An often-ignored recovery issue: child support

While non-custodial fathers are often court-mandated to pay child support¹, back unpaid child support has remained a little-discussed issue in substance abuse treatment. Because the credentials of many men in recovery qualify them mostly for low-prestige, seasonal or menial low-paying jobs in our service economy^2,3, these men may find it difficult to secure a socially affirming job or to earn a livable wage. As a result, it is not unusual for some men to fall behind on their child support payments or to deliberately forego over-the-table employment in the name of self-preservation to avoid having their wages garnished.^4,5

This is a likely factor accounting for a significant portion of the 18% of persons in addiction treatment who are unemployed for reasons other than those “commonly recognized” due to disability, being a caretaker or babysitter, being retired, or going to school.⁶

In order to address this issue in treatment, addiction professionals can invite a representative from the state-run child support enforcement agency (CSEA) to conduct an information workshop in which men can learn about child support issues, receive assistance in scheduling frequency of visitation with children, and understand how to remediate CSEA enforcement actions that limit employment opportunities. Such workshops can be extremely informative and can help non-custodial fathers overcome a deep sense of disillusionment with their inability to negotiate regular child support payments. The workshop provides answers to many questions about the who, what, where, when and how of child support.

Generally, CSEA workshops hold the potential to instill in fathers a newfound sense of autonomy to petition the enforcement agency to proactively adjust monthly support payments as well as the overall balance of child support. This can facilitate repairs in the co-parental relationship, allowing some men to have active involvement in their children’s lives. It also sets the stage for men to petition support of the court system for visitation rights or legal custody of their children.

Easing turbulent relations

Granted, some men may believe that the mother of their child is not deserving of economic support because support payments are being misused, as in not supporting the needs and overall well-being of the child.⁷ Men who are not on good terms with their ex-spouse or ex-partner may be particularly sensitive about having little to no decision-making influence over how support payments are spent, which can serve to inhibit support payments.⁸

If social turbulence characterizes the father’s interaction with the mother of his children, and in response the mother restricts the father’s opportunity for parental involvement, some men may be driven to spite the ex-spouse by refusing that person any bit of their earned income.⁹ This may reasonably intensify resentments in the co-parental relationship.

When this is the case, professionals can help men by incorporating the making of amends into their treatment plan. This can include working independently or joining an Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) or Narcotics Anonymous (NA) 12-Step fellowship and working conjointly with a sponsor on Step 4 (personal inventory), Step 9 (making amends) and Step 12 (principles over personalities).

The goal is to re-evaluate attitudes, feelings and behaviors, and to reframe past history with their children’s mother. The goal is for men to come to “a place of respect or at least acceptance of their child’s mother … to establish, or at least attempt to establish, a more cooperative partnership with her.”¹⁰

Conclusion

Back unpaid child support is a common recovery issue brought by men into substance abuse treatment. It can play a major role in whether a father is able to achieve a sense of optimism about honoring a commitment to remain in his child’s life, and hope at restoring a healthy loving relationship with his children. This may help men recover more fully.^11,12

Izaak L. Williams, a Moore Research Fellow, is an outpatient substance abuse counselor at Ho‘omau Ke Ola in Hawaii. His e-mail address is izaakw@hawaii.edu.

References

1. McMahon TJ, Giannini FD. Substance-abusing fathers in family court. Fam Court Review 2003;41:337-53.

2. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Results From the 2011 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Mental Health Findings. Rockville, Md.: SAMHSA; HHS Publication No. (SMA) 12-4725.

3. National Employment Law Project. The Low-Wage Recovery and Growing Inequality. Available at www.nelp.org

4. Maldonado S. Deadbeat or deadbroke: redefining child support for poor fathers. UC Davis L Rev 2005;39:991-1023.

5. Hanson TL, Garfinkel I, McLanahan SS, et al. Trends in child support outcomes. Demography 1996;33:483-96.

6. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. The TEDS Report: Substance Abuse Treatment Admissions That Were Labor Force Dropouts, May 26, 2011. Retrieved from www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k11/008/WEB_TEDS-008_LaborForceDropouts.htm

7. Furstenberg FF, Sherwood KE, Sullivan ML. Caring and Paying: What Fathers and Mothers Say About Child Support. New York City: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation; 1992.

8. Doherty WJ, Kouneski EF, Erickson MF. Responsible fathering: an overview and conceptual framework. J Marriage Fam 2008;60:277-92.

9. Amato PR, Meyers CE, Emery RE. Changes in nonresident father-child contact from 1976 to 2002. Fam Relations 2009;58:41-53.

10. Bryan M. The Prodigal Father: Reuniting Fathers and Their Children. New York City: Clarkson Potter; 1997.

11. Kerr DCR, Capaldi DM, Owen LD, et al. Changes in at-risk American men’s crime and substance use trajectories following fatherhood. J Marriage Fam 2011 Oct;73:1101-16.

12. Dudley JR. Increasing our understanding of divorced fathers who have infrequent contact with their children. Fam Relations 2001;40:279-85.