A Biological Father
A biological father who had sexual intercourse with the child mother once without a fundamental relationship is supposed to pay child support for the child. Child support is chiefly guided by the notion that parents are legally obligated to support financially their child. According to the constitution a parent is defined as the natural and lawful mother or father of a child whereas a father is ascertained to be a male person recognized by law as a parent of a child. However, the definition also accommodates adoptive parents as legal and lawful parents of a child. A natural parent merely means a biological parent of a child (Alston, Parker & Seymour, 1992).
In the case it is obvious that despite the nonexistence of a relationship between the father and mother of the child it is quite definite that the father is the natural parent of the child. This simply means that as a natural and biological parent of the child, according to Title 18 cap 228 of the United States’ constitution the father is mandated to support the child financially (Alston, Parker & Seymour, 1992). The financial support of the child is to guarantee that the child meets all fundamental needs ascertained in the rights of a person such as food, shelter, clothing and education. A failure by the natural and biological parent to financially support the child will attract legal action under the “Failure to remunerate legal child support,” affirmed in the Title 18. Lack of a relationship between the father and mother plays a minimal role on the child support obligations. This is primarily because child support is based on the interests of the child and neither of the father nor mother. Nonetheless, the courts have the responsibility of making sure that it balances the pressure between the capability of the father meeting his other financial obligations and those of child support.
A Same Sex Partner
A same sex partner who is not a biological, natural or adoptive parent to a child but had a long term emotional relationship with the child and mother is not entitled to legal child support after the same sex couple splits up. It is observable that there exists no legal association between the child and the same sex partner to the mother. Wardle & Nolan, (2011), acknowledge that for a person to meet child support obligation it is pivotal that a legal binding relationship exists between the two. The legal associations recognized by the law are a natural or biological parent and an adoptive parent. This simply means that a long term emotional relationship or association is not a factor that is predominantly considered in the family courts. A compelling instance can be a close relative to a child who shares a strong and long term relationship is not entitled to child support of the child. The child support in this case entirely is assumed to the biological parent of the child in the same sex relationship after the split of the two parents. However, the case may change if the same sex parents adopted the child when the couple came together. This is merely because a legal association in terms of adoptive parents would have been created by the couple towards the child. In this case the other same sex parents is legally bound to meet the financially requirements of child support.
Child Support Based on Biological, Legal and Social Relationship
Child support ought to be founded on the biological, legal and social relationship between a child and an adult. Based on the legal and social relationship, child support is well factored for to guarantee that in the course of a bitter disagreements and separation the child can still enjoy the financial support of both parents. Basing child support on biological, legal and social relationship is pivotal because of the following reasons.
Alston, Parker & Seymour, (1992), aver that in terms of an acrimonious and rancorous separation between two parents the law still provides strong foundation for the child obligations by the two separated parents. A compelling instance is a case of two same sex parents having a child where one parent was a donor and the other a surrogate. Title 18 on child support undoubtedly stipulates the parts to be played by the two mothers of the child. While the egg donor parent may assume the custody of the child it is apparent that the surrogate mother also has obligations to the child. This can be denoted from the social association in terms of surrogating the egg. The surrogate mother will be liable to financially upkeep of the child because she is a natural part of parenthood to the child. This is accredited to the fact that she is a parent to the child in terms of the mutual agreement between the biological mother and herself. Moreover, the court may assume the surrogate mother as an adoptive parent because of role in the child development (Wardle & Nolan, 2011).
Second, it is fundamentally sound for child support to be based on biological, social and legal relationship between a child and an adult merely because the basis puts the interests of the child prior to the interests of the parents. Biological, legal and social relationship basis of child support acknowledges the needs of the child at the expense of the adult needs. This is merely because the child has essential needs that cannot be satisfied without the help of the parents. A convincing case is when a conception of the child is in vitro whereas the resulting embryo is implanted in the mother contrary to the will of the father which results to splitting up of the couple. In the case the father is entirely liable to child support despite the disagreement between the two parents. This is chiefly because the need of the child supersedes the disagreement between the parents.
Trattner, (2007), concludes that according to Title 18, it is obvious that the father has a social relationship and responsibility to the child based on the biological association. In this case the mother maybe infertile but biological relationship between the father and child is obvious. This makes the father liable to child support. The legal basis of child support was purely fashioned to guarantee that needs of the child are addressed despite hostility flourishing between parents. This is merely because a failure to contribute to child support by a parent attracts punishment from the courts. The punishment can be in terms of forceful deductions from the parents’ earnings, punishment by a jail term or confiscate of property of the parent. The punishment is to deter parents from avoiding the social responsibility of child support. In addition, it is also noticeable that legal, biological and social relationship factors diverse and wide factors in guaranteeing that parents play their vital role of supporting the upkeep of their children.
Alston, P., Parker, S. & Seymour, J. (1992). Children, Rights, and the Law. Oxford University Press.
Trattner, W. (2007). From Poor Law to Welfare State, 6th Edition: A History of Social Welfare in America. Simon and Schuster.
Wardle, L. & Nolan, L. (2011). Family Law in the USA. Kluwer Law International.