Georgia Declares State's Child Support Guidelines Unconstitutional.
On February 25, 2002, a courageous Superior Court Judge in the Alapaha
Judicial Circuit, by the name of C. Dane Perkins, granted the motion of
Michelle L. Sweat, which declared the Georgia Child Support Guidelines to
be null and void as the guidelines violate numerous provisions of the
constitutions of both the United States and the State of Georgia. Michelle
Sweat was divorced on November 12, 1998, and had agreed to allow the
father to have custody of the three minor children of the parties while
she received visitation, and a provision of the agreement of the parties
was that she not be obligated to pay child support. On or about July 14,
2000, Monica Houseal, an agent with the Georgia Child Support Enforcement
Agency in Nashville, Georgia, forwarded to Michelle Sweat a written
request for "possible modification" of her child support obligation and
requested certain financial information. At the time of trial, Michelle
Sweat's approximate monthly gross income was $1,862.00, and the father's
gross monthly income was approximately $2,650.00. Ms. Sweat was requested
by the Department of Human Resources to pay $452.00 in child support and
up to $79.00 per month for insurance for the minor children for a total of
$531.00 per month. After this request by DHR, Ms. Sweat filed her
challenge to the constitutionality of the Georgia child support guidelines.
Judge Perkins noted in his order that in a study conducted in 14 South
Georgia counties between 1995 and 1997, it was found that 82.2% of
contested custody cases resulted in custody being awarded to the mother
and that guideline support had an impermissibly discriminatory affect upon
men based upon their gender.
The Georgia child support guidelines were enacted by the legislature in
1989 in order to qualify for approximately $25,000,000.00 from the Federal
government for child support enforcement. While the originators of the
guidelines no doubt had good intentions, they were extremely rushed and
adopted guidelines from the state of Wisconsin, which were based upon
poverty cases where the total income of the parents was $12,000.00, which
would be approximately $21,000.00 in the year 2000. They were based upon
the assumption that the custodial parent had no employment and that the
non-custodial parent had no visitation with the children. They were never
intended to be applied to higher income families and they had a built-in
cap in that they were only intended to recover welfare payments to the
custodial parent.
The Federal mandate required that a study be performed as the basis of the
guidelines so that an equitable amount could be determined. In the trial
of Ms. Sweat's case, Monica Houseal testified that in Georgia no studies
were done to establish the cost of caring for a child in Georgia. In
accordance with Georgia law, there is to be a commission to examine the
guidelines every four years. In the commissions that have been established
to review the guidelines, in only one year, 1998, included an economist on
the commission, Mr. Mark Rogers. Mr. Rogers testified in the Sweat trial
and stressed there are no economic studies which show that the cost of
care for a child increases as a percentage of the gross income of the
payor of child support. In fact, the opposite is true. The cost of child
support decreases as a percentage of the obligor's income as it rises. His
testimony further pointed out that there is no economic data to justify
the guidelines. It has further been noted by Judge Perkins that by
requiring the non-custodial parent to pay an amount in excess of that
required to meet the child's basic needs, as the economic analysis has
shown, the Guidelines impermissibly interfere with parental decisions
regarding financial expenditures of children.
Once the economic necessities of a child are covered, the government has
no right to say how much money should be spent for the care of children.
Mr. Bill Atkins, of Stephens County, an advocate for child support reform,
stressed that if the guidelines were in fact accurate, Georgia's statute
concerning cruelty to children should be revised so that a parent would go
to prison if they did not spend a certain percentage of their gross income
on their children. Most states in the United States have formulas for
determining child support which include, not only the income of both
parents but also the amount of time each parent spends with the children
during which they expend their funds directly for the children's benefit.
In addition to Daryl G. LeCroy, of Atlanta, who assisted Ms. Sweat in the
case, Ms. Sweat was represented by Mr. Kontz Bennett, of Waycross,
Georgia, who originally filed the motion in behalf of Ms. Sweat.
Judge Perkins further noted that the guidelines do not take into account
the large tax benefits that the custodial parent receives. He noted that
custodial parents typically receive $200 to $350 per month in extra,
after-tax, income just for having custody.
He concluded that Michelle Sweat would not be required to pay any child
support based upon the income of the parties and the fact that she has at
least 20% of the parenting time. She will be required to continue paying
approximately $70.00 per month for health insurance for the children, plus
14.3% of any unreimbursed medical expenses that exceed $250.00 per year
based upon her share of the parents' combined income which is over a base
amount required for the parents support.
|
