Children of Divorce: More Pain? : Wrongheaded state bill would cut support from noncustodial parents
Assemblyman Bill Morrow (R-Oceanside) is out to cut child support payments of noncustodial parents by an average 20% to 25%. That would be unfair and create hardship for those children left in the primary care of the other parent, usually the mother.
Under existing law, child support orders are specified on the basis of a uniform guideline using a percentage of both parents’ net income. AB 180 would change the formula so that a noncustodial parent paying $400 a month in child support would see the payment drop to $300. A reduction of that size could mean the loss of essentials like day care and damage the welfare of both the child and the custodial parent. The higher the income bracket, the greater the cut in child support.
Morrow’s bill had been stalled in the Assembly Judiciary Committee until the recent Republican sweep of committee chairmanships. Despite the GOP party line of holding parents more responsible for their children and families, the committee Republicans voted unanimously in support of AB 180. The measure, which is championed by fathers’ rights groups such as the Coalition for Parent Support, makes no provisions for enforcement. Some fathers who object to the current formula simply do not pay.
Assemblywoman Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica) is leading the opposition to AB 180, and she is supported by a number of organizations, including Children Now and the Assn. for Children for Enforcement of Support.
Rearing children means parents sharing fair and equitable responsibility. This is especially difficult when the mother and father are divorced. The parent with custody typically incurs more of the cost, and many have a hard time making ends meet on child support payments under the current formula. AB 180 would unfairly scale back even further the obligations of the noncustodial parent.
That seems contrary to politicians’ clarion call for fathers to be more responsible for their children. This bad bill should not prevail.
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
