Child support: Can my father be forced to pay back-pay?

My father just found out that he has a 12 year old daughter. Now he is paying child support every month. Can he be forced to pay back-pay? If so why?

Yes. Because he hadn't contributed in all those years. Strange as it may sound, that is how the mob, er, the family court system operates. Guilty until proven guilty.

[tinkster44]

He can only be forced to pay back CS to the date of the filing thats all.

I'm from the Philippines..I have a kid who's turning 8 yrs old this year. His dad is employed but he's not giving support for my kid. We have talked about this a couple of times already. We always agree that we're going to share on our kids expences. But he is not doing his part. Is there a possible way that the child support would be automatically deducted from his salary?

Originally Posted by tinkster44 He can only be forced to pay back CS to the date of the filing thats all.

Not necessarily. If the mom asks for retro, then it will go all the way back to when the child was born.

Did you hear about Brian McKnight? Even though he didn't even take a paternity test, he's been hit with a whopping amount of back child support because a judge recently ruled he IS the father to some woman's 14 year old child.

Google it. You're wrong about it going back only as far as the filing of the petition.

[abauchmoyer]

It depends on the state. Some states will allow back pay and others will not. In ohio for example, there is no back pay. The orders are effective the hearing day. (not even the date filed) For example I filed for support in Feb. we went for the hearing in June. He was ordered to pay a pro-rated amount for the rest of June and the full monthly amount as of 1July.

Originally Posted by abauchmoyer It depends on the state. Some states will allow back pay and others will not. In ohio for example, there is no back pay. The orders are effective the hearing day. (not even the date filed) For example I filed for support in Feb. we went for the hearing in June. He was ordered to pay a pro-rated amount for the rest of June and the full monthly amount as of 1July.

Thats the way it should be. If a woman waits forever to go after child support then she should only be allowed it from the moment of the court case. If she wanted it early on, she would have applied for it then.

Why is it some women think "Oh gee, I can wait until you are 15 and collect 15 years worth of child support. Then I can get me a new car, maybe a new house because that is lots of money." GRRRRRRRRRRRR
This is the very reason that if you don't apply when the kid is young, I honestly don't think you should be entitled to back pay.

To the previous poster: You've been going around these threads lately spewing your bitter opinion on child support. These are only your own sour opinions and have nothing to do with the legality of it. If you cannot offer advice based on legal structure without emotionally opining, it's best not to post at all.

The reason Abauchmoyer didn't receive retro pay was because she obviously didn't ask for it. Judges can't read minds. Custodial parents can ask for retro child support, and they frequently receive it.

[tinkster44]

Originally Posted by Unregistered Not necessarily. If the mom asks for retro, then it will go all the way back to when the child was born. Did you hear about Brian McKnight? Even though he didn't even take a paternity test, he's been hit with a whopping amount of back child support because a judge recently ruled he IS the father to some woman's 14 year old child. Google it. You're wrong about it going back only as far as the filing of the petition.

No, you are wrong. Since the OP did not give their state I cannot look up the specifics for their state but almost all states its the date of filing. that way no one is nailed for cs for years and years, thats just plain silly.

[tinkster44]

Originally Posted by Unregistered Not necessarily. If the mom asks for retro, then it will go all the way back to when the child was born. Did you hear about Brian McKnight? Even though he didn't even take a paternity test, he's been hit with a whopping amount of back child support because a judge recently ruled he IS the father to some woman's 14 year old child. Google it. You're wrong about it going back only as far as the filing of the petition.

It was Florida, and here is the FL statute, plus, He was in DEFAULT that is one reason and probably the only reason he got socked with all that support, IF the story is even true.
17) In an initial determination of child support, whether in a paternity action, dissolution of marriage action, or petition for support during the marriage, the court has discretion to award child support retroactive to the date when the parents did not reside together in the same household with the child, not to exceed a period of 24 months preceding the filing of the petition, regardless of whether that date precedes the filing of the petition. In determining the retroactive award in such cases, the court shall consider the following:
(a) The court shall apply the guidelines in effect at the time of the hearing subject to the obligor's demonstration of his or her actual income, as defined by subsection (2), during the retroactive period. Failure of the obligor to so demonstrate shall result in the court using the obligor's income at the time of the hearing in computing child support for the retroactive period.
(b) All actual payments made by the noncustodial parent to the custodial parent or the child or third parties for the benefit of the child throughout the proposed retroactive period.
(c) The court should consider an installment payment plan for the payment of retroactive child support. [FONT=Verdana][SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE][/FONT]