PARENT'S RIGHTS NOW!

CHILD-SUPPORT RECEIPTS UP; RELIANCE ON PUBLIC ASSISTANCE DOWN

Following is the text of a August 23, 2006 Press Release from Patricia Buscher of the Public Information Office for the U. S. Census Bureau:

More child support is being received, and a rise in employment rates of custodial parents match a decline in participation in public assistance programs, according to a report released today by the U.S. Census Bureau.

The report, Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support: 2003, reveals that 7 million custodial parents received 69 percent of the money owed to them by the noncustodial parent. Thirty percent were receiving assistance from the government. This was an improvement from 1999, when custodial parents were collecting just 59 percent of the money. Forty-one percent were relying on public help in 1993.

Full-time, year-round employment for custodial parents rose from 46 percent in 1993 to 54 percent in 2003. In this time frame, the proportion of mothers receiving welfare fell from 26 percent to 8 percent, reaching a low of 6 percent in 2001.

Other highlights:

• Custodial parents who were owed child support in 2003 were due an average of $5,100 each — a total of $37 billion. They were able to collect an average of $3,500 each, or $25 billion total.
• About 45 percent of custodial parents due child support received the full amount, and about 76 percent received at least some child support in 2003.
• More than half (59 percent) of all custodial parents received some type of noncash support — such as gifts, clothes or food — in addition to or in lieu of child support payments.
• In 2003, 1-in-4 custodial parents and their children were living below the poverty level. In 1993, 1-in-3 were living in poverty.
• As of spring 2004, an estimated 14 million parents had custody of 22 million children under age 21 whose other parent lived elsewhere. Five of every six custodial parents were mothers (83 percent).
• About 8 million custodial parents had some type of agreement or court award to receive financial support from the noncustodial parent for their children in 2004. The proportion of custodial mothers with child support agreements increased from 60 to 64 percent over the past 10 years.
• The age of custodial mothers rose between 1994 and 2004. In 1994, 25 percent were 40 years or older. By 2004, the number had grown to 37 percent.
• Fewer than one-third of custodial mothers had never married, 46 percent were currently divorced or separated, 22 percent were currently married and 2 percent were widows. Custodial fathers were less likely than mothers to never have married (20 percent).
• About 3 million noncustodial parents provided some type of health insurance for their children in 2003.

Most estimates in this report are from the 1994 through 2004 April biennial supplements to the Current Population Survey, cosponsored by the Census Bureau and the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Child Support Enforcement. Statistics from sample surveys are subject to sampling and nonsampling error.

For further information on the source of the data and accuracy of the estimates, including standard errors and confidence intervals, go to http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/childsupport/source03.pdf.

The AP has reported that the federal government has assessed the State of South Carolina $58 Million for its failure to create a child support tracking system. Amazingly, the system itself cost "only" $100 Million. The only other state that does not have its system in place is California. But, while California is expected to have its system in place by next year, South Carolina is not expected to have its system in place for another four years and after who knows how many fines. And, in the meantime the $1.2 Billion South Carolina arrearage is increasing by about $100 Million per year.

This article and this article were both recently published in the Charleston City Paper. Certainly, one may advance the argument that, as an elected public official, Mr. Scarborough should expect close public scrutiny of his personal life. However, we question the propriety of the public having unbridled access to Family Court Records related to children and spouses who did not voluntarily offer themselves for elective office. We respect the idea of a free Press, but we also fear the potential for real harm when everyone gets to troll through "public information" that is public information only by virtue of the fact that Court Rules make it so. For example, what is to keep an unscrupulous person from stealing either Social Security Numbers or financial information? What is to keep a pedophile from acquiring information about a potential target from these so-called "public records"?

It may be that the allegations raised against Mr. Scarborough ultimately prove to be unfounded. But whether that proves to be the case, there should be more protections afforded to the privacy rights of innocents involved in Family Court proceedings.

We would like to know your thoughts on these subjects. Please post them to http://parentsrights.blogspot.com/. Feel free to post anonymously and to disagree with our position. But, please be civil in your posts.

According to an ABC News article, a Bill is pending before the South Carolina Legislature to provide for virtual visitation between children and their "non-custodial" parent. We have yet to review the proposed legislation and, therefore, are not yet in a position to make comments. However, as a general rule, we applaud the enactment of creative legislation that makes it easier for parents to "maintain the bonds with their children." Our concern, however, is that "virtual visitation" may become a substitute for physical visitation as well as a justification for the custodial parent to relocate either out of county or out of state.

The Post and Courier has reported "Two senior lawmakers say the state needs to set standards for South Carolina's unregulated drug screeners to ensure the reliability of an industry that wields considerable influence over everything from hiring to child custody battles. At the same time, a committee of Lowcountry lawyers plans to meet to air concerns about the methods and credentials of Robert Bennett, the primary drug screener for Charleston County's Family Court."

In what may be one of the understaments of all time, Charleston County Bar President Cheryl Shoun, was quoted as saying, "the courts need to use 'the utmost discretion' in determining who should serve as expert witnesses in proceedings that directly affect people's lives."