 AS COMPARED TO THE CANADIAN FEDERAL CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES OF 1997

There are various models for determining and allocating child support obligations post-divorce and many different principles upon which such a policy can be based. In most legal systems the parents retain the duty to support their needy children after divorce as it is primarily their obligation to ensure the adequate financial welfare of their children. This principle is applicable in both the South African and Canadian legal systems. In South Africa, in terms of both the common law and legislation, both parents must maintain their children “according to their respective means”. The awarding of a specific amount of maintenance is, however, a complex process calculated by the courts on a case-by-case basis mainly by considering two issues: the needs of the children and the parents’ ability to maintain their children within the circumstances and means of each of the parents. Although both aspects are important in a maintenance enquiry, the focus of this note is on the interpretation of the calculation of the contribution of each of the parents, especially the non-custodial parent. The interpretation of the concept “means” obviously has important consequences for the parties: the broader the interpretation of the “means” of a parent, the higher the proportion of the contribution of that parent would be towards the support of the children. This is especially important in South Africa where a substantial proportion of those who are obligated to pay maintenance is impecunious. The Canadian law rested on similar principles until 1997 when the federal government promulgated the Federal Child Support Guidelines as an amendment to the Divorce Act. The impact of these Guidelines on the calculation of the parental share of post-divorce child support has been far-reaching. The aim of this note is firstly to examine the meaning of the term “means” within the South African legal system as set out in the common law, the various statutes and as these have been interpreted by the majority of courts over the past century. The second aim is to give a brief overview of the Canadian Guidelines and to compare their current system with the South African scenario. The rationale for choosing this jurisdiction is (i) the fact that in both jurisdictions the courts have the ultimate say over the amount of support paid; and (ii) as the Canadian position before their 1997 amendments was similar to the current South Africa system, it was envisaged that by exploring their reasons for change and evaluating their current system, some useful insights might be gained in solving some problems experienced in the South African maintenance system. The note will conclude with some suggestions for reform in South Africa in light of the Canadian experience.

Can economic incentives for joint custody harm children of divorced parents? Evidence from state variation in child support laws

US state laws vary widely in the treatment of child support under joint custody. While some states require no child support in joint custody cases, other states require fathers with joint custody to pay the same amount as if they had no custody. The economic incentives generated by those custody laws can affect family decisions and the wellbeing of children of divorced parents, both under joint and sole custody. Merging child data from the SIPP with state child support guidelines, we find that economic incentives for joint custody have negative effects on the human capital development and health of children of divorced parents. Custody data together with parental characteristics and time use data suggest that economic incentives for joint custody may limit children's time spent with relatively high-quality mothers, as fathers pursue joint custody in response to the policy. We do not find an effect of economic incentives for joint custody on the probability of divorce and on the wellbeing of children in intact families. Our results are robust to specification changes, and the negative effects of economic incentives for joint custody on the wellbeing of children tend to be larger for girls and for children aged 12 and under.

A Child Support Framework Accounting for Parenting Time and Half-Siblings

In the United States, child support guidelines sometimes generate surprising and presumably unintentional child support amounts, especially in situations with extended visitation, shared parenting, and half-siblings. These are consequences of the ad-hoc mathematical formulas that are in common use to account for such situations. This paper provides ten such surprising examples from ten randomly selected states. A child support calculation framework is constructed that takes as inputs the subjective/normative decisions that the public and legislators must make regarding children's expenditures, the progressivity of the contributions between parents, and other matters. Our goal is to derive mathematical formulas for child support amounts that achieve those normative goals while satisfying basic desiderata such as supporting children in both of their families, equity between siblings, neutral medical decisions, and not requiring higher contributions from parents with a lower salary.

Too Much, Too Little, or Just Right? Recent Changes to State Child Support Guidelines for Low-Income Noncustodial Parents

There are growing concerns that current child support guidelines may result in “too high” orders likely to go unpaid and resulting in substantial debt. Recent federal legislation reflects these concerns by requiring states to consider the noncustodial parent’s ability to pay when setting child support orders [45 C.F.R. § 302.56(c)(1)(ii)]. However, this legislation leaves states to determine how to balance the economic needs of paying parents and their children. This paper explores how this flexibility affects the extent of variation in order amounts for low-income parents across states. To better understand how states interpret this new ruling and implications for order amounts, we conducted a cross-state comparison of recent changes to state child support guidelines for low-income payors and calculated order amounts for several types of cases. We find that states fall on a spectrum of how they conceive of parental financial responsibility versus parental self-sufficiency in their policy. Some states view noncustodial parents’ responsibilities for their children’s financial needs as secondary to parents’ abilities to meet their own basic needs; others view children’s needs as coming first; and many fall somewhere in between. Our findings add to current understanding of how child support agencies and lawmakers attempt to address the financial needs of low-income families through policy and statute. We find that having generous self-support reserves and no minimum orders allows states to maximize noncustodial parent income. However, if states seek to maximize financial contributions to children, more graduated adjustments to order amounts may be preferable.

