Things that never got resolved. Points in arguments that kept resurfacing. Breakdowns in communication. When two kept trying to work on something but answers was not given that were agreeable to both parties. Where all you could think of was getting away from that person because there was irrevoable differences that could not be addressed. The beginning of the end so to speak. When a divorce seems the perfect truce. To agree to disagree. I regained my sanity with the divorce. Do you celebrate the anniversary of your divorce?
Her at home didn't work; We didn't have enough money. Her at work didn't work; We had no babysitter. Babysitters are very expensive. Who trusts them? When the wife or mom goes on strike? I think that Stephen King horror book isn't out, yet. I tried that one time where she was working and I stayed at home. Talk about motivation to get a job, oh my, I had a job in no time at all, lol.
In addition to the above, States were required to: (1) collect support in certain foster care cases; (2) collect spousal support, in addition to child support, when both were due in a case; (3) notify AFDC recipients at least yearly of the collections made in their individual cases; (4) establish a State commission to study the operation of each State's child support system and report findings to the State's governor; (5) formulate guidelines for determining appropriate child support obligation amounts and distribute the guidelines to judges and other individuals with authority to establish obligation amounts; (6) offset the costs of the program by charging various fees to nonwelfare families and to delinquent noncustodial parents; (7) allow families whose AFDC eligibility was terminated as a result of the payment of child support, to remain eligible for Medicaid for 4 months; and (8) seek to establish medical support awards in addition to cash awards for support. In addition, the FPLS was made more accessible and more effective in locating absent parents. Sunset provisions were put in effect for the extension of Medicaid eligibility and Federal tax refund offsets for non-AFDC families.
1986 P.L. 99-509—The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 required States to provide that support installments are vested as they fall due and, therefore, are judgments entitled to full faith and credit. It also allowed prospective modification from the date the opposing party received notice of the motion for modification.
1988 P.L. 100-485—The Family Support Act of 1988, enacted on October 13, 1988, made many important changes to the CSE program. The major provisions were:
Immediate Wage Withholding
For IV-D cases, States were to provide for immediate wage withholding in orders issued or modified on or after November 1, 1990, unless one of the parties demonstrates and the court finds that there is good cause not to require it or there is a written agreement between both parties for an alternative arrangement. In non-IV-D cases, immediate wage withholding was to apply to all orders initially issued on or after January 1, 1994.
Disregard of Child Support
The child support disregard was to be applied to a payment made by a non-custodial parent in the month it was due even though it was received in a subsequent month.
Guidelines for Child Support Award Amounts
Judges and other officials were required to use State guidelines for support awards, unless the decision-maker entered a written finding that applying the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in the case. States were to review their guidelines every 4 years.
Beginning 2 years after enactment, if a State determined, under its plan for review and adjustment of orders, that an order being enforced under the program should be reviewed, the State must, at the request of either parent or of the CSE agency, initiate a review of the order and adjust it, if appropriate.
Beginning 5 years after enactment, States were to begin to review and adjust individual case awards every 3 years in AFDC cases, unless it is not in the best interests of the child and neither parent has requested review.
In other IV-D cases, the review and adjustment process had to be available every 3 years if a parent requests it.
States were required to notify each parent subject to an order in effect in the State that is being enforced under Title IV-D: (1) of any review of the order, at least 30 days before the commencement of the review; (2) of their right to request a review; and (3) of any proposed adjustment or determination that there should be no change to an order, allowing the parent at least 30 days for challenge.
Federal Financial Participation and Audit Provisions
To encourage greater reliance on performance-based incentives, Federal matching funds were reduced by 2 percent in FY1988 (to 68 percent) and another 2 percent in FY1990 (to 66 percent). Federal matching funds became available at the 90 percent rate for developing and installing automated systems, including computer hardware purchases, to facilitate income withholding and other newly required procedures.
State incentive payments were reset at 6 percent for both AFDC and non-AFDC collections. These percentages could increase to as much as 10 percent for both categories for very cost-effective States, but a State's non-AFDC incentive payments were limited by the amount of incentives payable for AFDC collections. The law further required States to pass incentives on to local CSE agencies where these agencies have participated in the costs of the program.
