csr8512.htm

12-1985

CHILD SUPPORT REPORT

NEW LAW EXPEDITES ENFORCEMENT IN NEW YORK

This article is based on a talk given by Judge Richard D. Huttner, Administrative Judge, New York City Family Court, at a session on "Reducing Court Backlogs: The Expedited Process" held during the National Conference of State Legislatures National Conference on "Children in Poverty: the Effects on Nonsupport." The conference was held in Charleston, South Carolina, October 2-5, 1985. Judge Huttner was appointed to the bench in 1978, and was recently elected to the Supreme Court of the State of New York.

New omnibus child support legislation which became effective November 1 in New York provides comprehensive reform of child and spousal support enforcement--most especially through provisions for expedited procedures expanding the powers of hearing examiners, and automatic wage withholding--"income execution" actions--initiated by private attorneys and by support collection units.

Judge Richard D. Huttner, Administrative Judge of the New York City Family Court, praised the legislation in a presentation to those attending the National Conference of State Legislatures conference in Charleston.

He explained that, in New York State, petitions for support and paternity fall within the jurisdiction of the Family Court, and that in New York City with a population of over 7 million people, the Family Court handled over 35,000 support petitions in 1984.

"We expect as many support petitions in 1985 as in 1984," Judge Huttner said. "With 42 judges to hear these cases, as well as 100,000 other matters, an expedited procedure was a life and death matter."

"In the main the New York Support Enforcement Act of 1985 is a very good piece of legislation. It's good because the legislature consulted with the soldier in the trenches--the family court judge before enacting legislation," he said.

Judge Huttner served as a commissioner on the Governor's Child Support Commission, and in so doing he was able to express the needs of the judiciary. He feels that his participation on the commission helped in the enactment of legislation which sets forth procedures which synchronize with existing court operations.

In his talk Judge Huttner explained the new procedures and how they work to assure smooth and effective enforcement processes in New York.

Hearing Examiners

According to Judge Huttner, perhaps the most important innovation provided by the new legislation to expedite support orders is the expanded use of hearing examiners.

Previously, in support cases involving paternity issues, judges were required to make paternity findings prior to making an order of support. The vast majority of child support cases in the New York City Family Court involve unmarried parents. And, although 90 percent of those putative fathers who appear in court freely admit paternity, the judge was required by law to read the allocution to each of them, i.e., advise the alleged father of his legal rights.

The problem was that the putative father frequently did not understand the allocution. In fact, many times he did not speak English in which case an interpreter had to be called in before the allocution could be repeated.

The new legislation provides for the use of a written acknowledgment of paternity printed bilingually in Spanish and in English. The putative father can execute the form at the local child support or social service office where the agency worker explains the content of the form--the legal implications and his rights. The putative father is given a copy to take with him to examine. If he signs the acknowledgement, he waives his right to a court hearing on the paternity issue. This obviates the time-consuming allocution and, the respondent is better informed as to his rights than he would have been had he received an allocution in the tense atmosphere of the courtroom.

Judges no longer have to deal with any respondents who have executed an acknowledgment. Under the new law these cases are presented directly to a hearing examiner who approves the paternity petition and issues a filiation order and an order of support if appropriate. If no objections are filed, the hearing examiner's order automatically becomes an order of the court in 30 days. In New York City neither party need appear in court once paternity is acknowledged and a support agreement is signed. A petition for approval of the acknowledgment of paternity and the support agreement is submitted to the court for review and issuance of the appropriate orders.

During those 30 days no stays can be issued and support must be paid if ordered. This procedure is a tremendous saving of judicial time considering that 90 percent of all paternity and support petitions need not ever come before a judge because there is no contest.

Centralized Support Part

Judge Huttner has established a centralized support part to hear every welfare-related IV-D support case in the city.

One judge and eight or nine hearing examiners are assigned to this part exclusively. They do nothing but hear IV-D support matters unfettered by any other work of the court. This special attention to IV-D support cases results in a greater quantity and a better quality of support orders. Hearing examiners are appointed to 3-year terms and can be reappointed, thus assuring the court a continuity of expertise in support matters. Hearing examiners also hear private support cases.

Hearing examiners do not hear matters relating to custody or visitation, contested paternity, requests for orders of protection or for exclusive possession of the marital home. These must be heard exclusively by judges. Hearing examiners not only make orders of support, they can order an undertaking to assure payments are made, commit the respondent to jail upon confirmation by a judge, and order any relief a judge can to enforce the order. If the respondent defaults in appearing and it can be proven he was personally served with process, there are no second chances, no second requests: An order of support must be entered.

Before the new provisions, women were made to return to court 4 to 6 weeks after the initial hearing and during that time were without child support. Sometimes on the second return date a warrant of arrest was issued and no support would be forthcoming until the respondent was arrested and brought to court. Another major change in the statute is that a temporary order of support must be issued on the very first occasion the respondent appears.

