by Tzan Alexander

Created on: October 23, 2008

I must admit, the first thing I take issue with is the fact that the court system, or anyone else, has to "force" a father to pay child support. How can anyone look at their child, their own flesh and blood, and not want the absolute best for them? How can anyone hold their child in their arms and not want so much better for them than they had? Sadly, the reality of the world we live in is that there are too many parents that care more about themselves then about their own children. For these parents, I say enforce the maximum child support allowable by law.

However, for those fathers that are truly doing everything they can to stay a part of their child's life, to foster a relationship with them, but paying an exhorbant amount of support is detrimental to the father's economic status, I say it is unethical to force them to pay. Don't get me wrong, I do believe that both the father and mother are equally responsible for the care of their children. However, care of the child is more than just a dollar figure. Everything that the father does that is considered contributing to the care of the child needs to be taken into consideration when the amount of child support is determined.

For example, let's say it is determined that a father of three must pay $1,500/month support. He is also required to cover their medical insurance, which costs him $350/month; and $650/month for half the cost of child care. He spends an average of $300 every three months (which averages out to $100/month) on new clothes for them; and he pays about $40/month for their extracurricular activities. The visitation schedule allows for him to have them every other weekend. On his weekends he spends as much quality time and does as much as he can with them. He has made great efforts to remain actively involved in his children's lives, despite the seperation or divorce, such as attending most school or extracurricular activities and performances, participating in school fundraisers, taking them to the doctor, attending and/or throwing birthday parties, etc. If this type of father finds it very difficult to pay both the support and additional expenses, and live out side of the poverty level, then he should be allowed to deduct the amount of the expenses from the total support to come up with an adjusted monthly payment. In other words, rather than paying $1,500/month plus the expenses, he would pay $1,500 - $350 - $650 - $100 - $40 = $360 per month. This resolution is closer to what would be happening if both parents lived in the same household.

I do not agree that just because two parents are unable to live together that the father should be the only one financially supporting the child. Especially if he is unable to do a lot financially, but is willing to do as much as he can in other ways to support the growth and development of the child or children. I also do not agree that child support should be a crutch or an excuse for a mother not to do everything within her ability to take care of the child or children as well. It should not be the main or only source of income in the custodial parent's household.

It takes a man and a woman to make a baby. Therefore both are responsible for the care, growth and development of that child. However, I firmly believe it is unethical to put one parent, namely the father in this case, who is trying to be a responsible parent, in a financial situation where after paying child support he is unable to take care of his basic needs, like a roof over his head, clean clothes, food, water, and electricity.

Learn more about this author, Tzan Alexander.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.