Excellent Amendment Limiting Parent's Child Support Obligation Washington - RCW 26.19.065

by MatthewPitts 23. October 2009 02:59

In my continuing review of the newly amended child support laws now in effect in the State of Washington, I continue to be pleasantly suprised. As I was researching for another project, I was happy to see the legislature had addressed a serious concern regarding child support limits.

A parent's child support obligation remains limited to 45 percent of his income, but the legislature added extra language to the statute which will greatly benefit parent's with multiple support obligations. There has been confusion regarding child support calculation when a parent has to pay support for multiple children from different relationships. The typical person affected by this scenario is an unmarried father with multiple children from different relationships.

Of course there are additional considerations, but the statute now includes the following language: "Neither parent's child support obligation owed for all his or her biological or legal children may exceed forty-five percent of net income except for good cause shown." Wash. Rev. Code 26.19.065

Some courts have been applying this logic all along. However, Washington DCS has used the "Whole Family Method" which has been largely inefficient. It is good to see that the legislature is considering the severe financial hardship that multiple child support orders can cause.

 

Comments

10/24/2009 8:27:12 PM #

Marie

Dear Mr. Pitts:

Thank you for providing this information, as my husband has been a victim of the "Whole Family Method", as he has two different child support orders, and has been paying an extraordinary amount of child support due to the Division of Child Supports method of determining the support obligation for his children. The amount of child support that he has been paying is more than fifty percent of his net income, and it has caused a severe financial hardship. We are now looking into modifying the child support orders in consideration of this new statute.

We sincerely thank you for sharing this knowledge.

Marie

Marie |

11/17/2009 2:43:38 AM #

Martin

The 45 cap is nice improvement. However, it appears that the whole family is to the wayside. This amendment seems very double edged to me. There are many men that have filed simultaneous petitions for CS mod using the whole family as argument to reduce on all of them. Usually, they come out well. But now, if the 45 does not apply anyways, for their income is high enough, it seems they lose the whole family argument. Last, the whole family was used also when they had another child from a different relationship living with them, that seems gone. I admit, I am still sorting through all the additions and subtractions of the new laws.

Martin |

11/17/2009 3:50:41 AM #

MatthewPitts

I understand your point. However, there are many situations where a Washington father with children from multiple relationships has not been able to modify all of his support obligations in an organized fashion. This often results in disparate support obligations. Thanks for reading.

MatthewPitts |

11/30/2009 9:37:29 PM #

Martin

Not sure if I gave you credit for your great site Matthew, just love it. I am hoping to get more time to come back to you here. VERY GOOD WORK.

Martin |

Design by Matthew A. Pitts
Some Icons by Dry Icons
Copyright 2009 - Matthew A. Pitts, Freelance Paralegal (A Division of Lend A Hand Legal, LLC)
Powered by BlogEngine.NET 1.5.0.7

Sponsors

About Matthew A. Pitts

Matthew A.Pitts

I am a freelance family law litigation support paralegal serving King County, Pierce County, and Snohomish County. Visit my site at www.mattpitts.lendahandlegal.com