An Overview of the Rules in the USA Regarding the Award of Post-Divorce Spousal Support in 2019

In this article, I summarize the various approaches in the USA regarding the award of post-divorce spousal support. In a few states, spousal support is rarely awarded. When it is awarded, the support amount is set at a low amount and the duration of the award is almost always short. In a number of other states, it seems that spousal support is more frequently awarded, and awards can be large if the claimant spouse needs a substantial support award to maintain after divorce the standard of living during the marriage. In marriages of long duration, award duration in these states can be indefinite-until either spouse dies or the recipient remarries. But it appears that, in most states, there seems to be little agreement among judges regarding the award of spousal support. Lawyers report a large variation in approaches among judges in the same area. The spousal support award, if any, that results in any given case is significantly impacted by the judge to whom the matter is assigned. As a result of this confusion and lack of consistency, some states recently have adopted child support guidelines. Of course, spousal support guidelines are not new in the USA. Some local areas have been applying guidelines for decades. But the guidelines more recently adopted have been adopted statewide for the first time in the U.S. It will be interesting to see how lawyers and judges will evaluate the effectiveness of the recently-adopted guidelines. I argue that the current level of confusion and lack of clarity in many states regarding spousal support rules should not be allowed to continue. A basic principle of equitable distribution is that a spouse’s post-divorce earnings are not marital property. The award of post-divorce support essentially creates an exception to this important general rule. The principles governing the award of spousal support need to be clarified in some manner so it will be easier to predict and decide when post-divorce earnings should be shared. This could be accomplished by the adoption of a spousal support statute that more clearly sets forth the rules for the award of spousal support. Since few states seem inclined to attempt such a clarification, it seems that guidelines are the most likely way the award of spousal support can be made more consistent in the USA.

Comparing income-shares and percentage-of-income child support guidelines

Child support guidelines are one of the most explicit, and consequential, public articulations of parents' obligations to their biological children. States must weigh a variety of policy tradeoffs, including issues of equity, transparency, and simplicity. Many states are shifting to “income-shares” guidelines models from “percentage-of-income” models, citing a perceived increase in equity and flexibility. Given additional complexities in implementing the income-shares model, we ask how often, and for whom, alternative guidelines yield substantially different child support orders. We use state administrative data on matched pairs of divorcing parents to simulate expected order amounts for each type of guideline. We find that, despite substantial differences in the information required to implement alternative models, for most families, adopting a different model would result in only modest changes in the amount of child support due. However, in some instances a different model would result in large changes, particularly for relatively low-income fathers.

Parenting Time in Texas Child Support Cases

The Texas Title IV‐D child support agency has, on a universal basis, included parenting plans in its child support orders for the last thirty years. While most state child support agencies are just beginning to consider the idea of parenting time orders, Texas has successfully navigated federal regulations and federal funding limitations to ensure that parenting time is made available, as fairly and safely as possible. This article explains how this achievement has been possible, with the existence in Texas law of a standard possession order and a set of simple child support guidelines. It also discusses a variety of innovative and collaborative activities to inform and educate the public about the availability of these services. Keypoints for the Family Court Community It is possible for a state child support enforcement agency to obtain child support orders that routinely include parenting time provisions for the nonresident parent. The inclusion of parenting time in all orders can be accomplished effectively and safely in Texas due to strong public policy, supportive legislation, and agency practices that are innovative and collaborative.

A Practitioner's Guide to The Economic Implications of Custody and Access under the Divorce Act and the Federal Child Support Guidelines

The following analysis provides a bird's eye view of the economic impact of custody and access dispositions on child support orders granted pursuant to sections 8 and 9 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines. It is written for the benefit of legal practitioners and judges in Québec and provides a succinct but relatively comprehensive review of child support orders under the federal guidelines in cases where each parent has custody of one or more of their children (Guidelines, section 8) or where each parent shares custody of or access to their children not less than forty per cent of the year (Guidelines, section 9). It then proceeds to deal with the priority accorded to child support over spousal support as required by section 15.3 of the Divorce Act. In conclusion, it addresses the implications of child rearing responsibilities in the context of spousal support orders, with particular attention being directed to section 15.2(6)(b) of the Divorce Act. For a more detailed analysis of these issues, readers are referred to the author's electronic book Child Support in Canada, which is reproduced on Quicklaw, at db pdcs (data base Payne's Digests on Child Support).

Korean Divorced Mothers' Experiences with Child Support from Noncustodial Fathers

The purpose of this study was to explore Korean divorced mothers' experiences with child support. The data were collected from 17 Korean divorced mothers who were divorced between the years of 2004 and 2009 and were raising at least one minor child. Data were analyzed based on the inductive data analysis method. Most mothers negotiated to receive child support from noncustodial fathers without experiencing much conflict with the fathers at the time of the divorce, but only five mothers received child support at the time of the interviews. The mothers experienced difficulties in receiving child support from the fathers under the child support policy in Korea that treated child support as a personal issue and provided little systemic support for child support. Regarding required parenting agreements, most of the mothers acknowledged the need to have parenting agreements but they still wanted voluntary payment of the child support from the fathers. The results suggest that it is necessary to expand parenting education for divorced parents to encourage voluntary participation in parenting and to improve the child support policy by introducing child support guidelines and enhancing child support collection systems.

