|
I have a friend James, who is married to Sandra.
This is a second marriage for both, and Sandra came to
this marriage with an adolescent son, Troy.
Troy, unfortunately, has many afflictions, mostly serious
motor skills. Could even be Cerebral Palsy. I'm just not
sure, but suffice to say that Troy has an uphill road ahead.
Due to Troy's existing problems, and new problems that
have arisen, his care/medication has become quite costly.
Sandra has, and is, requesting court assistance in the ad-
justment(increase) of child support from Troy's father,
Daryl.
When Troy was born, or soon to be born, Sandra and
Daryl were made aware that Troy was going to have
these serious afflictions. Daryl wanted the birth aborted,
but Sandra did not.
Troy was born, the predicted afflictions were every bit as
serious as proposed, Sandra and Daryl divorced shortly thereafter.
Should Sandra prevail in these requests for additional
child support assistance, or should Daryl be able to
reduce his responsibility by having wanted the birth
aborted.
Yes, the names have been changed....
Thanks,
Gary
|
| |
| |
Gary Walker wrote:
[OP's friend's wife has a severely disabled child from a prior
relationship. She is seeking an increase in support due to the child's
special (and presumably expense) needs. OP wants to know if the father
can defend on the basis that he wanted an abortion because the child's
disabilities were known during gestation.]
The answer is no. The choice to abort belongs to the mother alone.
The father has no say in the matter and cannot use her choice later to
oppose the imposition of a support obligation or its amount.
The public policy behind parental child support obligations is based on
the need of the child for economic support and the undesireable
alternative of the taxpayer having to bear the burden. The
post-conception choices/disputes of the parents are irrelevant.
|
| |
| |
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005, "Gary Walker" <twf@swbell.net> wrote:
[ A mother and father to be learned during
pregnancy that their child if born will be seriously
developmentally disabled; the husband asked his
wife to abort the pregnancy but she refused; their
child when born did have the afflictions predicted,
which have increased over time; the man and
woman divorced soon after their child's birth,
and the mother later remarried; their child is
now an adolescent and his medical needs and, as
a consequence, his financial needs, have increased;
thhe mother has sued for an increase in child
support; and the father wonders:
Will he probably be able to reduce rather than
increase his financial obligations on the ground
of the mother's earlier denial of his request that
she have an abortion? ]
No.
[ On the facts as stated above, should the mother
prevail on her requests for additional child support
payments? ]
Maybe, but there is not any way reliably to predict.
Unless the parties compromise/settle, the court will evaluate
whatever were the terms/provisions of the parties' marital settlement
or child support agreement, if there was one; whatever may be the
terms/provisions of previous orders/judgments directing support;
except, perhaps, as made not significant by whatever may be the
terms/provisions of such earlier documents and the litigation and
payment history between the parties, the mother's and the father's
relevant financial history, present income and assets, and reasonably
foreseeable financial expectancies; and whatever if any other
facts/circumstances that may be relevant -- information you mostly do
not provide anywhere in your posting/query.
Also, though it is unlikely that this would be dispositive for (or,
perhaps, even considered by) the court, that you suggest that the
mother has been remarried for some time but do not report whether
(regardless whether he has any past/presently law-imposed obligation
to do so) her husband has been contributing financially to her child's
support and, if not, why not; and it is at least theoretically
possible that, perhaps especially to the degree handled
sophisticatedly by the child's biological father and unsophisticatedly
by the mother, the credible answers to these questions may influence
the court's ruling.
|
| |
| |
Gary Walker <twf@swbell.net> wrote:
: Should Sandra prevail in these requests for additional
: child support assistance, or should Daryl be able to
: reduce his responsibility by having wanted the birth
: aborted.
Not a lawyer as they say but familiar with C.S.
The father's desire to abort the birth is immaterial to the case. The court
will likely examine the child's needs as well as the mother's and father's
incomes. They'll make a determination of who should pay what based on
that determination. The county DA's office (Child Support Enforcement or
whatever it's called in your county) will "represent" the child for the
purposes of establishing the support order, if requested.
b.
..
|
| |
| |
Gary Walker <twf@swbell.net> wrote:
: Should Sandra prevail in these requests for additional
: child support assistance, or should Daryl be able to
: reduce his responsibility by having wanted the birth
: aborted.
Not a lawyer as they say but familiar with C.S.
The father's desire to abort the birth is immaterial to the case. The
court
will likely examine the child's needs as well as the mother's and father's
incomes. They'll make a determination of who should pay what based on
that determination. The county DA's office (Child Support Enforcement or
whatever it's called in your county) will "represent" the child for the
purposes of establishing the support order, if requested.
b.
.
Well, one of the reasons I posted this question is that to
date, Sandra has not been successful in obtaining any
child support increases to help with these growing expen-
ses. Although the father, Daryl, is reportedly financially
able to pay.
Gary
|
| |
| |
[OP writes that mother is seeking an increase in child support from
a father whom, in anticipation that the child would have adverse
health issue, had asked the mother to abort the pregnancy.]
Gary Walker wrote:
...
Well, one of the reasons I posted this question is that to
date, Sandra has not been successful in obtaining any
child support increases to help with these growing expen-
ses. Although the father, Daryl, is reportedly financially
able to pay.
One need not doubt anything in the paragraph above to stand by
the conclusion that the father's expressed desire for an abortion
is STILL not relevant.
--
FF
|
| |
| |
[OP writes that mother is seeking an increase in child support from
a father whom, in anticipation that the child would have adverse
health issue, had asked the mother to abort the pregnancy.]
Gary Walker wrote:
One need not doubt anything in the paragraph above to stand by
the conclusion that the father's expressed desire for an abortion
is STILL not relevant.
--
FF
Well, I wasn't suggesting relevance by reporting the Mot-
her's failures when returning to the child support table.
Actually, the comment really didn't have a purpose other
than as an update, and my surprise that additional respon-
sibility of the Father had been denied for these extra child
expenses. Of course, I'm not privileged to all the details.
Thanks,
Gary
|
| |
| |
|
