> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # What’s the point of child support? - URL: https://www.smdp.com/whats-the-point-20060725/ - Published: 2006-07-25T15:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-25T00:23:54.000Z - Author: Guest Author - Tags: Opinion, Santa Monica, #archive-import *BY DAVID PISARRA Deadbeats take a hit* In a highly anticipated court ruling this past week, the Supreme Court of California struck a blow for children that should cause every deadbeat parent to shudder. The Supreme Court effectively said that a child support order remains enforceable forever. The court ruling now makes it incumbent upon the paying spouse to maintain records of payment forever to prevent themselves from being hauled back into the courtroom to prove they paid their child support. The history of child support is that if a paying spouse did not pay, and the receiving spouse waited too long to go in court to collect his or her money, the paying spouse had a defense to the claim. It was a legal doctrine called “laches,” which stands for the proposition that if someone waits too long to enforce their claim, they can be barred from collecting. The California Supreme Court chose to invalidate this doctrine, in regards to child support awards, because the Legislature made child support a forever obligation. It used to be that a spouse who avoided his or her child-support obligations long enough would eventually avoid having to pay them entirely. This is frequently the case with deadbeat dads who would gladly spend thousands of dollars in attorneys fees to avoid paying their ex-spouse’s child-support. To address this issue, the Legislature chose to make child support awards an exception to the doctrine of laches. In doing so, lawmakers have struck a blow for the rights of children everywhere. The practical effects of the ruling are that parents who are owed child support from 10, 15, or 20 years ago can effectively go to court today and ask the court to enforce that child-support order. That is great news for those thousands of parents who suffered through raising children without the proper support from their ex-spouses. The ex-spouse who has gone on to buy a house, owns stocks, or in some other manner has become wealthy, can now be hauled into court and made to pay that child support. The ruling is welcome news to those of us who have been faced with many a parent sitting in our office crying that their ex-spouse never paid child support but is now living in a wonderful new house with his new wife living in luxury. It's bad news for the trophy wives whose husbands have effectively avoided paying their child-support all these years. It's very bad news for those husbands who now cannot avoid paying up. And for those who actually paid their child-support and have a vindictive ex-wife who wants to try and squeeze more money out of their ex-husbands — well, you better get your bank records in order. Those husbands who paid their child-support but don’t have records to substantiate their payments could theoretically be brought back into court and be made to repay all of that child support. This nightmare scenario is sure to play out somewhere across the vast landscape of family law and while I would hate to be that person, I am certainly glad that the Legislature and the court chose to close the loophole that so often allowed scumbags to avoid their family obligations. From a family law perspective, it is a welcome tool that will hopefully increase compliance with child-support orders. In the short run, there are certain to be a number of cases which will be brought by spouses who now wish to collect their back child-support. But as the backlog of deadbeat dads and moms gets cleared up, hopefully the children of the state of California will be the recipients of more frequent child-support payments. From a parents’ perspective, they will now have to become more vigilant in making sure they get and keep receipts for payments made by cash. The payor spouse should keep copies of canceled checks and money orders, or get a notarized document stating that all support has been paid. Probably most important however — for the parent who is ordered to pay child support — when a change of circumstance, such as a loss of a job or a reduction in salary merits a reduction in child-support, that party needs to get a modification downwards, otherwise they will be responsible for the higher support until it is paid. Children are a lifetime obligation. This latest court ruling recognizes that as a society we are going to place the full weight of the judicial system behind supporting children. Child support has now become the ultimate obligation. While child support has never been dischargeable in bankruptcy, it has been dischargeable in the Superior Court system through the trick of avoiding and delaying payments by deadbeat parents who switch jobs, change bank accounts and move out of state, all to avoid supporting their children. Like most law students, I became a lawyer with the hope of being able to help people. It did not take long in the family court for me to realize how rarely the court system actually helped people. I have seen parents struggling to make their rent and raise their children while their ex-spouses drove fancy cars, wore custom tailored clothing and traveled the world. I have had clients who just could not keep up the fight because the deck was so stacked against them. This latest court ruling levels the playing field somewhat. Because the parent who is raising a child frequently has little or no disposable income, they are generally at a huge disadvantage when attempting to go into court. By making child-support a forever obligation, the courts have now given the disadvantaged parent the ability to focus on raising their children today, and then, when life is less hectic and hopefully their ex has more money, going after their deadbeat ex. For all those spouses who have avoided paying their child support, in the hopes that they can avoid it forever, their day of reckoning has arrived, and I suggest that they make peace with their ex. This new tool means that deadbeats stand to lose, and children get to win. Finally. (David Pisarra is a lawyer in the Santa Monica firm of Pisarra & Grist. He welcomes your questions and comments. He or (310) 664-9969.) *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 25, 2006.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/072506.pdf?ref=smdp.com)