Child support policy: some critical issues and the implications for social work.

The growth of female-headed households and the concurrent likelihood of poverty in such families have increased interest by the public and policymakers in examining policies affecting this group. Particularly since 1975, policymakers have focused on the child support system as a way to reduce high poverty rates among children in single-parent families and the public cost of supporting those families (Seavey, 1996; Wong, 1993). As a result of this focus, child support collections reached $12.0 billion in fiscal year 1996, an 11 percent increase over fiscal year 1995. Aid to Families of Dependent Children (AFDC) collections amounted to $2.9 billion of that total with AFDC families receiving over $480 million in pass-through payments (Office of Child Support Enforcement, 1998). Although there has been steady improvement in the amount of child support collected--that is, money paid by the absent parent to the custodial parent for the support of their children--the amount that is due continues to be much greater than the amount received. It is estimated that nationwide, parents are owed $35.4 billion in overdue child support (Meckler, 1997). However, if full payment had been made to the 1.26 million families who were living in poverty in 1991 and were scheduled to receive child support payments, only 140,000 of them would have received enough income from these payments to put them above the poverty level (U.S. House of Representatives, 1998). Although it may not bring a single-parent family out of poverty, child support is a significant source of income for these families, because single mothers, even if they work, are likely to be in poverty (Edin & Lein, 1997; Garfinkel, McLanahan, & Robins, 1994; Seavey, 1996). In 1995, 41.5 percent of the nearly 8.8 million families headed by mot hers with children under 18 had incomes below the poverty level. Slightly more than 13 percent of these families were poor even though the mother worked year round, full time. At the same time, child support collections resulted in 294,000 families being removed from AFDC (U.S. House of Representatives). Most child support legislation has focused on fostering responsible behavior toward children by parents, contributing to the well-being of families, and reducing welfare costs. This latter goal, reduction of the costs of the Title IV-A program, has taken precedence. By requiring that most of the child support collected for welfare families be given back to the state rather than going directly to the families and by strengthening the penalties for parents who do not pay child support, unintended effects may have resulted. About one-third of the 4.6 million custodial mothers without awards chose not to pursue a child support award (U.S. House of Representatives, 1998). The question remains whether increasing punitive policies results in some mothers' reluctance to participate in the formal system, particularly because applicants for child support do not have the right to select what enforcement actions are taken. Rather than improving compliance and enforcement, as these policies intend, they may have an oppos ite result of reducing the number of child support awards made. Although it is clear that current policies have increased the amount of child support collected, it is unclear what effect the emphasis on debt collection and penalties for nonpayment has had on parents' decisions regarding child support. Debt Collection or Best Interest of the Child Until recently, federal law required that payments from the absent parent be used to increase the income of families on welfare by only $50 a month, with the balance going back to the state. In fiscal year 1996 this policy resulted in the recovery of 15.5 percent of AFDC payments (U.S. House of Representatives, 1998). Not only does this policy put debt collection above the wellbeing of families, there is increasing evidence that it sabotages the goal of increasing paternity establishment and collection of child support. …