The requirement for an annual audit of State CSE agencies was dropped in favor of an audit once every 3 years. The focus of the audits was altered so that, beginning with the FY1986 audit period, a State's effectiveness would be evaluated on the basis of program performance as well as operational compliance. Graduated penalties of from 1 to 5 percent of total payments to the State under the AFDC program would be imposed if a State were found not to have complied substantially with Federal requirements over successive periods. The penalty could be suspended, however, if the State were to take corrective action, over a maximum period of 1 year, to come into substantial compliance.
Improved Interstate Enforcement
The proven enforcement techniques discussed above were to be applied to interstate cases as well as intrastate cases. Both States involved in an interstate case could take credit for the collection when reporting total collections for the purpose of calculating incentives. In addition, the law authorized OCSE to commission special State demonstration grants, beginning in FY1985, to fund innovative methods of interstate enforcement and collection. The Federal audits would focus on State effectiveness in establishing and enforcing obligations across State lines.
Equal Services for Welfare and Nonwelfare Families
Congress stated in the Social Security Act that, in creating the CSE program, it intended to aid both nonwelfare and welfare families. Several specific requirements were directed at improving State services to nonwelfare families. All mandatory practices had to be available to both types of cases; the interception of Federal income tax refunds was extended to nonwelfare cases; incentive payments became available for collections in nonwelfare cases; when families are terminated from AFDC, they automatically are to receive nonwelfare support enforcement services, without being charged an application fee; and States were required to publicize the availability of nonwelfare support enforcement services.
1982 P.L. 97-248—The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 was signed into law on September 3, 1982. The following provisions affected the CSE program:
FFP was reduced from 75 to 70 percent, effective October 1, 1982. Incentive payments were reduced from 15 to 12 percent, effective October 1, 1983. Congress also repealed a provision for reimbursement of certain court personnel costs that exceed the amount of funds spent by a State on similar court expenses during calendar year 1978. The mandatory non-AFDC fee imposed by P.L. 97-35 was repealed, retroactive to August 13, 1981. States were allowed to elect either not to recover costs or to recover costs from collections or from fees imposed on noncustodial parents. State authority to collect spousal support in certain non-AFDC cases was clarified. As of October 1, 1982, members of the uniformed services on active duty were required to make allotments from their pay when support arrearages reached the equivalent of a 2-month delinquency. Beginning October 1, 1982, States could reimburse themselves for AFDC grants paid to families for the first month in which the collection of child support is sufficient to make a family ineligible for AFDC. P.L. 97-253—The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1982, effective September 8, 1982, provided for the disclosure of information obtained under authority of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 to various programs, including State CSE agencies.
P.L. 97-252—The Uniformed Services Former Spouses' Protection Act, signed into law on September 8, 1982, treated military retirement or retainer pay as property to be divided by State courts in connection with divorce, dissolution, annulment, or legal separation proceedings.
1984 P.L. 98-378—The Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984 required improvements in State and local CSE programs in four major areas:
Mandatory Practices
All States were required to enact statutes providing for the use of improved enforcement mechanisms, including: (1) mandatory income withholding procedures; (2) expedited processes for establishing and enforcing support orders; (3) State income tax refund interceptions; (4) liens against real and personal property, security or bonds to assure compliance with support obligations; and (5) reports of support delinquency information to consumer reporting agencies. In addition, State law had to allow for the bringing of paternity actions any time before a child's 18th birthday, and all support orders, issued or modified after October 1, 1985, were to include a provision for wage withholding.
1978 P.L. 95-598—The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, signed into law on November 6, 1978, repealed a section of the Social Security Act that had barred the discharge in bankruptcy of assigned child support debts. This section of the Social Security Act was restored in 1981. 42 U.S.C. § 656(b).
1980 P.L. 96-178—Federal financial participation (FFP) in expenditures for non-AFDC services was extended until March 31, 1980, retroactive to October 1, 1978.
P.L. 96-265—The Social Security Disability Amendments of 1980, signed into law on June 9, 1980, increased Federal matching funds to 90 percent, effective July 1, 1981, for the costs of developing, implementing, and enhancing approved automated child support management information systems. Federal matching funds were also made available for child support enforcement duties performed by certain court personnel. In another provision, the law authorized the use of the IRS to collect child support arrearages on behalf of non-AFDC families. Finally, the law provided State and local CSE agencies with access to wage information held by the Social Security Administration and State employment security agencies (SESAs) for use in establishing and enforcing child support obligations.
P.L. 96-272—The Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 contained four amendments to Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. FFP for non-AFDC services was made available on a permanent basis. States became eligible to receive incentive payments on all AFDC collections as well as interstate collections. As of October 1, 1979, States were required to claim reimbursement for expenditures within 2 years, with some exceptions. The imposition of the 5 percent penalty on AFDC reimbursement for States not having effective CSE programs was postponed until October 1980.
1981 P.L. 97-35—The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 added five amendments to Title IV-D. The IRS was authorized to withhold all, or part of, certain individuals' Federal income tax refunds for collection of delinquent child support obligations. CSE agencies were required to collect spousal support for AFDC families. For non-AFDC cases, State agencies were required to collect fees from noncustodial parents who were delinquent in their child support payments. Child support obligations, which were assigned to the State, no longer were dischargeable in bankruptcy proceedings. States were authorized to withhold a portion of unemployment benefits from noncustodial parents delinquent in their support payments.
The Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, now the Secretary of Health and Human Services, is required to establish a separate organizational unit to oversee the operation of the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program. Responsibilities include: (1) establishing a parent locator service; (2) establishing standards for State program organization, staffing, and operation to ensure an effective program; (3) reviewing and approving State plans for the program; (4) evaluating State program operations by conducting audits of each State's program; (5) certifying cases for referral to the Federal courts to enforce support obligations; (6) certifying cases for referral to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for support collections; (7) providing technical assistance to States and assisting them with reporting procedures; (8) maintaining records of program operations, expenditures, and collections; and (9) submitting an annual report to Congress. Primary responsibility for operating the CSE program is placed on the States. Each State must have an approved State plan indicating that: (1) the State has designated a single and separate organizational unit to administer the program; (2) the State will establish paternity and secure support for individuals receiving AFDC and for others who apply directly for CSE services; (3) child support payments will be made to the State for distribution; (4) the State will enter into cooperative agreements with appropriate courts and law enforcement officials; (5) the State will establish a State Parent Locator Service (SPLS) that uses State and local parent location resources as well as the Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS); (6) the State will cooperate with any other State in locating an absent parent, establishing paternity, and securing support; and (7) the State will maintain a full record of collections and disbursements made under the plan. Specific procedures are required for distributing child support collections made on behalf of families receiving AFDC. States are to be paid incentives for collections made in AFDC cases. Monies due and payable to Federal employees are subject to garnishment for the collection of child support. To be eligible for AFDC, each applicant for, or recipient of, AFDC must make an assignment of support rights to the State; must cooperate with the State in establishing paternity and securing support; and must furnish his or her Social Security Number (SSN) to the State. The effective date of these provisions was July 1, 1975, except for the garnishment provision, which was effective on enactment. Because several problems were identified before the effective date, Congress extended the effective date to August 1, 1975, in P.L. 94-46.
P.L. 94-88—In August 1975, States were allowed to obtain waivers from particular program requirements under certain conditions until June 30, 1976 and to receive Federal reimbursement at a reduced rate. This law also eased the requirement for AFDC recipients to cooperate with State CSE agencies when such cooperation would not be in the best interests of the child. It also provided for supplemental payments to AFDC recipients whose grants would be reduced because of implementation of the CSE program.
1950 Congress passed the first Federal child support enforcement legislation requiring State welfare agencies to notify appropriate law enforcement officials upon providing Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) with respect to a child who was abandoned or deserted by a parent. 42 U.S.C. § 602(a)(11). The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws and the American Bar Association approved the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA) (amended in 1952 and 1958 and revised in 1968). 1965 Public Law (P.L.) 89-97—The Social Security Amendments of 1965 permit State or local welfare agencies to obtain from the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare the address and place of employment of a noncustodial parent who owes child support under a court order for support. 1967 P.L. 90-248—Under the Social Security Amendments of 1967, States may obtain from the Internal Revenue Service the addresses of noncustodial parents who owe child support under a court order for support. In addition, each State must establish a single organizational unit to establish paternity and collect child support for deserted children receiving AFDC. States must work cooperatively with each other under child support reciprocity agreements and with courts and law enforcement officials. 1975 P.L. 93-647—After 3 years of Congressional attention to child support enforcement issues, the Social Services Amendments of 1974 created title IV-D of the Social Security Act, which was signed into law on January 4, 1975. 42 U.S.C. §§ 651 et seq. Under Title IV-D:
RainbowSlider Forum Posts (7,174)
I want the best for them, too.
Unresolved Issues.
It will be my seventh year. I married her twice so I am counting both divorces as one taking in the latest divorce.