Excerpt a from DEADBEATS,DEADBROKES,AND PRISONERS,

by ANN CAMMETT - 18 Geo.J. PovertyLaw & Pol'y 127,129-31(2011)

* * * In the case of incarcerated parents, who are disproportionately poor and from communities of color, federal enforcement of child support orders plays a more limited role in securing more financial stability for their children. Indeed the opposite result is common: aggressive enforcement and uncollectible debt can manifest in unintended consequencesthat hamper the larger goal of ongoing parental support.Prisoners are also parents, and in many states they amass huge child support arrears during a period of incarceration. Such a debt does not relate to real income since prisoners earn little or no money, the debt will likely never be collected, and the support arrearage will not ultimately redound to the benefit of their children. This dynamic has been further complicated by an important element of the support model that we have embraced in the United States: absolute enforcement against all nonresi- dent parents who have fallen behind in child support, regardless of their circumstances. A wide range of very serious sanctions, such as onerous salary garnishment, driver's license suspension, re-incarceration, and many others can be triggered against parents when they are released. Moreover, pursuant to federal law-specifically the Bradley Amendrnent- debt from child support arrears cannot be modified or discharged by a court once it is accrued. These automatic penalties are counterproductive, as they make it more difficult for formerly incarcerated parents to pay ongoing support as they attempt to successfully reintegrate into society and resume contact with their children. Rather, automatic child support enforcement creates perverse incentives that alienate parents from the formal economy and drive them underground-and away from their families. Such a paradigm cannot be in the best interests of their children and runs counter to the goals of the child support program.

The universal perception that all parents who fail to pay support are "deadbeat dads" remains a powerful cultural narrative and tough enforcement against parents that fail to pay is resonant with the body politic. This narrative driving child support enforcement has become progressively more punitive without allowing for meaningful political and policy discourse that distinguishes deadbeats frorn "deadbrokes" - those who simply don't have the ability to pay. Further, in the case of prisoners, state courts often conflate blame for criminal conduct with one's actual ability to earn money while incarcerated, using debt accumulation and obligation as a proxy for further punishment. Yet, debt accrued during incarceration does not typically represent a resource from which children will eventually benefit. A financial obligation on the books, unmoored to real earning capacity, may remain unpaid forever because it does not represent real income or future earnings. It is quite simply an uncollectible debt that does not benefit children, the state, or society.

This book, and all H2O books, are Creative Commons licensed for sharing and re-use with the exception of certain excerpts. Any excerpts from the Restatements of the Law, Principles of the Law, and the Model Penal Code are copyright by The American Law Institute. Excerpts are reproduced with permission, not as part of a Creative Commons license.