Family Lawyer

Vol. 7, No. 2 {Fall 2002}

A semiannual newsletter designed to provide legal information that family counselors and therapists can use to help their patients.

Child Support

This past June, the Court ruled that when it awards child support, it will consider a custodial parent’s request for additional nonessential items that benefit the child directly and benefit the custodial parent incidentally. Nonessential items may include the costs of maintaining a home: repairs, long-term maintenance, capital improvements, the upgrading of cars, furniture, and even replacing a washer and dryer.
The facts of the specific case (Loro v. Del Colliano) were unique. Although the non-custodial father earned between $650,000 and $1,000,000 per year, he was ordered to pay only $700 per week ($36,400 per year) in child support. At the time of the divorce, the child had been 9 years old; now she was 16. In delivering its ruling, the Court stated that a child is entitled to appropriate furniture and personal items commensurate with her age and with the ability of the supporting parent to pay for such items.
In a second case (Isaacson v. Isaacson), also decided this year, the Court issued a similar ruling, stating that children are not only entitled to the bare necessities of life, but they should also benefit from a parent’s financial achievements. I believe that these cases will be responsible for a tremendous increase in post-judgment litigation

Guidelines for high-income cases
In high-income cases, the question invariably arises: How much of the child support benefits the custodial parent vs. the child? It is important to remember that the income of the high earner is not at issue. When parental income is such that the parent can always pay whatever the child support many be, the issue becomes: What are the reasonable needs for the specific child or children? Would reasonable needs for a privileged child include a swimming pool, a nanny, a cell phone, a computer, golf lessons, tickets to events? What about a chauffeur?

Another wrinkle
A same-sex couple each had a child with the same sperm donor. After they broke up, they sued for visitation rights with each other’s child. The application was denied because a case that already existed--and granted visitation to same-sex couples--had not yet been filed when this case was originally filed! In other words, if this case came before the courts today, visitation would be granted. If anyone can see the logic in this, please let me know.

Conflicting roles
Practicing mental health professionals should avoid conflicting roles in forensic matters. According to the Practice Parameters for Child Custody Evaluation issued by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, “Performing a forensic evaluation expands and complicates the clinician’s familiar role of diagnosing and treating psychiatric illness and raises the important issues of competence and . . . ethics. It is extremely important for the clinician to understand the differences in roles and to keep these roles separate.”

Malpractice
It constitutes malpractice and a breach of contract for a forensic therapist to distribute her or his report before showing it to the client and the client’s attorney, or before receiving consent to distribute the report to the guardian ad litem or to the other side.

Report access
Under the Standards for Child Custody and Parenting Time Investigation Report that were published this past January, judges can no longer deny access to child custody and visitation reports by claiming that they are “confidential”.

The Family Lawyer is published semiannually by Pamela M. Cerruti, Esq., for mental health and social service professionals. This publication is intended to provide information to its readers. It is not intended to offer legal or professional advice. For more information, please contact: Pamela M.

Website: http://www.Cerruti-FamilyLaw.com