Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 03/21/2002 3:23:32 PM PST by Starmaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Starmaker
Great post! Get this. I make ~$50,000. Wife makes ~$40,000. I'm paying $827.00 a month in temporary child support while the custody batle drags on. And by court order, I can see my son only four days a month. What a Country!
2 posted on 03/21/2002 3:31:16 PM PST by buccaneer81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Starmaker
The amount awarded as “child support” must be limited to address only the need for financial support of dependent children.

Read the term "dependent children". This is a term of art describing the subject matter of these laws, and the limits of this agency's authority to interfere with domestic relations.

Federal reforms effectively blocked the application of established legal principles by extending the use of politically controlled formulae, known as child support guidelines, to non-welfare cases.

The "non-welfare cases" do not extend to every case involving chlidren. The intention, which can be documented by committe reports etc was to classify those removed from the welfare roles because of the income received as child support. Dependency and continued absence are still requisite conditions for application of this program.

The Georgia court, rightly so, determined that the child support system subjects parents, especially fathers, to unnecessary government interference.

This is true, and in spite of the mixed bag of reasons, the court conditioned such intreference on compelling state interest, avoiding or reducing an expenditure of public assistance.

Child support enforcement agencies exercise powers reserved for the judiciary. States have done little to reform their systems and it may take further action to compel states to operate constitutionally.

In an effort to "fix" the system in Minnesota, the legislature gave administrative powers to the judiciary. Nice try, but still in violation of the separation of powers. Simply limiting the program to the proper class, and using the guidelines for recovery of past assistance provided (as they were intended), would be a more appropriate remedy.

The application of a presumptively correct formula for determining child support awards is a profound deviation from established constitutional process that demands careful and constant scrutiny.

A debt owed to the state for providing public assistance when another parent had the ability to so provide, where such obligation is limited by the guidelines and the public assistance grant, is reasonably calculated by a presumptive guideline. The problem is in the application of these guidelines in establishing ongoing support obligations, when the public interest is only tied to the public assistance grant and/or an accumulated arrearage ("arrears" being another bothersome term of art to describe the grant money expended when another parent had the ability to contribute.) I could go on, and I will, if anyone is interested.

6 posted on 03/22/2002 4:17:19 AM PST by right2parent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson