Can the Family Support Act Put Some Life Back into Deadbeat Dads?: An Analysis of Child-Support Guidelines, Award Rates, and Levels

2001 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura M. Argys ◽  
H. Elizabeth Peters ◽  
Donald M. Waldman
Keyword(s):  
Family Support ◽  
Child Support ◽  
Family Support Act ◽  
The Family ◽  
Deadbeat Dads ◽  
Support Guidelines

scholarly journals Child Support Guidelines

1991 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 404-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
IRWIN GARFINKEL ◽  
DONALD OELLERICH ◽  
PHILIP K. ROBINS
Keyword(s):  
Family Support ◽  
Child Support ◽  
Population Survey ◽  
Current System ◽  
Family Support Act ◽  
The Family ◽  
Carry Over ◽  
New Guidelines ◽  
Support Guidelines ◽  
New System

This article uses data from the Current Population Survey to examine the extent to which the new child support guidelines being developed by the states in response to the Child Support Amendments of 1984 and the Family Support Act of 1988 can be expected to increase child support awards and payments. The analysis focuses on the guidelines being developed in Wisconsin, Colorado, and Delaware, which are representative of those being implemented nationwide. The results suggest that the new guidelines will increase child support payments by somewhere between 47% and 54%. Child support awards are predicted to increase by between 77% and 88%, depending on the guideline being considered. Compliance with the new guidelines is predicted to be modest, averaging 61% across marital status groups, but this evidence on compliance is very tentative because it is based on an analysis of the current system and the results may not carry over to the new system.

US Social Welfare Policy: The Reagan Record and Legacy

1998 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHN O'CONNOR
Keyword(s):  
Family Support ◽  
Bill Clinton ◽  
Social Welfare Policy ◽  
George Bush ◽  
Social Provision ◽  
The Social ◽  
Family Support Act ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Right

This paper reviews the Reagan administration's attack on the US welfare system during the 1980s. The paper considers the origins, provisions and impact of Reagan's three major pieces of retrenchment legislation: the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, the Social Security Amendments of 1983, and the Family Support Act of 1988. It is argued that Reagan's record in retrenching welfare was limited in budgetary terms, but was successful in making welfare programmes more restrictive. Reagan's welfare legacy is assessed in terms of his attempts at restructuring social provision and shifting the welfare debate to the right. The paper concludes by asserting that Reagan's critique of, and attack on, social provision was accepted by his presidential successors, George Bush and Bill Clinton.

Sectionalism and Policy Formation in the United States: President Carter's Welfare Initiatives

1996 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Desmond King
Keyword(s):  
Family Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Formation ◽  
Jimmy Carter ◽  
Archival Material ◽  
The North ◽  
Family Support Act ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Us ◽  
North And South

President Jimmy Carter twice attempted to enact major reforms of the US welfare system. Using archival material from the Carter Presidential Library, this article argues that one major reason for the failure of both initiatives was the persistence of regional divisions between representatives from the north and south in the Congress. This factor is as germane to the welfare failure as poor presidential-congressional relations and changes to the committee seniority system in the Congress. American welfare programmes were institutionalized in such a way that, from the 1930s, building a coalition across sectional interests (as represented by members of the Congress) was nearly impossible: gains to one region constituted losses to the other. The consequence of the way Carter pursued and failed to achieve welfare reform was to enhance the priorities, particularly ‘working for welfare’, exploited by Reagan in the final year of his administration when the Family Support Act was enacted.

Why the Family Support Act Will Fail

Challenge ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 33-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah K. Gideonse ◽  
William R. Meyers
Keyword(s):  
Family Support ◽  
Family Support Act ◽  
The Family

Good, Responsible Parenting: Child-Support Guidelines in an Era of Neo-liberalism

2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krista Robson
Keyword(s):  
Child Support ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Judicial Discretion ◽  
Poverty Measure ◽  
Government Documents ◽  
The Family ◽  
Normative Messages ◽  
Good Behaviour ◽  
Support Guidelines

AbstractFollowing decades of criticism, the federal government amended the Divorce Act in 1997 to include guidelines and support tables for the determination of child-support orders. The guidelines were meant to replace a child-support system that relied heavily on judicial discretion, which was blamed for the inconsistency between awards, the inadequacy of the amounts awarded, and inequity in the system. Normative messages about parental responsibility and good behaviour were reinforced in the new child-support regime. Through an analyses of case law, government documents, and interviews with lawyers, unique insight is gained in expanding our understanding of what is happening “on the ground,” beyond the “black letter of the law,” pursuant to the child-support law reforms. This article outlines the dominant message about responsibility that parents receive when they encounter child-support law. Further, it is necessary to consider the socio-economic context in which these reforms have occurred, as they have significant implications for the family in today's society. In the current climate of neo-liberalism, the reformed child-support legislation might be seen as one strategy in the state's reconfiguration of responsibility for the welfare of children. This research demonstrates that while the rationalization of child support has achieved some key objectives, it will fail as an anti-poverty measure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document