The Obligations of High-Income Parents

The Child Support Guidelines, incentivized by federal law, provide rebuttable guidance for setting child support awards, except in low- and high-income cases. This article focuses on the latter, as states continue to grapple with the question of whether the child should receive a proportion of the noncustodial parent’s income regardless of its amount, or whether there should be another limit. This article traces the narrative of child support obligations in high-income cases by considering the development of the economic aspect to the parent-child relationship, as well as the purpose and nature of the child support system. The resulting insights are especially useful for states seeking consistency in child support award decisions.

Child support guidelines and divorce incentives

A child support guideline is a formula used to calculate support payments based on a few family characteristics. Guidelines began replacing court awarded support payments in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and were eventually mandated by the federal government in 1988. Two fundamentally different types of guidelines are used: percentage of obligor income, and income shares models. This paper explores the incentives to divorce under the two schemes, and uses the NLSY data set to test the key predictions. We find that percentage of obligor income models are destabilizing for some families with high incomes. This may explain why several states have converted from obligor to income share models, and it provides a subtle lesson for the no-fault divorce debate.

Unchanging child support orders in the face of unstable earnings

The underlying theory behind child support guidelines implies that child support orders should change when the incomes of noncustodial parents change. This paper documents changes in noncustodial fathers' earnings over a five-year period and examines the relationship between the changes in earnings and modifications in child support orders. Using detailed longitudinal administrative data from Wisconsin, the authors examine the history of orders and earnings for fathers in couples who had their first child support ordered in 2000. A substantial proportion of fathers experience large changes in earnings, but relatively few of the associated child support orders are modified. Using discrete-time multinomial event history models that consider time-varying variables and control for censored observations, we find some evidence of changes in earnings being associated with changes in orders, all else equal, but the relationship is relatively weak and order changes are not proportional to earnings changes. The findings highlight the challenges and importance of developing policies that result in child support orders being more responsive to changes in fathers' incomes. © 2010 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

Good, Responsible Parenting: Child-Support Guidelines in an Era of Neo-liberalism

AbstractFollowing decades of criticism, the federal government amended the Divorce Act in 1997 to include guidelines and support tables for the determination of child-support orders. The guidelines were meant to replace a child-support system that relied heavily on judicial discretion, which was blamed for the inconsistency between awards, the inadequacy of the amounts awarded, and inequity in the system. Normative messages about parental responsibility and good behaviour were reinforced in the new child-support regime. Through an analyses of case law, government documents, and interviews with lawyers, unique insight is gained in expanding our understanding of what is happening “on the ground,” beyond the “black letter of the law,” pursuant to the child-support law reforms. This article outlines the dominant message about responsibility that parents receive when they encounter child-support law. Further, it is necessary to consider the socio-economic context in which these reforms have occurred, as they have significant implications for the family in today's society. In the current climate of neo-liberalism, the reformed child-support legislation might be seen as one strategy in the state's reconfiguration of responsibility for the welfare of children. This research demonstrates that while the rationalization of child support has achieved some key objectives, it will fail as an anti-poverty measure.

Child Support Guidelines and Divorce Rates

A child support guideline is a formula used to calculate support payments based on a few family characteristics. Guidelines began replacing court awarded support payments in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and were later mandated by the federal government in 1988. Two fundamentally different types of guidelines are used: percentage of obligor income, and income shares models. This paper explores the incentives to divorce under the two schemes, and uses the NLSY data set to test the key predictions. We find that percentage of obligor income models are destabilizing for families with high incomes. This may explain why several states have converted from obligor to income share models, and it provides a subtle lesson to the no-fault divorce debate.

The Federal Child Support Guidelines: Some Recent Developments and Useful Building Blocks

The Federal Child Support Guidelines: Some Recent Developments and Useful Building Blocks

Federal Child Support Guidelines: Recent Regulatory and Judicial Developments: Relevant Extracts from Payne and Payne, Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2006, Irwin Law

Federal Child Support Guidelines: Recent Regulatory and Judicial Developments: Relevant Extracts from Payne and Payne, Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2006, Irwin Law

Adult Children and the Federal Child Support Guidelines in Canada: Some Important Things to Remember

Adult Children and the Federal Child Support Guidelines in Canada: Some Important Things to Remember

The Anatomy of Canada’s Child Support Guidelines: The Effects, Details, and History of a Feminist Family Policy

Recent studies have shown that Canada’s Child Support Guidelines, adapted from the U.S. “Wisconsin” model, have serious negative incentive effects on marriage stability. The source of this outcome is found in the design of the guidelines, which consistently transfer net wealth to the custodial parent. This paper examines the details of Canada’s guidelines, and then traces backwards to their source. It argues that the guidelines are the logical implication of family policy based on feminist theories of the family. The paper concludes that an institutional view of the family is a better model to base family law on.