Child Support, Not Just for Dad’s Anymore

More Women Paying Child Support

At one time in the Family Court system, you would have been hard-pressed to find a father with custody of their children after a divorce. It was almost a carte blanche fact that women, mothers, would end up with custody of the children in any divorce situation. In fact, if a woman didn’t end up with custody, there had to be something drastically wrong with the home environment; because judges loathed taking children from their mothers.

Like everything however, situations and criteria change over the years, and with more women than ever now having to enter the work force along-side their male companions, they are not necessarily the automatic choice anymore for custodial parent of the minor children.

In a sad and ironic twist, women, who entered the work force initially to help support their families when it became obvious that two incomes were needed often just for basic survival, have now eliminated themselves as sole custody winners in the battles for their children by this very behavior.

In the past, it was understood that a man would leave the house, often early in the morning, to work all day, and return late at night. This left him very little time to be available for the child. With the advances of women into careers and the workforce, more and more children were seeing daycare personnel more than they saw their own parents even while their parents were married. Judge’s consider this time constraint now when deciding which parent will have custody of the children.

Additional considerations are also made for the basic criteria of healthy home environment, and financial ability to support the children; though time available to devote to the child’s care has become a major factor in most custody decisions, forcing women to re-evaluate their roles as matriarch of their families and very often having no choice as to be allowed the luxury of choosing their children over their careers, means they no longer can support them financially anyway.

If you are entering into a divorce or custody situation with your spouse or partner, contact Aggressive Legal Services for advice and an appointment.

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

‘Best Interest of the Child’ Still the Golden Rule

Child Custody Issues

The misconception that a child over the age of 14 will be able to tell the court which parent they want to live is an unsupported rumor for the most part. Family Court Judges uphold the tenet that the child will be placed with the parent who is most able, capable, and willing, to provide the most solid foundation and healthy home environment for the child.

Older children may be allowed to have a share in the discussion, and voice their preferences, however, ultimately, the decision will rest in the hands of the court, and the applicable guidelines will be followed in terms of financial ability, as well as whether the custodial parent will be available for the child at regular intervals of time.

Factors under consideration in determining where the best placement for any child involved in custody matters will be remain the stability of the home environment, the relationship the child has with each parent, any set routines or practices that are upheld within the child’s environment, living conditions, parental fitness, and then, perhaps, the preferences of the child.

Although the age of the child does not matter in some cases, as a judge may consider a younger child more mature and therefor their request would carry more weight in deciding where they are placed.

Likewise, judges will consider the child’s motivation for requesting placement with a particular parent. Have they been promised rewards for requesting to live with the parent? Is there a situation where the child perceives the parent as unable to care for themselves and needing their help? In particular, with teenagers, judges are concerned with the level of supervision in the home, as many children at this age are looking for the environment with the least supervision; something the judge will be wanting to oppose in their decision.

There is no cut and dry standard for deciding custody and placement issues of minor children. Each case is treated individually and handled according to the circumstances and situations that present themselves.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Lower Interest Rate on Child Support in MA

Child Support Issues

A current decision mandated by Massachusetts lawmakers reduces the interest and penalties on any support arrears owed by non-custodial parents by 50 percent, the article below states.

A unique study performed by the Urban Institute recently discovered that in states where there is no interest or penalty for late payments, support payments increased by six times, compared to those states who do impose penalties showing an increase in arrears instead.
The full release follows below.

Massachusetts' Interest Rate on Late Child Support Reduced 50 Percent

After advocacy from fathers' and family organizations, the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) is reducing the interest rate for past-due child support by 50 percent. The modification decision was made after a DOR Hearing on Reducing Interest on Overdue Child Support.

At the hearing, members of Fathers and Families, an organization that seeks family court reform to support equal rights and responsibilities for mothers and fathers, presented personal stories and empirical information on the negative effects of interest charges on past-due child support.
Challenging Child Support Interest Rates

One Fathers and Families member, John Natale, questioned why the interest rate was so high when he could refinance his mortgage at 4.65 percent. Another member, Chris Jenson, related that he once fell behind on child support by $375. After making the overdue $375 payment, he still owed $1,240 in interest and penalties, which is more than three times the amount he originally owed.

Hearing attendees also presented information on child support arrearages in states that do and do not charge interest on past-due child support. A 2007 study from the Urban Institute found that arrears in states that did not charge interest on late child support increased by six times from 1987 to 2006. In the same time period, arrears in states that did charge interest increased tenfold. This study demonstrates that charging interest on past-due child support does not reduce arrearages.

A Poverty Problem

The Urban Institute also found that arrearages often exist because the paying parent is in poverty. The organization's investigation revealed that 70 percent of all people in arrears on child support earn less than $10,000 a year. In the current economic downturn with high unemployment rates, it is challenging for some people to make child support payments; adding penalties and charging high interest rates makes it even more difficult.

The lowered interest rate on overdue child support in Massachusetts will help parents pay and catch up on child support. If you have questions about child support or how the interest rate change may affect you, contact a child support attorney in your area.

Copyright at Massachusetts Family Law Group

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Domestic Assault and Domestic Violence Need Attention

Domestic Assault Issues

Domestic assault can have serious and far reaching effects on families of all types, and from all backgrounds of society. The damaging influence of being a member of a family where there is a standard set for violence in the home, is felt throughout life in the form of an inability to manage one's own affairs, fear of relationships and commitment, and the potential to become a violent transgressor in deference to either a parent or sibling who set the example when you were younger.

Many times domestic assault arises because of a simple lack of communication in the home, and a misunderstanding of how to handle and direct anger when it is felt as an emotion. A clearer understanding and some key tools for handling anger are typically a good start to helping heal the family unit, and eventually helping to reunite the members into a more healthy environment shared together.

There are situations however, where domestic assault is a result of drug or alcohol abuse and the violent behavior that often accompanies their use. If this is the situation, seek immediate intervention for yourself and any children that share the home with you in the form of drug or alcohol counseling, family support, or detoxification programs to help you put your life back together, and protect your loved ones from any harm that you may do to them and later regret.

It is only too easy to lose your temper and cause serious, irreparable harm to the people you love in a moment of heated temper or aggression. Husbands and wives have died, harmed their children, and themselves, only to calm down later and be crushed and devastated by their actions against their loved ones. There is no other way to combat domestic violence than by opening yourself to counseling for the issues that are driving you to behave violently in the first place.

If you are brought before the court on criminal charges for domestic assault, you will not only be sentenced to jail time in most instances, but will also be required to attend to the issues beneath the aggression and anger and seek help for yourself. Don't wait until you need the services of a criminal defense attorney to preserve your right to freedom, if you are prone to domestic violence, seek help immediately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Criminal Defense Attorney and Criminal Defendant Rights

The role of Padilla v. Kentucky continues to be a pertinent decision making tool in any discussion about the rights of criminal defendants within our criminal justice system. The following article speaks to the repercussions of this landmark decision.

Padilla v. Kentucky and the Role of Criminal Defense Representation

May 3, 2011

Since the U.S. Supreme court decided Padilla v. Kentucky in early 2010, the role of criminal defense representation related to counseling clients about the broader consequences of criminal convictions has been under scrutiny.

Since the U.S. Supreme court decided Padilla v. Kentucky in early 2010, the role of criminal defense representation related to counseling clients about the broader consequences of criminal convictions has been under scrutiny. The American Bar Association (ABA) used Padilla as a starting point to form a task force in late 2010 to study the impact of the case.

While the outcome of the study could directly affect how current and past criminal cases are handled, the main practice consideration for criminal defense attorneys, particularly in New York, is to understand and explain conviction consequences more fully to their clients.

Padilla v. Kentucky

In Padilla, the Court found that a criminal defense attorney exhibited "constitutionally deficient" representation when he did not counsel a non-citizen client about the deportation consequences of a guilty plea.

