Child Support

In 1992 $27 billion in child support went uncollected. The U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES has estimated that a substantial increase in child support collections could reduce the payments of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) by 25 percent. The federal government created the AFDC program in 1935 to enable states to provide money and services to help poor children remain in their own, single-parent homes.

These observations were not lost on the 1994 Senate, which directed the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT to "immediately address shortcomings in enforcement of the law [regarding child support]." Enforcement efforts are administered federally through the department's Office of Child Support Enforcement, but child support recovery units at the state level perform the daily task of securing payment.

The problems surrounding the collection of child support have provoked frustration and ingenuity in states throughout the nation. A major barrier to timely and regular collection is the large volume of child support orders that states are required to enforce monthly. One response has been to divert cases from the court system by empowering state agencies to enforce child support orders.

A primary means of collecting is wage withholding. This action requires that the employer of the obligor send a percentage of the obligor's paychecks to the state or county, which forwards it to the custodial parent. Where the custodial parent receives federal public assistance, income withholding is mandatory. GARNISHMENT is similar to withholding, but it is used when the obligor is about to receive a lump-sum payment.

Interception of the obligor's federal tax return is another enforcement tool. In the first seven years after implementing a pilot of this requirement, $1.8 billion was collected. As of the early 2000s federal law requires every state to have legislation for intercepting the tax returns of delinquent obligors and applying them to child support after a review.

Self-employed obligors, or those whose employment is unknown, pose a challenge to collection agencies. In their case, states may rely on the custodial parent's knowledge of the obligor's income and on tax returns to pursue enforcement.

If a parent who owes child support dies, the child support payments may be made from the deceased parent's estate, at least according to one court. In L. W. K. v. E. R. C., 735 N.E.2d 359 (Mass. 2000), in the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts a father was required by a court to pay $100 per month in child support for his minor daughter until the daughter turned 18. The father subsequently disinherited the daughter in his will. He died five months after he executed the will. The court ruled that the child was entitled to receive child support payments from the father's estate until she turned 18.

Other enforcement methods include placing a lien on the obligor's property so that it cannot be sold without clearing the arrearage. At times, interest is added to unpaid child support in order to motivate the obligor to pay off this debt; in 1995, the default rate was nearly 50 percent on child support, compared with only 3 percent on car loans. Some states have taken the high-profile approach of publicly issuing controversial "Wanted" posters depicting delinquent obligors. Others have revoked state-issued fishing, hunting, and even driver's licenses as punishment for nonpayment.

Less common methods for securing child support owed are the seizure of government security bonds, collection of the full amount by the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE (this method was still under consideration in 1995), and seizure and sale of property or other forced payment. The effects of reporting delinquent obligors to credit bureaus are being studied.

Interstate orders (orders for support to be paid by a parent in a different state) pose additional problems for enforcement. Although three in ten child support cases are interstate, only 10 percent of the delinquent collections nationwide result from these cases. This circumstance has caused child support collection, usually considered a state function, to become an issue of national importance. Although most states have LONG-ARM STATUTES enabling them to retain jurisdiction over obligors in other states, delays result when the laws are not uniform.

from. Failures to collect across state lines are due to heavy case backlogs, multiple and conflicting orders, lack of priority given to interstate cases

A sample child support guidelines worksheet (state of NE)

by the responding state, and an inability to locate the noncustodial parent.

The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA), which was developed in 1992, contains what is called the one order, one time rule, in which the initial state retains jurisdiction in order to prevent multiple orders. The act limits modifications and provides that they must occur in the child's home state. The model legislation also features direct income withholding, so that the state of origin can communicate directly with the obligor's employer in another state. It also requires that states that adopt the uniform law provide enforcement services to one another.

In October 1994, the U.S. Congress's Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act became effective (28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1 note, 1738B, 1738B note), enabling states to enforce and modify orders under certain circumstances.