An Act To Create a Uniform Approach to the Determination of Child Support When Parents Provide Substantially Equal Care for Children
Maine Legislature, Session 121, LD 0234
Committee: Judiciary
Amends: 19-A MRSA §2007

Legislative Document 
No. 234 
H.P.189 
House of Representatives, January 23, 2003 
An Act To Create a Uniform Approach to the Determination of 
Child Support When Parents Provide Substantially Equal Care for 
Children 
Reported by Representative NORBERT of Portland for the Family Law Advisory 
Commission pursuant to the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 19-A, section 354, subsection 2. 
Reference to the Committee on Judiciary suggested and ordered printed under Joint Rule 
218. 
Printed on recycled paper 
/Jf~ 
/J1.11bc~ 
MILLICENT M. MacFARLAND 
Clerk 
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows: 
Sec. 1. 19·A MRSA §2001, sub·§8·A is enacted to read: 
8-A. 
Substantially equal care. 
"Substantially equal care" 
means that both parents participate substantially equally in the 
child's total care, which may include, but is not limited to, the 
child's residential, educational, 
recreational, child care and 
medical, dental and mental health care needs. 
Sec. 2. 19·A MRSA §2006, sub·§4, as enacted by PL 1995, c. 
694, Pt. B, §2 and affected by Pt. E, §2, is amended to read: 
4. 
Computation of parental support obligation. 
The total 
support 
obligation 
must 
be 
divided 
between 
the 
parties 
in 
proportion to their respective gross 
incomes. 
The 
court or 
hearing officer shall order the party not providing primary 
residential care to pay, in money, that party's share of the 
total 
support 
obligation 
to 
the 
party 
providing 
pr imc1ry 
residential 
care. 
The 
primary 
residential 
care 
provider 
is 
presumed to spend the primary care provider's share directly on 
each child. 
If the court or hearing officer determines that the 
parties provide substantially equal care for a child for whom 
support is sought, 
presumptive support must be calculated in 
accordance with subsection 5, paragraph D-1. 
Sec. 3. 19·A MRSA §2006. sub-§5. 1fD, as enacted by PL 1995, c. 
694, Pt. B, §2 and affected by Pt. E, §2, is amended to read: 
D. 
When the parties have equal annual gross incomes and 
provide 
~esiaeB~ia~-~~-e~~a~~y substantially equal care 
for each child for whom support is being determined, neither 
party is required to pay 
the other 
a 
parental 
support 
obligation. 
The parties shall share equally the child care 
costs, 
health 
insurance 
premiums 
and 
uninsured 
medical 
expenses. 
Sec. 4. 19·A MRSA §2006, sub-§5, 1fD-l is enacted to read: 
D-1. 
When 
the parties 
do 
not have 
equal 
annual gross 
incomes but provide substantially equal care for each child 
for 
whom 
support 
is 
being 
determined, 
the 
presumptive 
parental support obligation must be determined as follows. 
(1) 
The basic support entitlement for each child must 
be 
determined 
in 
accordance with 
subsection 
and 
enhanced by a multiplier of 1.5. 
This product is the 
enhanced basic support entitlement. 
(2) 
Using the enhanced basic support enti tlement , 
a 
total 
support 
obligation 
for 
each 
child 
must 
be 
determined pursuant to subsection 3. 
The amount is the 
enhanced total support obligation. 
(3) 
Using the enhanced total support obligation, 
a 
theoretical 
parental 
support 
obligation 
must 
be 
determined for each party as though the party were the 
nonprimary residential care provider under subsection 4. 
(4) 
The party with the higher annual gross income has 
a presumptive obligation to pay the other party the 
lower of: 
(a) 
The difference between their parental support 
obligations as calculated in subparagraph (3); and 
(b) 
The presumptive parental support obligation 
determined for the payor party under the support 
guidelines 
as 
though 
the 
other 
party 
provided 
primary residential care of the child. 
Sec. 5. 19-A MRSA §2007. sub-§3. llA. as enacted by PL 1995, c. 
694, Pt. B, §2 and affected by Pt. E, §2, is repealed. 
SUMMARY 
This bill addresses several problems in current law. 
It 
provides a standard for the courts and the parties in cases where 
the parents provide substantially equal parenting for the child 
but have unequal incomes. 
Current child support guidelines are 
silent on this matter. 
The bill provides a presumptive calculation in cases where 
the parents provide substantially equal 
care 
for 
the child. 
Current child support guidelines permit a deviation but provide 
no guidance for a presumptive determination of the amount of the 
deviation. 
The presumptive calculation contains a recognition that when 
both parents have substantial residential responsibility and each 
provides a home for the child, the child expenditure is likely to 
be significantly greater than it would be if the child were 
living primarily with one parent. 
The 1.5 multiplier in the 
calculation 
takes 
into 
account 
the 
increased 
costs 
of 
households providing shared residence. 
The 
bill eliminates 
the 
current 
specific child 
support 
deviation criterion that is based upon 30 0/0 residential care of 
the child. 
The 30% threshold is very close to the amount of time 
that 
"an 
alternate 
weekend, 
split 
holidays 
and 
vacation" 
nonresidential parent has. 
Li tigation to defend or support a 
deviation occurs, with parents fighting over a very few days and 
nights, counting them for the court, in order to be under or over 
that 
threshold. 
Such 
litigation focuses 
the 
court 
and 
the 
parties 
away 
from 
the 
best 
interest 
of 
the 
child. 
The 
elimination of the 30% deviation does not deprive a parent who is 
very active in the life of the child and who provides less than 
substantially equal parenting from petitioning the court for a 
deviation under 
another provision that permits 
the 
court to 
deviate 
when 
the 
court 
finds 
that 
the 
application 
of 
the 
guidelines would be "unjust, inequitable, or not in the child' s 
best interest" pursuant to the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 
19-A, section 2007, subsection 3, paragraph Q.