Art of Divorce: Family Law Resources

…and a revised version of the law, were both passed by the states over the years, but the clamor for more action against “deadbeat dads” lead the federal government to weigh in on the issue. From 1975 to 1996, Congress passed four federal laws designed to force the states to adopt effective means of child support enforcement on an interstate basis. A U.S. Commission on Interstate Child Support was created. Many a politician wooed the soccer mom vote by holding out the occasional millionaire who failed to support as an example of how all men who didn’t pay support were intentionally evading their obligations. In 1996, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws drafted the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UISFA). Congress did its part by including a provision, 42 U.S.C. § 666f, in the 1996 welfare reform law that required every state to adopt UISFA in order to qualify for federal monies to pay for child support enforcement. It was the federal carrot to get the states to pass the stick into law. UISFA makes it easier to collect child support and alimony against one who has moved to another state. It encourages government agencies and courts to cooperate in creating and enforcement of support orders. Private lawyers can be hired to help speed the process along. A support order can be issued by one state and registered in other states for enforcement. An order is enforceable in the registered state unless there is a timely objection to the registration. States are supposed to honor the support orders issued elsewhere regardless of whether such an order would have been issued under local law. There are restrictions on modifying support orders issued by other states. For most issues, the law of the state that issued the support order will govern. Child custody and visitation issues cannot be addressed in the interstate support enforcement proceedings. If a mother is withholding visitation time in violation of the custody order, the father cannot raise this as a defense to nonpayment of support. UISFA also makes it easier to collect support from the parent’s employer. The support is deducted by the employer from the parent’s wages.

Popularity: 25% [?]

Fathers typically do not question their responsibility to reasonably support their children after a divorce. Reasonable support maintains a child’s a living standard based on what the father is financially able to pay. Unfortunately, reasonable support as a concept was tossed out the window in favor of child support as a means of punishment. Too often, support is calculated on guidelines that have the practical effect of decreasing the father’s standard of living while permitting to the ex-wife to spend a disproportionate amount of his income on herself, boyfriends, etc., without regard to the child’s actual needs. In short, a woman’s wants, rather than needs, have become the paramount focus of courts and child support enforcement offices nationwide. Frequently unable or occasionally unwilling to pay child support, many noncustodial parents abandon contact with their children, often moving to another state. Children become a “burden,” and are closely identified with the pain associated with the divorce. The term “deadbeat dad” came to life because men are usually not the custodial parent. No one questioned the wisdom of child support awards that forced men to become fugitives. A job layoff and resulting loss of income could make a man a criminal in addition to unemployed. In many states, a man can check the Internet to find a picture of himself as a wanted man with an outstanding warrant for his arrest based solely on nonpayment of child support. Regardless of the justice or injustice of the situation, it is important to know the key laws enacted to deal with interstate child support enforcement.

Popularity: 22% [?]