| Revision as of 10:53, 25 October 2007 editRogerfgay (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,359 edits Undid revision 166952747 by DanielEng (talk)← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 12:04, 27 October 2007 edit undoFisherQueen (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users57,545 edits Sorry; I didn't see that you were closing the AfD. Carry on. | ||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| {{Expand|date=October 2007}} | |||
| Seed of a concept: | |||
| (Note: This stub article should evolve differently than ]) | |||
| I believe that an article is needed to provide a broad overview of the issues involved in child support policy. Many pages exist that provide information about policy implementations in particular countries. | |||
| North American child support law was based on traditional British common law practice up until 1990. Federal reforms in the US from 1975, 1984, and finally 1988 changed all that (1990 the year of first non-British common law type implementation). This was a fundamental change that completely swapped out the British common law approach for one based on the Soviet model (well documented and currently being discussed much on talk radio). People interested in the topic held their breath awaiting constitutional rulings on the reforms. In 1993, in P.O.P.S. V Gardner, a federal appeals court accepted the reforms by reclassifying family issues as "social policy" (it was private issue law with a high degree of constitutional protection). "Social policy" does not have the constitutional protections that relate back to British common law and the classic liberal relationship between the individual and the state. An example of social policy is the setting of welfare entitlements. Recipients have no rights other than equal treatment under law. It was this fundamental change that also led to rulings by state courts on same-sex marriage. Once the constitutional requirement became "equal treatment" on ONLY equal treatment, some state courts found it necessary to treat same-sex couples equally in their desire to marry. Other countries used in the current article here followed suit. | |||
| == web references == | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| == Other references: == | |||
| * Braver, Sanford L., and Diane O'Connell (1998). Divorced Dads: Shattering the Myths. Penguin Putnam, Inc. | |||
| * Baskerville, Stephen (2007). Taken into Custody, the War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family. Cumberland House, Tennessee. | |||
| * RSFSR (1969) Article 68 of the Russian Soviet Family code established July 30, 1969; one quarter of earnings for one child, one third for two, and one half for three or more (modified by Code No. 223-FZ of December 29, 1995; see RFFLC, 1995) | |||
| * RFFLC (1995) Article 81 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation No. 223-FZ of December 29, 1995 (still applies a percent-of-income formula, see RSFSR, 1969) | |||
| {{Website-stub}} | |||
Latest revision as of 12:04, 27 October 2007
Redirect to: