The Rural Voice, 1998-02, Page 17111111-1
of a vial period after which a firm
commitment will be given to the
change of residence. This will make
for a smoother transition and allow the
child to calculate whether in fact it
would not be better to stay with the
parent and work out their differences.
When there has been a change in
residency and/or custody of a child,
there is also a corresponding change in
child support. When residency of a
child changes, the parent who was pay-
ing child support to the other parent
for a child will no longer be obliged to
pay support to that parent for that child
except in unusual circumstances.
However, the previous custodial parent
will now have an obligation to support
the child no longer in his or her
custody, so from going to being a
receiver of support to a payor of
support can be a very substantial
financial difficulty for the custodial
parent. In fact, one of the reasons that
custodial parents resist change in
custody or residence of a child is the
effect of that change upon the child
support. If the custodial parent has two
children, the change of one child will
mean that there is now according to
the child support guidelines "split
custody", each parent having a child.
If each parent has an equal income,
then there would be no Child support
paid between the parents since the one
parent's obligation to pay for the child
in the other parent's custody would be
off -set totally by the other parent's
obligation to pay to the other parent.
However, if there is a significant
difference between the two parents'
incomes, then the change of custody
could still mean that the former paying
parent would still continue to pay but a
reduced amount even though he or she
now has a child. This is because the
parent's obligation to pay support and
the quantum of it is based upon the
income earned by that parent.
For instance, supposing the non-
custodial parent had income of
$40,000, then in accordance with the
Guidelines he or she would have been
paying $570 per month for the two
children in the other parent's care. But
as soon as one of the children goes to
live with the access parent, the
custodial parent has an obligation to
pay for that child based upon his/her
income. If that income is, say, $20,000
then he or she would be paying to the
Agrilaw
other parent $163 for the child, and the
new custodial parent would have to
pay $345 for the child with the other
parent based upon a $40,000 income.
The difference between the two would
become the new amount that the
higher income earner would be paying
to the lower income eamer, namely
$182 per month, even though they
both have one child each.0
Agrilaw is a syndicated column
produced by the full service London
law firm Cohen llighley Vogel &
Dawson. Michael E. McGarry is a
partner in the firm and practises in the
area of family law. Agrilaw is intended
to provide information to farmers on
subjects of interest and importance.
The opinions expressed are not
intended as legal advice. Before acting
on any information contained in
Agrilaw, readers should obtain legal
advice with respect to their own
particular circumstances.
Ill
11 HEM
FARM AUTOMATION SPECIALISTS
H. NICHOLSON
& SON
CONTRACTING
• PIPELINES • COOLERS
• PARLORS • AUTOMATION
• SERVICE ALL MAKES •
Complete professional sales and service of:
feeding, milking, manure handling equipment,
livestock stabling, farm and industrial supplies
✓AO- AgrIMetal
VENT
er
VALn1ETALI
H ULE
(519) 934-2343
Fax: 934-3179
RR #2, Tara, Ont. NOH 2N0
Ben & Sheri Rier - Owners
Bob Nicholson - Sales
Ernie Schopf - Sales
FEBRUARY 1998 13