This new procedure will insure that children are provided for irrespective of how long it takes to hear the case. Because of the caseload and requests for adjournments in New York, often hearings were adjourned for months without any support being provided.

Interestingly, if respondent is served but defaults, a hearing examiner must enter an order of support but a hearing examiner can't enter an order of filiation.

Income Deduction Orders

Another feature of the new child support legislation is the use of income deduction orders. Prior to the new legislation an enormous number of petitions were filed seeking enforcement of support orders. This took judicial time, clerical time and, most importantly, children were in the meantime being deprived of support. Almost every time the child's parents had a dispute, support was withheld or delayed or reduced as a punishment directed to the custodial parent by the non-custodial parent. Visitation was often withheld by the custodial parents as part of their strategy and tactics.

The courts heard the same parties time and time again. This is now a thing of the past. If a parent defaults three times in paying the full amount or on the due date, or accrues arrears in excess of 1month's support payment, an automatic income deduction order is issued. The court has no discretion in the matter: an income deduction order must be entered and this lien takes priority over any other lien placed on the parent's salary. It is expected that this will have a very positive effect on reducing the number of enforcement petitions filed and, more importantly, assure the timely and proper payment of child support.

Judicial Education

Judge Huttner emphasized the need for "informed and courageous" judges. "After many years on the bench, I've come to the conclusion that the most carefully drafted statute can be emasculated and its anticipated effect eroded if judges in their discretion decide to carve it up with exceptions," he said. "If judges aren't courageous . . . If judges aren't dispositive . . . no statute, however artfully drawn, will work."

"In my opinion, motivating the judges is the very first step to take in implementing any new legislation," Judge Huttner concluded. "Again, without their efforts, concern and cooperation, any legislation is rendered meaningless notwithstanding all the planning and management techniques employed."

To help insure that judges apply the statute as intended, a seminar was held for New York judges. (See article this issue.)

NEW YORK JUDICIAL EDUCATION

The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) conducted a one-day seminar for members of the New York City and State judiciary at Fordham University Lincoln Center School of Law on October 25. Experts on child support enforcement discussed issues addressing the seminar title question: Child Support Orders: Are They Worth the Paper They Are Printed On?

Recognizing that the plight of single-parent families is one of urgent concern, Professor Norma Winkler of the University of California at Santa Cruz, began the afternoon session with a discussion of the economic impact of child support.

The judge's perspective was given by Richard D. Huttner, Administrative Judge of the New York City Family Court. (See article this issue.) Judge Huttner emphasized the important role judges have in effective child support enforcement. He explained that the new legislation authorizing hearing examiners did much to relieve the overburdened judiciary, but in no way diminished the judges' influence and responsibility.

New York Legislation

A comprehensive Index to Child Support Laws compiled by the New York State Commission on Child Support in August 1985 was distributed during the session on new State legislation in New York. Nelson Weinstock, Deputy Commissioner for Operations in the New York State Department of Social Services, told about the increased collections New York City has achieved in the last 3 years. He said he believes the new legislation will speed up the support process, make enforcement routine, and equalize treatment for AFDC and non-AFDC clients.

Formulas

Robert G. Williams, Ph.D., National Center for State Courts (NCSC), explored the economic data, formulas and other factors involved in developing child support guidelines. Dr. Williams Authored the Institute for Court Management interim report, Development of Guidelines for Establishing and Updating Child Support Orders. (The study is funded by OCSE and is available from OCSE Reference Center).

Panel

The audience became so involved and interested in the presentations by a panel of New York State Family Court Judges--Michael A. Ambrosio, Karen Peters and Judith Sheindlin--as they examined approaches to effective enforcement,

that the discussions had to be halted due to lack of time. Joyce Sparrow, Esq., Executive Officer of the New York City Family Court, facilitated the lively session.

Dinner Speaker

The program ended with dinner speaker Stephen Goldsmith, Chairperson of the National District Attorneys Association Child Support Enforcement Committee, speaking on the topic, "Intergovernmental Cooperation on Child Support."

The seminar was organized by OCSE New York Regional Office, the State Commission on Child Support, and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.

STATE UPDATE

Barbara Paulin is director of the newly created Division of Child Support Enforcement in Delaware . . . New IV-D director for Illinois is James 1. Gottreich, Chief of Illinois Bureau of Child Support Enforcement, effective October New York Judicial Education 1 . . . And, in Wyoming, Jed White replaces Shirley Kingston who was transferred to the Attorney General's Office as Chief LegalCounsel for the child support program.

NONSUPPORT AND POVERTY ARE TOPICS AT CHARLESTON

Children still constitute 40 percent of all poor people despite the more effective child support laws States have enacted during the past few years, and dramatic improvements made in collections of past-due child support payments. In fact, 55 percent of all children in single-parent households live in poverty. And, of the 5 million mothers eligible for child support payments, only 49 percent received their full payment in 1983. These were the topics of the day at an OCSE-funded conference in South Carolina in October.

