Romney’s “Parental Responsibility Bill” Would Damage Children
       Governor Romney’s ‘Parental Responsibility Bill’ that was debated yesterday on Beacon Hill would damage children by impoverishing their fathers who already have to deal with the nation’s most expensive child-support requirements MassNews has found.
       The bill calls for fathers, who have children receiving MassHealth, to pay up to 5% of their gross income per child to reimburse the state for the cost of the healthcare plan. This would be in addition to the child support they already pay, as well as the state’s Medicaid contribution which is already being deducted from their paychecks to pay for the program.
       Romney’s bill also empowers the state’s Department of Revenue, rather than the Family and Probate Court, to determine the costs of supporting a child and how much a father can “afford”. Because the Dept. of Revenue itself receives federal reimbursement based upon the amount of child support it collects, it has a vested interest in higher levies and cannot be considered a neutral administrative decision-maker regarding child support issues.
       If a father has a second family, this could create significant hardship for that family. “Effective health care reform cannot be accomplished by providing for some kids while ignoring or impoverishing others”, says Dan Hogan, Fathers & Families Executive Director.
       Furthermore, the proposal also fails to provide a reasonable assurance that the person the state duns for money is actually the real father. In fact, 25-30% of paternity DNA tests prove that the putative father is not the actual father. Yet, the Romney Administration’s current efforts to ensure that the correct person has been identified are woefully inadequate, despite relatively simple and inexpensive procedures to prevent mistakes.
       The ultimate result of the bill will be that Massachusetts will have more dads who end up in arrears in their child support payments because they cannot afford to pay this added tax burden. This will make fugitives of many dads, driving them out of the lives of their families.
       Although the bill talks about “non-custodial parents,” everyone knows that phrase includes almost no one except fathers. It is a very rare case where a father has custody and is also receiving support money from the mother, although there are some. In that case, it might be that the child is in danger of losing the companionship of its mother. Almost everyone agrees today that every child needs the support of both a mother and a father.
       House members voted yesterday to send the bill to study and it is unclear whether it will come up for a full vote this legislative session, or have to wait until next year to be reintroduced.