.
yes, it should be law
Absolutely not.
Unless there's reason to think the custodial parent is misappropriating the funds, no. If someone pays child support, that is their duty as a parent. The amount of child support someone pays is usually a lot less than the amount it takes to actually raise and support a child anyway.
Not all parents are responsible and take care of their children as they're supposed to, so yes, that is only fair to the payer for the payee to be accountable, just an old surfdogs opinion.
Hello JA:
No.
excon
no, not as long as the child or children in question are being properly housed, nourished, and educated in the manner they would have been had the relationship/marriage not been irretrievably broken. i would think the status of the children, concerning these things, would be obvious. if the children are suffering in any of these ways, of course the situation should be 'assessed'. in some cases, it may even show a need for a rise in child support provided by the non-custodial parent, if the other parent is struggling to make ends meet, while not misappropriating funds.
Here, the government mandates what amount of child support will be paid, and it's a function of the relative incomes of the two parents, who the children live with and how many children there are. But if my ex is asking for extra money on top of that, yes I want to see where it is going.
Just curious, how far should it go, in your opinion? If you think about it, the funds generally get mixed in with household funds, so the money may go towards a mortgage payment or groceries. But, playing devil's advocate, if someone wanted to "misuse funds," they could offer up the receipt for the mortgage, but then spend their own cash on drugs or whatever, simply because they have it available. So, should the payee's entire account and financial habits be up for scrutiny, or just the amount of the child support?
And... does the paying person also get a say in how those funds are used? Let's say the payer wants the kid to take trumpet lessons and the payee takes the kid to Karate class instead. Can the payer dispute how those funds are spent?
Good points.
I've been reading up on why men skip out on child support payments, even when they're capable of making them. One of the reasons is that sometimes they do it because they don't want to feel like their ex is benefitting from the money. A proposed solution to this was to have the person receiving the funds to provide documentation about where the money goes. Theoretically, it could increase the number of people who are good payers.
This could be super tedious for all parents to do on a regular basis and then force the courts to sift through it all. Perhaps an audit upon legitimate suspicion would be better.
So yes and no, I think. If a parent has good reason to believe the guardian is using the money to finance an addiction or something like that, then yes, they should have some form of recourse. But I can definitely see this being abused. Not to mention, child support may not go directly to the kids in the form of clothes etc., but the cost of food, utilities, housing, insurance, a vehicle etc. are all things necessary to run a stable house the children can live in. So, this is a tricky one.
No as long as the child(ren) are being taken care of properly with food, clothing and shelter.
If not then the non-custodial parent should seek custody.
I can understand the feeling. But I think it would not be fair. To split up with someone, and then have to provide documentation (I can only imagine this would be receipts and/or bank statements) about everything you spend, would be an invasion of privacy. In some breakups, it's necessary to put as much distance between the people as possible. I think having to provide this info would only lead to more tension, as surely you'd have arguments about money between the two parents, which in many cases is a factor in the split in the first place.
@FNdR --- 
Yet another topic upon which we agree 95%. I think requiring full accounting of support payment expenditures would most often end up just being a harrassment tactic by the support payer.
No. However, a smart custodial parent will keep very good records.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. I can easily see someone bitter about the custody agreement using this to wreak havoc and few can withstand the stress and scrutiny of the all-powerful govt. microscope. lol
I agree... think it's a horrible idea, but I've seen it suggested so much with nobody refuting it that I was starting to wonder if maybe the idea had some merit. While I can sympathize with the concept of it, I just can't justify that kind of intrusion on someone and I also agree that, if the records are there, it will open it up to the payer scrutinizing spending, which isn't cool at all.
Both of you made good points.
