NationStates Jolt Archive

Child Support

Description- Fair judgment on how much parent should pay child support

A) Fathers and/or mothers are often forced to pay more then should on child support laws.

B) Legalize that each person is fairly appointed a correct amount in which to pay.
I. By doing studies on the income of the parent.
II. Seeing how much spare money they have after buying the living requirements including: Insurance, food, and house payment.

C) I realize that child support may be needed, but people shouldn't be made to pay excessive amounts in which they can't afford.

D) If parent does not pay child support the court should jump on the violator as soon as possible instead of waiting for it to build up.

E) If parent is involved payment should be taken down since parent is also helping take care of the child by offering their home, food, and money for activities.

What do I need to change so far? XD

You're making lots and lots of assumptions.

First, you don't say what child support is. Or to be more exact, you don't say what its purpose is. Here's a very wordy definition; with a bit of work you should be able to turn it into something a lot pithier and a bit more sensible:

"Child support" is defined as payments made from one parent of a given child to the other, where the parents are estranged and the second parent is the one bringing up the child.

The purpose part is something to argue about a lot, because different people have different ideas of what its about. What you think its about is the most basic level of justification for your resolution. Here are a few ideas, most of which don't fit your proposal so feel free to ignore them.


It's to punish the absent parent.
It's to ensure that both parents contribute financially (equally?) to the upkeep of the child they both brought into the world.
It's for the child's benefit.
It's because the parent without the child is the one in a position to earn money.
It's because the parent with the child, who is now happily married to a really rich person, thoroughly hates their ex.


You don't have to say why Child Support is supposed to be there, but it will help you be clear about what you want out of the proposal.


The second obvious assumption is that a nation may not have child support payment laws at all. Not all nations have welfare systems, regrettably. If you're going to force them to have this particular bit of welfare, then you are going to have to go into the reasons for it, and you must define what it is with a lot more care than you would otherwise. If you aren't going to force them to have it, you have to say that too at least in passing and keep it in mind for how you phrase the rest of the resolution.

B) Legalize that each person is fairly appointed a correct amount in which to pay.
I. By doing studies on the income of the parent.
II. Seeing how much spare money they have after buying the living requirements including: Insurance, food, and house payment.
OK, you know how much "spare money" a parent has. How is that turned into support payments? Does the income of the other parent matter? Do any special needs of the child matter?

Insurance for what, by the way? Our insurance sector in Gobbannium seems to be smaller than average. I put it down to people understanding that when you gamble, the house always wins.

Oh, and you meant "legislate", not "legalize".

C) I realize that child support may be needed, but people shouldn't be made to pay excessive amounts in which they can't afford.
Whenever the word "I" turns up in a resolution, I turn off. This is something that the World Assembly is doing for the World Assembly's reasons; "I" shouldn't be part of that.

That aside, this is a perfectly good reason for having a resolution. It's a good idea to put your reasoning first, so I'd stick this line above "B" instead of where it is now.

D) If parent does not pay child support the court should jump on the violator as soon as possible instead of waiting for it to build up.
You're assuming that the court is the active thing here. It usually isn't; there's very often some sort of official support agency which is responsible for bringing claims for support to court in the first place and monitoring the results. You need to use some general term like "the responsible agency" instead of "the court" to avoid making still more assumptions about how nations work.

I'll save the real grammar nit-picking for another time :)

Thanks =]... I shall make changes in a bit. I need to think about this before I get mad XD

Thanks =]... I shall make changes in a bit. I need to think about this before I get mad XD

I find sleeping on things helps; my ideas, or at least my objectives, are always clearer first thing in the morning. I've usually missed something, but it's easier to cope with that when you have a better feel for what you're trying to end up with.

Don't worry about getting mad at me, by the way, I know how frustrating these things can be. Just don't expect to go from a standing start to a full-blown ready-for-prime-time resolution in two days flat, that's all.

Child Support

Description- Fair judgment on how much parent should pay child support

I agree with this in nations where there is a definite money system in place. I'll come back to this statement later.

A) Fathers and/or mothers are often forced to pay more then should on child support laws.

This doesn't do anything. It's just a statement. It could have the addition of the word recognising, or understanding. However, why is this concern of Rutianas? If a child is getting more money than base child support laws of nation X requires, the child wins.

B) Legalize that each person is fairly appointed a correct amount in which to pay.
I. By doing studies on the income of the parent.
II. Seeing how much spare money they have after buying the living requirements including: Insurance, food, and house payment.

OOC: Touchy subject for me. I'll try to keep my own feelings out of it.

IC: If a parent has a child, they should support the child. Yes, even if this means having to make do with a little less. House payment? Just rent a room if you have to. You made the child. You must assist in caring for the child. This doesn't stop a parent from getting a different job that pays just enough to have a tiny amount of money left over in at the end.

C) I realize that child support may be needed, but people shouldn't be made to pay excessive amounts in which they can't afford.

What is excessive for the resolution? I don't necessarily think having to move into a single room to take care of a child to be excessive. You need to determine what excessive is.

D) If parent does not pay child support the court should jump on the violator as soon as possible instead of waiting for it to build up.

Agreed. However, sometimes this isn't necessary. What if a parent is attempting to pay, but for reasons out of their control, they're having issues? IE, lost their job and is looking for work.

E) If parent is involved payment should be taken down since parent is also helping take care of the child by offering their home, food, and money for activities.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Child support is paid to the parent who has custody in order to provide basic needs for the child. If the non-custodial parent is still paying for shelter, food, and other necessities, then it's still considered child support. It shouldn't be lowered.

There's no provision for parents to come to mutual agreements either on child support.

Now, money systems. What do countries who have no money system do? Rutianas has no money system, therefore, we have no legal concept of child support payments.

Paula Jenner - Rutianas Ambassador

OOC: What about systems in which, legally if not biologically, a child can have more than two parents?

Edit: Would this only apply where children were conceived in wedlock, or at least during fairly long-term cohabitation, or for children who were conceived during more casual relationships as well? If a woman becomes pregnant as a result of being raped, and decides to keep the child, can she claim child support from the rapist? (I'd say 'Yes'...)
What about cases where one of a child's parents has died but their rights with respect to that child have passed to somebody else, such as their own parents or an older (& now adult) offspring? Would both their obligations to that child, and their (potential) right to claim support from the child's other parent[s], pass with those rights? (Again, I'd say 'Yes'...)
And as this is being proposed for legislation on an international basis, including a clause about enforcing these obligations when the parents now live in different (W.A.) nations might be a good idea.