Argumentative Essay: TANF And Child Support
TANF and Child Support
The topic of child support and how the funds are allocated can become a very debatable topic. The way child support works in most states is that if the custodial parent (the parent the child lives with) receives Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) the child support paid by the non-custodial parent goes towards paying the state back. Some feel that the state should not try to recoup the money. Others feel that by the state taking the child support payments, it takes away from the custodial parent and still leaves the single parent with the burden to take care of the child alone. I disagree with this argument. I feel that the state should be paid back for TANF benefits awarded and garnishing child support payments may be the easiest way to receive payment.
TANF should be used as a temporary assistance. The program only allows up to 5 years of assistance within a lifetime. You can look at it as the program taking the place of the absent parent. According to TANF website …show more content…
In cases like the examples listed above, the custodial parent and child are not only receiving TANF but also a portion of the child support payment. It’s not taking anything from the family it is actually providing more assistance. The system cannot continue to run if we keep allowing people to receive assistance and not pay any portion of it back when the start to receive a supplemental income.
I can understand why people feel that the custodial parent should receive the full child support payment. The state system was designed those who are in need of assistance. If a parent was/is receiving benefits and start to receive child support, the state should recoup their money. If people would like to continue to have a program the offers assistance, measures such as these (repaying the state through child support) must remain in
The topic of child support and how the funds are allocated can become a very debatable topic. The way child support works in most states is that if the custodial parent (the parent the child lives with) receives Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) the child support paid by the non-custodial parent goes towards paying the state back. Some feel that the state should not try to recoup the money. Others feel that by the state taking the child support payments, it takes away from the custodial parent and still leaves the single parent with the burden to take care of the child alone. I disagree with this argument. I feel that the state should be paid back for TANF benefits awarded and garnishing child support payments may be the easiest way to receive payment.
TANF should be used as a temporary assistance. The program only allows up to 5 years of assistance within a lifetime. You can look at it as the program taking the place of the absent parent. According to TANF website …show more content…
In cases like the examples listed above, the custodial parent and child are not only receiving TANF but also a portion of the child support payment. It’s not taking anything from the family it is actually providing more assistance. The system cannot continue to run if we keep allowing people to receive assistance and not pay any portion of it back when the start to receive a supplemental income.
I can understand why people feel that the custodial parent should receive the full child support payment. The state system was designed those who are in need of assistance. If a parent was/is receiving benefits and start to receive child support, the state should recoup their money. If people would like to continue to have a program the offers assistance, measures such as these (repaying the state through child support) must remain in