Public Sentiments About the Parenting Time Adjustment in Child Support Awards

LSN: Children Pub Date : 2015-07-08 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2628455
S. Braver, I. M. Ellman, W. Fabricius
{"title":"Public Sentiments About the Parenting Time Adjustment in Child Support Awards","authors":"S. Braver, I. M. Ellman, W. Fabricius","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2628455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The states differ substantially among themselves as to what their guideline systems specify about reducing child support awards as a function of the division of parenting time after divorce. Most adopt a “cliff-model”, whereby no reductions are accorded until the parenting time to the noncustodial parent reaches some “shared parenting” threshold, generally about 35% of the total parenting time. As another in a series of experimental investigations about the sentiments of lay citizens pertaining to family law issues, the current investigation probed this issue, as well as the allied issue of whether the reason for nonvisitation might influence the child support adjustment. Results showed that the public’s judgments displayed continuous visitation adjustments to child support (as opposed to the cliff-model system instituted by most states), and that the amount of the adjustment reflected the amount the custodial parent saved due to visitation, rather than the amount the noncustodial parent spent. Of the reasons for non-visitation, only the father’s move (not the mother’s move nor her refusal to permit visitation) significantly affected the respondent’s child support judgments.","PeriodicalId":294024,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Children","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Children","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2628455","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The states differ substantially among themselves as to what their guideline systems specify about reducing child support awards as a function of the division of parenting time after divorce. Most adopt a “cliff-model”, whereby no reductions are accorded until the parenting time to the noncustodial parent reaches some “shared parenting” threshold, generally about 35% of the total parenting time. As another in a series of experimental investigations about the sentiments of lay citizens pertaining to family law issues, the current investigation probed this issue, as well as the allied issue of whether the reason for nonvisitation might influence the child support adjustment. Results showed that the public’s judgments displayed continuous visitation adjustments to child support (as opposed to the cliff-model system instituted by most states), and that the amount of the adjustment reflected the amount the custodial parent saved due to visitation, rather than the amount the noncustodial parent spent. Of the reasons for non-visitation, only the father’s move (not the mother’s move nor her refusal to permit visitation) significantly affected the respondent’s child support judgments.
公众对子女抚养费中育儿时间调整的看法
各州之间在指导制度上对减少子女抚养费作为离婚后育儿时间分配的函数的具体规定存在很大差异。大多数采用“悬崖模式”,即在非监护父母的育儿时间达到某种“共同育儿”阈值(通常约占育儿总时间的35%)之前,不会减少育儿时间。作为一系列关于非专业公民对家庭法问题的看法的实验调查中的另一项,本次调查探讨了这一问题,并探讨了不探视的原因是否会影响子女抚养费调整的相关问题。结果表明,公众的判断显示了对子女抚养费的持续探视调整(与大多数州制定的悬崖模型系统相反),调整的金额反映了监护权父母因探视而节省的金额,而不是非监护权父母的花费。在不允许探视的原因中,只有父亲的迁居(而不是母亲的迁居或她拒绝探视)对被告的子女抚养判决有显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信