Over 225 persons attended the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) conference, entitled "Children in Poverty: The Effects of Non-Support" held in Charleston, South Carolina, on October 2-5, 1985. The conference was sponsored in part by the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement. State legislators and their staff comprised about 60 percent of those attending the meeting, representing 49 States, Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, and Guam.

The NCSL Child Support Enforcement Project organized the program to:

183 Increase awareness of the relationship of nonsupport and

children in poverty.

183 Highlight State efforts to strengthen child support laws

to comply with the Federal Child Support Enforcement

Amendments of 1984 (P.L. 98-378)

183 Share State experiences with other lawmakers and child

support professionals; and,

183 Explore new financing strategies for children's services.

Caucus Reviews

The twelve plenary sessions offered to participants focused on several aspects of child support such as enforcement techniques, expedited procedure, and custody and support. Each afternoon attendees gathered in group caucuses to review the day's program. For example, on the first afternoon, caucus members addressed legislative strategies for improving child support systems. On the second day, caucus members suggested financial systems or appropriation methods to help States support children's programs.

Two events, one at a lovely plantation outside Charleston and the other on board a ship which cruised Charleston harbor, providedconference members a relaxed background in which to continue sharing State examples of child support programs.

At plenary sessions, moderators pulled together the conference theme of poverty in children and how non-support aggravates the

problem.

Judy Mann, nationally syndicated columnist of the Washington Post, spoke at one of these sessions about poverty among single heads-of-household, and at another, Speaker Tom Loftus, Wisconsin House of Representatives, shared philosophical views on child support enforcement in Wisconsin.

The financial conference session on Saturday morning was spent discussing financing service delivery programs for children.

"Conference evaluations ranked the conference high in all areas including faculty presentations, materials, and overall quality," said Deborah Dale, Director of the NCSL Child Support Enforcement Project. "Letters sent by faculty and other conference attendees confirmed the evaluations that this was a successful conference."

NEW PROCEDURES MANUAL PROMOTES UNIFORMITY, EFFICIENCY

A new operations manual developed by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), under contract to the Cleveland, Ohio, Bureau of Support Enforcement, helps personnel streamline their case processing. Staff agree that a focus on written procedures is the key element.

New Federal legislation (P.L. 98-378, The Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984) leads courts to focus on procedures for enforcing child support obligations. Recognizing the need for effective case processing procedures in support enforcement matters, Administrative Director of the Ohio Courts Louis C. Damiani, and Thomas J. Roche, Court Administrator of the Department of Domestic Relations of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas (Cleveland), secured the assistance of the Northeastern Regional Office of the National Center for State Courts to produce an operations manual for the Bureau of Support. The manual completed in February 1985, serves both as a training tool for new personnel and as a reference guide for procedures.

This first version of the manual is descriptive, rather than prescriptive. According to users, its most important benefit is the opportunity it affords Bureau of Support personnel to view procedures objectively. The documentation set forth in the manual can thus serve as a basis for making future improvements. Moreover, as the court proceeds with automation, the manual can provide the basis for streamlining case processing and enforcement techniques.

Information in the operations manual is organized into three major sections, as are the activities of the Cleveland office: supportservices, cashiers, and parent location. The support services section contains all case processing procedures including motions, orders of support, use of referees, and enforcement measures--citations wage orders, and warrants. The cashiers section discusses processing of support payments--receipts, disbursements, financial records and auditing procedures. In the final section are procedures for processing parent location service requests--including identification of priority referrals, use of the Federal Parent Locator Service, and monthly report preparation.

Developing the Manual

The manual was developed by the National Center in close cooperation with Bureau of Support staff, by documenting procedures on site. Drafts of the manual were then reviewed by administrative staff and office supervisors in the Bureau of Support for comprehensiveness, legal accuracy and conformity with administrative policy.

The format of the manual permits questions on procedures to be answered quickly: procedures are presented in step-by-step fashion, annotated with explanatory notes, legal citations and authority references, and sample forms. A detailed index and glossary are supplied. The looseleaf format of the manual calls attention to its flexible nature. It's easy to keep the manual up-to-date with changed laws and to ensure that it reflects current, improved office procedures.

Statewide Manuals

The National Center has prepared similar manuals for clerks' offices on a statewide basis. These manuals encourage

uniformity in procedures, while allowing for variations in the court environment. Since the Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984 make it even more urgent that States use proven enforcement methods and develop new ways of improving effectiveness in handling cases, these manuals are especially valuable.

The methodology for preparing a statewide manual involves identify location of experienced key personnel who have a track record of streamlined office operations to serve on a working committee.

