Agenda for the 21st Century
Child support should be formally awarded to the child, not to the parent with care. When the child is young, this only makes symbolic difference, but as the child gets older, it may bring to the surface what child support is REALLY for - goods & services for the benefit of the child. And the child may want someone other than the parent with care to provide these goods & services sometimes.
In most European countries, the child maintenance is awarded to the child. This applies to at least Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Norway, and Sweden. In the Netherlands, the beneficiary is normally the parent with care for younger children, but older children may receive child maintenance in their own right.
One implication is psychological. If the award is to the child, some of the feeling that it is for spousal maintenance is reduced.
More importantly, it becomes clearer that "the money should follow the child", which has implications for the shared care cases.
It also opens up the debate about whether all the payment should be handed to the parent with care, or some of it should be placed in a trust fund for the child to have later. And it offers a more sensible approach for when the child is older, and/or perhaps away from home at boarding school or college.
It may even provide the opportunity for either the child or the non-resident parent to take legal action against a parent with care who demonstrably doesn't spend the money on the child.
Think what difference this would make to what NRPs think about the scheme, & legally-justified analysis of the formula.
If the government is NOT prepared to say that the money is awarded to the child - why not? What is their motive?
Change the law.
Claimed reply to a CSA form:
|Page last updated: 17 December, 2003||© Copyright Barry Pearson 2003|