Jose Padilla resided in the United States as a legal permanent resident for more than 40 years. He was even a recognized Vietnam War veteran. Padilla was charged with transporting marijuana in Kentucky, which put himself at risk for deportation because he was not a citizen. Padilla's lawyer advised him to enter a guilty plea under the assumption that his many years living in the U.S. would offset his immigrant status. Immediately following his guilty plea, Padilla was ordered to be deported.

Padilla claimed during his post-conviction hearing, which is where a defendant asks to have a conviction overturned, that his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel was violated because of his attorney's advice was incorrect.

Although the Kentucky Court of Appeals sided with Padilla, the Kentucky Supreme Court denied Padilla's request to set aside his guilty plea. They stated that the Sixth Amendment "does not protect defendants from erroneous deportation advice because deportation is merely a 'collateral' consequence of a conviction." The U.S. Supreme Court, however, decided in favor of Padilla. The Court held that criminal defense attorneys must advise their clients when a criminal plea bears a risk of deportation, because of the seriousness of this consequence due to pleading guilty to a criminal charge.

Padilla's conviction was therefore overturned because his lawyer did not inform him about the likelihood of deportation after pleading guilty. This advice was deemed ineffective, which did infringe on Padilla's Sixth Amendment rights.

Since the opinion was published in March of 2010, the case has been cited in other criminal convictions where guilty pleas, even by U.S. citizens, resulted in negative consequences like termination of employment, loss of child custody, removal from housing and as evidence in civil lawsuits. This shows that while the Padilla ruling specifically addresses lawyers representing immigrant clients in criminal proceedings, the case has had a wider impact on criminal defense representation and expectations as a whole.

ABA Task Force

In December of 2010, the ABA's criminal justice section formed a task force to study the impact of Padilla v. Kentucky and related rulings on the practice of criminal defense. The task force will not only focus on the client advising obligations the Padilla case places on criminal defense attorneys, but it will also address how lawyers can achieve the broader role and responsibilities now expected of them.

The ABA criminal section chair, and member of the task force, is law school professor Bruce Green, who stated in an interview with the New York Law Journal that "Padilla raised the level of consciousness. It has reminded lawyers that they must learn about, and advise clients about, the impact of a guilty plea on their immigration status and in other significant ways beyond sentencing."

Green also indicated that the group has gathered significant data on criminal cases that resulted in specific consequences directly related to a plea or conviction.

The task force will continue to analyze what further assistance lawyers can give to advise clients about any possible consequences, but in the meantime Green thinks that "Criminal defense lawyers might help by broadening the scope of their representation beyond the criminal case or by making referrals to, and collaborating with, other professionals. The task force will study how lawyers and their offices address these situations, often in the face of time and resource limitations."

Practice Considerations

Specifically in New York, the Padilla v. Kentucky decision has increased the number of requests to overturn convictions and apply Padilla retroactively because of insufficient legal advice about entering guilty pleas and immigration consequences. It has also caused both prosecutors and defense attorneys to offer up and seek out more options and information about what a particular conviction may do to a non-citizen living and working in the U.S.

While Padilla has had a direct impact on practicing criminal defense in New York, it is unknown whether the results of the task force will be as profound. The main outcome may be that defense lawyers should advise clients about any legal or non-legal consequences, such as termination of public housing, when entering a guilty plea, which is a notion that has not yet been applied in a New York court.

For criminal defense attorneys, the most important lesson both Padilla and the ABA task force teaches is that defense lawyers need to understand their clients' situations and be willing to fully explain the consequences of any pleas or convictions before they are entered. If you were recently charged with a crime and are either a U.S. citizen or non-citizen in New York, contact an experienced New York criminal defense attorney with immigration knowledge to advise you about all possible consequences and handle your case properly from the start.

Article provided by Mark J. Sacco

Visit us at www.mjsacco.com
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.