The background for this article is, of course, the duty of parents to provide sustenance for their children, a duty that necessarily survives the break-up of the family. In this article, I continue to address the problems of the child support system, and I continue to take a holistic view of the problem. A fundamental concept of family law is that the system must do what is in the best interests of the child. Few people will disagree with the soundness of this fundamental concept. However, the problem lies with its application. Although counterintuitive, focusing solely on the child to the exclusion of his parents may not always be in the best interests of the child because the child needs strong parents. Hence, being mindful of the welfare of the child's parents is central to the wellbeing of the child. This means that if the concerns of the non-custodial parents who are behind in their child support payments are addressed and if they are financially able to make their child support payments, they will, and their children will benefit. The evidence clearly shows that these parents are usually poor males. Middle and upper class parents usually meet their child support obligations notwithstanding the bitterness and rancor that his or her divorce or separation may have caused.
"Shifting the Paradigm by Bringing Tax Arbitrage to the Lower Income Separated Family: Why Should the Middle to Upper Class Family Have All the Fun?,"
Akron Tax Journal: Vol. 26
, Article 4.
Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akrontaxjournal/vol26/iss1/4