Interaction among these committee members at the several review sessions is vital to successful production of the manual. At these sessions staff justify the efficacy and appropriateness of proposed procedures before peers and National Center staff. Each procedure is evaluated by experienced critics who make any necessary adjustments before including the procedure in the manual. Statewide manuals, therefore, reflect no one jurisdiction but are rather a consolidation of the best known practices.

Assistance Offered

Further Information regarding the development of manuals for other locales may be obtained from the National Center for State Courts, 300 Newport Avenue Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-8798, or from any of the regional offices of the National Center for State Courts. Copies of the manual are available from the headquarters publications department. The National Center project director for the Cleveland manual, Lorraine Moore Adams, can be contacted at the Northeastern Regional Office, Beechwood Hill 11, 1545 Osgood Street, North Andover, Massachusetts 01845, (617) 687-0111.

VOLUNTEERS HELP HOUSTON CHILD SUPPORT OFFICE

Caseload up?

Workforce constant?

Your state-of-the-art computer system still a year away from coming on-line?

You've got a problem.

Have you considered using volunteers as a part of the solution?

The Houston office of the Texas Attorney General's Child Support Enforcement Division did just that. Beginning in November of 1984, volunteers have helped in a number of areas, and staff feel that their contributions have far exceeded expectations.

"Our dilemma was the classic one," says Anne Wheeler, Public Information Officer for the Houston office. "We had far more work than we had staff to do it."

But because she knew that a large number of people want to help the collection of child support, Anne decided to explore using volunteers.

"A desire to help is not enough, however. Volunteers have to be informed about the opportunity. And, to be effective, they have to be oriented, trained, supervised-- and given meaningful work. If volunteers are given only menial tasks that nobody else wants to do and that have no clear connection to the collection of child support, they won't come back," says Anne.

As a first step in starting the volunteer program, Anne went to the Volunteer Center of the Gulf Coast, the American Red Cross, and the Texas Department of Human Resources to find out how they handled their volunteers. Next she participated in a 1 day training session offered by the Department of Human Resources. There she developed, among other things, the format for an informational folder to be given to each volunteer. The folder contains a letterof welcome from Attorney General Jim Mattox, several brochures describing the various services offered by the Child Support Enforcement Division, and detailed job descriptions of the positions that the volunteers fill. The folder also contains a "Letter of Confidentiality" for each volunteer to sign indicating their understanding of the serious nature of the work they will be doing.

Once volunteers are oriented to the office, and are briefed on procedures for scheduling and signing in, they are ready to work. In the Houston office, volunteers perform such tasks as: sending delinquency letters, sending notification letters for court dates and pretrial conferences, filling out letters and documents required for the courts, running the copy machines, logging cases, and setting up new case file folders. Care is taken in matching skills to tasks: A law student helps with paralegal work, while someone with secretarial skills helps with correspondence.

Recruiting Volunteers

Although some men have come forward and given excellent service, most volunteers are women. Also, there is a high turnover rate when other activities arise that make demands on volunteers' time. Because of this, the program to advertise for and recruit volunteers is a continuing one.

Many communities have a Volunteer Center funded by the United Way. The Houston office finds this an excellent place to advertise. Many newspapers have a "volunteer section", and this too they find to be a good place to publicize their program. And, the old stand-by--a press release-- the Houston staff agreed was yet another fruitful way to get coverage about their program and its opportunities.

Express Appreciation

Once your program is underway, it is important to express your appreciation frequently. Appreciation "coffees" and other get-togethers are good ways to do this. "So are certifications of service," says Anne Wheeler. "Since many employees now give significant weight to volunteer experience among the factors they consider for making personnel decisions, letters of recommendation can also be of great value. It is important therefore that letters of recommendation accurately describe the nature of the work done, and the length of time the individual did it."

"The Texas Child Support Enforcement Division Houston Office has used between 12-15 volunteers a week for more than a year. One of their number has been hired permanently," she adds. "And, perhaps the best evidence of the success of the Houston program is the development of a statewide volunteer program modeled after the Houston experience."

NOTICE

The Social Security Division, Office of General Counsel, H.H.S., is interested in hiring an experienced attorney with knowledge of Federal law and regulations pertaining to the Child Support Enforcement Program, part IV-D of the Social Security Act. Familiarity with the requisites of P.L. 98-378, interstate wage withholding, the Federal tax refund intercept program, and performance based audit standards would be definitely advantageous.

All applicants must be willing to locate within commuting distance of Rockville, Maryland, at their own expense. Salary will be commensurate with ability and experience (range GS 11-13). Any interested persons should apply by sending a completed Form 171--Personal Qualifications Statement (available from a Federal office or Job Information Center), a resume, and a writing sample to: Office of General Counsel, Office of Child Support Enforcement, 6110 Executive Blvd., Rockville, Md. 20852. Applications must be received within 2 weeks of the date of publication of this announcement.