Child Support Accountability and Privacy
Monday / September 03, 2007
Is how the custodial parent spends child support
money anyone else's business?
In a recent post, we mentioned that some
states are now using debit cards to provide
child support. One commenter said that debit
cards are a good idea because purchases by the
custodial parent could be "tracked" to make sure
that child support money was being used (in his
words) on Pedialyte
"as opposed to Bud Lite or Marlboro
Light."
That commenter framed an issue that often arises in child support cases. The noncustodial parent questions how the child support money is being spent, while the custodial parent says it's no one else's business. There are valid - and invalid - points on both sides of this issue.
If a custodial parent's lifestyle includes consuming lots of Bud Light or Marlboro Light, then the noncustodial parent might well question how child support money is being spent. But in this situation, perhaps the real issue is whether a change in custody should be sought.
Then there is the noncustodial parent who believes that child support money should be used only for purchases unique to the child. A common example is clothing. From this perspective, using child support to pay part of the rent or mortgage is an abuse because those things "are already paid for." But some of that expense must be allocated to the child, just as it would in an intact family.
A recent story from overseas revealed a novel abuse of child support money - lending it out at high interest rates. As a remedy, the story suggested that food vouchers be used instead of cash child support payments. Although using food vouchers would assist in the "accountability" problem, using them would be a nuisance to the custodial parent.
Expanding the use of debit cards is the best solution to the accountability issue. In litigation over child support, records of expenditures could be subpoenaed so that the court could see how the money was being spent. If an abuse existed, it would be evident. It would also be evident if the noncustodial parent had raised the issue just to harass the custodial parent.
That commenter framed an issue that often arises in child support cases. The noncustodial parent questions how the child support money is being spent, while the custodial parent says it's no one else's business. There are valid - and invalid - points on both sides of this issue.
If a custodial parent's lifestyle includes consuming lots of Bud Light or Marlboro Light, then the noncustodial parent might well question how child support money is being spent. But in this situation, perhaps the real issue is whether a change in custody should be sought.
Then there is the noncustodial parent who believes that child support money should be used only for purchases unique to the child. A common example is clothing. From this perspective, using child support to pay part of the rent or mortgage is an abuse because those things "are already paid for." But some of that expense must be allocated to the child, just as it would in an intact family.
A recent story from overseas revealed a novel abuse of child support money - lending it out at high interest rates. As a remedy, the story suggested that food vouchers be used instead of cash child support payments. Although using food vouchers would assist in the "accountability" problem, using them would be a nuisance to the custodial parent.
Expanding the use of debit cards is the best solution to the accountability issue. In litigation over child support, records of expenditures could be subpoenaed so that the court could see how the money was being spent. If an abuse existed, it would be evident. It would also be evident if the noncustodial parent had raised the issue just to harass the custodial parent.
|
