Beliefs About Child Support Modification Following Remarriage and Subsequent Childbirth
DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00535.x |
Date | 01 February 2009 |
Published date | 01 February 2009 |
JASON D. HANS University of Kentucky
Beliefs About Child Support Modification Following
Remarriage and Subsequent Childbirth
Framed by equity theory, fairness beliefs
regarding child support modification to account
for the financial impact of remarriage and sub-
sequent childbirth were assessed. Based on
a random sample of 407 Kentucky residents
using a multiple segment factorial vignette
approach, modification was supported by 57%
of respondents following remarriage, but only
12% believed that child support should be mod-
ified following childbirth. Support for modi-
fication was greater when the impetus was
a change in the marital or parental status of the
child support obligor than the recipient. Down-
ward modification when the obligor’s financial
situation worsened was favored more than
upward modification when the obligor’s finan-
cial situation improved. Overall, response pat-
terns showed little support for applying existing
child support models to modification decisions.
Child support policy has rapidly evolved over the
past few decades. Perhaps the most noteworthy
changes were ushered in by the Family Support
Act (1988), a U.S. regulation that reshaped two
of the most fundamental aspects of the child sup-
port system: the processes through which child
support amounts are established and the norm
for how money is transferred. A shift away from
broad judicial discretion in favor of presumptive
guidelines for setting the child support amount
was mandated to ensure children’s needs were
being met while also increasing the sense of fair-
ness across cases. The Family Support Act also
called for child support to be automatically de-
ducted and transferred from obligors’ paychecks
to child support recipients.
These changes have direct implications for
child support modification in the years following
divorce that have been largely unexamined. Spe-
cifically, the models that underlie the child sup-
port guidelines also affect the circumstances
under which modification is possible, and income
withholding limits the ability of parents to pri-
vately modify child support without court in-
volvement. It remains unclear whether and to
what extent these implications are desirable
because some evidence suggests that perceptions
of child support fairness erode over time in the
absence of modifications to adjust for changing
circumstances (Hans & Coleman, 2008). Thus,
using equity theory to frame the importance of
fairness perceptions, this study explores beliefs
among the general population about child support
modification as financial circumstances change
in the years following divorce and compares the
compatibility of those beliefs with the two princi-
pal child support models that guide modification
decisions in the United States.
Equity Theory
Equity theory provides insight into why maxi-
mizing perceptions of fairness with regard to
child support obligations may be in children’s
best interest. According to equity theory, an un-
derbenefited individual perceives an imbalance
Department of Family Studies, University of Kentucky, 315
Funkhouser Building, Lexington, KY 40506 (jhans@
uky.edu).
Key Words: child support, divorce, equity theory, remar-
riage.
Family Relations 58 (February 2009): 65–78 65
A Publication of
the National Council on
Family Relations
To continue reading
Request your trial