Child Support and the “Nurturing Parent” Doctrine in Pennsylvania

The question of earning capacity and whether a parent should be obligated to earn money outside the house often arises in child support cases in Pennsylvania. The courts need to consider the economic necessities of the children against the difficulties involved in taking care of the children, especially if there is a parent who has been taking care of the children in the past. In this article, we’ll discuss a leading case on the topic where the court had to consider whether a stay-at-home parent looking after several young children could be considered for imputing income for child support.

Background of the case 

In the aforementioned case, the couple got divorced following a long marriage where the wife was mainly at home looking after the four kids. The husband had been making much more money compared to the wife, who was taking care of the domestic needs of the family.

However, when the parties sought a divorce, there were issues regarding child support and earning capacity of the wife. The husband believed that it was necessary to assign earning capacity to the wife because she could find work outside of the home. On the other hand, the wife stated that she did not have to look for employment while caring for their children, including a child below the age of schooling.

The trial court agreed with the wife and considered Pennsylvania’s nurturing parent doctrine. This is a law where it is presumed that the parent taking care of their children, despite staying at home, makes some contribution to the child’s support. In essence, the court concluded that the earning capacity of the wife was zero at the moment.

The husband appealed.

The appeal

The Pennsylvania Superior Court upheld the trial court’s decision in relation to the wife’s earning ability on appeal. It stated that the doctrine of the nurturing parent continues to be a relevant factor in cases involving child support for young children and caregivers.

The Superior Court pointed out that several considerations should be taken into account before determining whether a stay-at-home parent should be employed. Such considerations include the age of the children, availability of childcare services, financial condition, and arrangement of the parties’ family life during the marriage.

In the case at hand, the court found that the parties made the joint decision to let the wife stay home and take care of the children during their marriage. Furthermore, the youngest child had yet to attend school full-time, which meant that it was rational for the wife to be the primary caregiver.

Finally, the Superior Court analyzed clauses in the parties’ agreement that aimed at precluding any future claims of child support. It ruled that such agreements were invalid because parents cannot barter away their children’s rights to receive appropriate support.

Talk to a Philadelphia, PA, Child Custody Lawyer Today 

The Law Offices of Lauren H. Kane represent the interests of Philadelphia residents who need to establish child support. Call our Philadelphia family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/superior-court/2007/a13031-07.html