Child support reform

The Mercury News ran an interesting story on California’s new child support collection system Sunday, highlighting the kinder, gentler tone: There’s a new deal for about 15,000 Santa Clara County dads who have lost their driving privileges because they failed to pay child support: Make one month’s payment and drive away with your license. The … Continue reading “Child support reform”

The Mercury News ran an interesting story on California’s new child support collection system Sunday, highlighting the kinder, gentler tone:

There’s a new deal for about 15,000 Santa Clara County dads who have lost their driving privileges because they failed to pay child support: Make one month’s payment and drive away with your license.

The county will make that offer in December during a 25-day amnesty for non-custodial parents to get back their licenses, no matter how much child support they owe.

“It’s an olive branch to people who think that all we want to do is put them in jail, when all we really want them to do is pay their child support,” said Peter Dever, who started last month as Santa Clara County’s first child support services director.

The kinder approach comes as Santa Clara County joins the rest of the state in shifting the burden of collecting child support from the district attorney’s office to California’s Department of Child Support Services. The new agency is increasingly changing gears, from hounding “deadbeat” dads to working with “dead-broke” ones.

Even groups of fathers are beginning to voice approval. “The attitude when it was in the DA’s office was, that’s your problem,” said Steve Ashley of the Santa Cruz-based Divorced Father’s Network, which has 800 area members. “Now it’s, let’s see what we can do.”

Bottom line of the story was that dads like the new system, and moms hate it. This is kind of silly, all in all, because it skirts the real issue. Child support is awarded in each state by a unique state-wide formula that’s enshrined in law. California’s formula demands more of middle- and low-income parents (“obligors”) than the formulas of 45 other states. As long as this formula remains in effect, the system that collects money from the parents who spend somewhat less time with their children than their former partners will be fundamentally unjust and ineffective. The management of the new collections department knows the formula is excessive, and the actual needs of children can be met just fine by collecting less than the statutory amount.

This annoys a vocal minority of mothers, those who’ve become used to the state acting as a weapon with which they can cudgel their exes. Tough break, that.