Resources
Child Support Resource Library
Welcome to the YoungWilliams Child Support Resource Library. Search by keywords or use the filters to select categories of interest to you. Currently, our Library consists of academic and government research articles and reports from around the country, federal opinions, and case law from states in which our full service child support projects are located.
Supporting Healthy Co-Parenting
This fact sheet is part of the Centering Child Well-Being in Child Support Policy series from the Ascend at the Aspen Institute and Good+Foundation. Research shows children have better outcomes when they are raised by both of their parents. This fact sheet encourages the use of family-centered strategies when working with families, which will increase the likelihood that non-custodial parents will be employed and pay support. Examples of strategies include more information about paternity acknowledgements during pre-natal care, more access to resources for parenting-time agreements, and fatherhood programs.
Setting Realistic and Accurate Child Support Orders
This fact sheet is part of the Centering Child Well-Being in Child Support Policy series from the Ascend at the Aspen Institute and Good+Foundation. This fact sheet describes examples of effective state policies for establishing and modifying child support orders for low-income parents. Two of the strongest predictors of compliance with a child support order is the paying parent’s income and the amount of support compared to that income. Orders not aligned with a parent’s ability to pay cause problems for states, too. Uncollected support and accruing arrears impacts performance. Policies which assist with realistic orders include a low income guideline schedule, requiring a factual basis for imputation of income, outreach about modification policies, accelerated review and adjustment, and modification based on incapacitation.
White v. White (Mississippi 2023)
A parent can’t contract away a child’s right to support. The mother filed to find the father in contempt for failure to pay support. The father had stopped paying support when the parents youngest child turned 18. The father argued that a provision in the divorce decree ended support when the youngest child turned 18 or emancipated. The chancery court gave the father credit for some expenses he had paid on behalf of the child but entered a judgment against father for support up to the child’s 21st birthday. The father appealed. The appellate court affirmed the decision. Mississippi law clearly states that parents can’t contract away their children’s rights to support before the child reaches the age of 21, unless the child emancipates. Such a provision in a divorce decree is unenforceable. The father provided no evidence of the child’s emancipation.
Implementing Sensible Debt Reduction Strategies
This fact sheet is part of the Centering Child Well-Being in Child Support Policy series from the Ascend at the Aspen Institute and Good+Foundation. This fact sheet describes policies in several states which reduce state-owed child support debt. Almost all states have policies in place to reduce state-owed arrears. These policies promote increased employment, higher child support payments, better performance for programs, and are essential to family well-being. These policies make sense when compared to the cost of trying to collect this debt.
Shared Placement, Child Support Payments, and Sharing of Child-Related Expenses: Overview and Mother’s Perception of Fairness
More families are entering into shared custody arrangements. Child support and the sharing of expenses is different with these arrangements. This report researches the perception of mother’s on the fairness of child support and expense-sharing in both traditional and shared custody situations. The research showed mothers in shared custody arrangements were more satisfied with both parents’ overall contributions to child costs. The report notes communication between the parents is critical and supports should be in place to assist parents when issues arise.
Ensuring Families Receive Child Support Payments
This fact sheet is part of the Centering Child Well-Being in Child Support Policy series from the Ascend at the Aspen Institute and Good+Foundation. This fact sheet gives examples of state policies that direct support directly to families rather than the government. Research shows that families use this support to pay for essentials such as food and clothing and non-custodial parents actually pay support when they know it goes directly to their families. Ultimately, both the families and the child support program benefit from family pass-though and distribution policies.
Centering Child Well-Being in Child Support Policy
The child support program has been fostering a culture change for the past few years from a program of strict enforcement to one that puts child well-being at its center. This paper frames a toolkit which explores recommended policies and practices to support the culture change. The toolkit includes information on family distribution, reducing arrears, right-sizing orders, income supports, family stabilization, and justice. The framing paper considers the importance of fathers, the history of the program, the effect of traditional policies, and the advantages of a realistic and evidence-based approach to program policy.
Voluntary Paternity Affidavit Program 2021 Hospital Survey Analysis
With the goal of increasing its paternity establishment performance measure, the state of Iowa conducted a survey to gather information about the hospital-based paternity acknowledgement program and reasons for the rejection of voluntary acknowledgements. This report gathers information on five different areas: the demographics of professionals who assist with voluntary paternity establishment at the hospitals, information about patient education, the materials and resources used during education, potential areas of improvement on the education process; and reports related to rejections of voluntary acknowledgements. That data gathered will be used going forward to provided targeted outreach.
In re Obembe (Kansas 2023)
A district court has many factors it can consider when applying the extended income formula for child support.. Payments to a 529 account, when ordered as a separate provision in a divorce decree, aren’t child support. The mother and father, both high earners, divorced. The final order set spousal support, child support for three children and, as a standalone term, required both parents to contribute monthly to a 529 account for each child. When the spousal support ended, the mother filed to modify child support. Using the extended income formula, the district court increased support and declined to count the father’s 529 contributions as support. The district court denied the father’s motion to alter or amend the judgment. He appealed on several grounds. He argued that Kansas child support orders are based on the needs of a child and that the child support award created a windfall for the mother. The appellate court disagreed. It found authority in a line of cases that allows courts to look at a variety of factors when applying the extended income formula. Further, the order explained the reasoning behind the child support award, which included addressing the children’s needs. The father also appealed the district court’s decision not to count his 529 contributions as child support. These contributions aren’t included in the any recognized definitions of child support. The provisions for support and the 529 contributions were separate in the divorce decree, showing an intent for them to be viewed separately.
Pinnacol v. Laughlin (Colorado)
For child support funds to be exempt from garnishment, the account into which they are deposited must comply with the provisions of the Colorado Uniform Transfer to Minors Act. When social security funds are comingled with other money, only the amount of funds that is clearly traceable to social security is exempt from garnishment. The parent in this case was awarded Social Security Disability. His employer had provided temporary disability during the award period and sought reimbursement. When the judgment wasn’t paid, the employer began garnishment proceedings. The parent argued his funds were exempt. The court found most of the garnished funds had been comingled with other funds and couldn’t be traced. The parent appealed. The appellate court upheld the finding. The child support account wasn’t set up as required by the Uniform Transfer to Minors Act, so the funds were not exempt. As for the savings account, the appellate court found the funds couldn’t be properly traced to social security. There was no evidence as to what funds where in the savings account to start.
