JIM MATTOX Attorney General

Supreme Court Building P. 0. Box 12546 Austin. TX. 76711. 2546 512/475-2501 Telex 9101674-1367 Telecopier 512/475-0266

714 Jackson, Suite 700 Dallas, TX. 75202-4506 2141742.6944

4024 Alberta Ave., Suite 160 El Paso. TX. 79905.2793 9151533.3464

h 71Texas, Suite 700 ..,uston. TX. 77002-3111 713/223-5666

606 Broadway, Suite 312 Lubbock, TX. 79401-3479 606/747-5236

4399 N. Tenth, Suite B McAllen, TX. 76501.1665 5121662-4547

200 Main Plaza, Suite 400 San Antonio, TX. 76205-2797 512/225-4191

An Equal Opportunityl Affirmative Action Employer 

# The Attorney General of Texas

.~une6, 1984

HonorableBob Bush Chairman Committeeon the Judiciary TexasHouse of Representatives P. 0. Box 2910 Austin, Texas 78769 OpinionNo. JM-159 Re: Whether House BillNo. 1169, 68th Legislaturerequires a minor child to have a social security number prior to the issuance of a decree in a child support suit Dear RepresentativeBush:
House Bill No. 1169, Acts 1983, 68th Leg., ch. 424. ,15,at 2346 amended section 11.15 of the Family Code by adding subsection (b). Section 11.15of the Family Code reads as follows:

(b) A decree in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship, in which any person is ordered to pay child support, must contain the social securitynumber of each party to the suit, includingthe child. (Emphasisadded).
You informus that certain judgesare interpretingsection 11.15(b)to require that final divorce decrees cannot be entered without the parents obtaining social security cards from the Social Security Administration for every child affected thereby, including infants. You ask us the followingquestion:

Is the legislative intent of section 11.15(b) of House Bill No. 1169 to require the acquisition of 'a social securitynumber for all childrenprior to entering a decree in such suits [affecting the parent-childrelationship]?
We answer your question in the negative; we conclude that section 11.15(b) requires the inclusion of such information & if it is alreadyavailable.
We are required to interpreta statute in a way which expresses only the will of themakers of the law, not forced nor strained, but simply such as the

p. 702Honorable Bob Bush - Page 2 (m-159)

words of the law in their plain sense fairly sanctionandwill clearly sustain. Railroad Commission of Texas v. Miller, 434 S.W.2d 670, 672 (Tex. 1968). Clearly, section 11.15(b) requires the decree in every suit which affects the parent-childrelationshipand inwhich any person is ordered to pay child support to contain the social securitynumber, if it is available,of everyparty to the suit, aswell as of every child therebyaffected. The issue iswhether section 11.15(b)of the Family Code, in addition, requires a person to obtain such a number if he does not alreadyhave one. More specifically,the issue iswhether to construe section 11.15(b) of the Family Code to include the phrase "and each party or child not already possessing a social security numbermust obtain one." Without clear evidence of legislative intent supportingsuch an inclusion,we decline to do so. If the language of a statute is plain, a courtwill not eliminate or supply a word or clause on the supposition that itwas included or omittedby inadvertance. Ratcliffv. State, 289 S.W. 1072 (Tex.Grim. APP. 1926); Winder v. King, 297 S.W. 689 (Tex. Civ. App. - Amarillo 1927), rev'd on other grounds, 1 S.W.2d 587 (Tex. Comm'n App. 1928). Courts will add words or phrases to a statute only when it is necessary to give effect to the clear legislative intent. Hunter v. Fort Worth Capital Corporation, 620 S.W.2d 547 (Tex. 1981); Sweeny HospitalDistrictv. Carr, 378 S.W.2d 40 (Tex. 1964). Our examination of the relevant legislative history does not reveal any intent on the part of the legislature to require that parties to a suit affecting the parent-childrelationship inwhich any person is ordered to pay child support, as well as the children affected thereby, obtain a social securitynumber if that person does not already possess one. The legislaturemerely intended to require the inclusion of such number if it has already been obtained. Accordingly, we conclude that section 11.15(b) of the Family Code requires, in any decree in a suitaffecting theparent-childrelationship in which any person is ordered to pay child support, the inclusion of the social securitynumber of each party to the suit, as well as that of every child affected thereby, if that number has already been obtained; it does not require parents to obtain social securitycards from the Social SecurityAdministrationfor every child who does not have such a card. SUMMARY Section 11.15(b) of the Family Code requires, in any decree in a suitaffecting the parent-child relationship inwhich any person is ordered to pay child support, the inclusion of the social securitynumber of eachparty to the suit, aswell

p. 703HonorableBob Bush - Page 3 (JM-159)

as that of every child affected thereby, if that number has already been obtained; it does not require parents to obtain social security cards from the Social SecurityAdministration for every childwho does not have such a card.

JIM MATTOX Attorney General of Texas TOM GREEN FirstAssistantAttorney General DAVID R. RICHARDS ExecutiveAssistantAttorney General Preparedby JimMoellinger AssistantAttorney General APPROVBD: OPINION COMMITTEE Rick Gilpin, Chairman David Brooks Colin Carl SusanGarrison Jim Moellinger Nancy Sutton

p. 704