Columnist Sandy Thompson: Raise cap on child support payments

Sandy Thompson

Saturday, Jan. 6, 2001 | 2:59 a.m.

Sandy Thompson is vice president/associate editor of the Las Vegas Sun. She can be reached at 259-4025 or e-mail at thompson@lasvegassun.com.

There's a move to raise the cap on child support payments in Nevada from $500 to $785 a month.

A bill draft (No. 965) has been submitted to the 2001 Legislature. It will be the third attempt in seven years to raise the cap that was set in 1987.

The proposal has the support of the executive council of the Nevada State Bar Association's family law section. Attorney Roger Wirth, an executive council member, said previous attempts to raise the cap were "dead on arrival" at the Legislature because the proposals were too complex and far-reaching. This time, he said, the approach is simple and straightforward and is based on the Consumer Price Index. The bill draft includes no other changes to the child support law.

Noncustodial parents now pay 18 percent of their gross income for child support, with a cap of $500 per child. According to Family Court Child Support Hearing Master Tom Leeds, the figure is high for low- to middle-income noncustodial parents when compared to rates in other states, but low for those in the higher-income brackets.

Wirth, citing figures from the Family Law Quarterly, says Nevada ranks low in its child support awards based on income. Seventy-five percent of the states provide for larger awards. If the new cap is approved, Nevada would rank in the middle nationwide.

Knight Allen, a local political activist, recently urged key state legislators to support increasing the cap to $785.

"It has been 14 years without an increase," he said. "That's outrageous."

Before the Legislature set the limit, Allen said, there was great disparity in child support awards from courtroom to courtroom. Judges were free to set the amounts. The legislation aimed to make the child support awards more uniform.

Judges still have some discretion based on a person's actual income and extenuating circumstances.

It certainly takes more than $500 a month to raise a child, so any increase in child support would be welcome. After the breakup of a relationship or marriage, the income of the custodial parent usually is greatly reduced. The purpose of child support is not only to provide for a child's basic needs, but to try to maintain a lifestyle similar to that provided during the marriage.

Given that, the proposal to raise the child support cap should sail through the Legislature. But that's unlikely.

In the last 2 1/2 years, the most common complaints among Family Court litigants have been about child support and custody issues.

The child support collection system can be a laborious, nightmarish process that frustrates custodial and noncustodial parents alike.

Some custodial parents fight tooth and nail to get their child support payments each month. In a few cases, their ex-partners are paying into the system, but they don't receive the money in a timely manner. In other cases, the noncustodial parents simply refuse to pay. There is no excuse for people who have the means but don't support their children.

The majority of noncustodial parents do pay, but for some it's a struggle. Arrearages, mounting interest and repayment of welfare add to their financial burdens. Generally, these parents -- usually fathers -- are in the lower income brackets.

Child support can be an economical Catch-22: Custodial parents and children need the increased amount; some noncustodial parents can't afford to pay it.

The cap should be raised, but the amount of the increase proposed -- $285 -- could ruin its chances.