A recent case from another, nearby state may be of interest to readers in Massachusetts. The issue involves the payment of child support by a father of a young child. In that case, the father argued that he was not the non-custodial parent of the child, thus he should not have to pay child support to the child's mother.
The case went to the highest court available for the home state of the family. The parents share custody of the boy, with the father having the child 56 percent of the time. The mother asserted to the court that she needed child support payments to pay for rent and other expenses that she incurred when she had her son during the part of the year that's she had residential custody of him.
The court in this case found that the father did not have to pay child support due to the amount of time that he had the child each year. It is not clear if the case will be appealed to a higher court or how a similar case would be decided by a court in Massachusetts. However, if the matter were to be followed in our state, changes to the child support system could ensue.
Child support is most often ordered to be paid by the non-custodial parent of a child. The payments are owed until the child reaches the legal age in most support matters. In cases like the one here, parents argue about who is the custodial parent, a decision that can be important to a person who seeks to obtain an order for child support. Before entering into such a matter, a parent may wish to seek information regarding the family laws of our state to ensure the best outcome possible for themselves and their children.
Source: thomsonreuters.com, "Millionaire parent doesn't have to pay child support: appeals court," Jessica Dye, April 18, 2013