USA – MASSACHUSETTS Law and Practice Contributed by: Steven E Gurdin, Barbara L Drury, Carlos A Maycotte, Stephen A MacKenzie and Kelly A Schwartz, Fitch Law Partners LLP
to seek a child support order. In general, the court issues child support orders pursuant to the Massa ‑ chusetts Child Support Guidelines. The Child Sup ‑ port Guidelines calculate child support using a for ‑ mula based on a combined income of the parties up to USD450,000 and takes into consideration factors such as the parenting plan of the parties, whether a child is over 18 years old, and the cost to each parent for health insurance and childcare. In instances where parties’ combined incomes exceed USD450,000, the guidelines provide a presumptive minimum order, and additional child support on income over the combined USD450,000 is within the court’s discretion. A self- calculating worksheet is available to assist with the computation of child support pursuant to the Child Support Guidelines. Under certain circumstances, the parties may agree, or the court may order, an amount of child support that deviates from the Child Support Guidelines, but any amount of child support is sub ‑ ject to the court’s consideration of the children’s best interests. It should be noted that the court may order concurrent orders of child support and alimony. Child support can be ordered for a child for as long as the child remains unemancipated. Emancipation for child support purposes is effectively determined by statute, Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 208, Section 28. While there are circumstances that con ‑ stitute emancipation before, it is possible that a child could remain eligible for a child support order until age 23. 3.3 Other Matters In high-conflict child custody cases, there is often dis ‑ agreement between parents on issues such as school choice, medical or therapeutic treatment, religious upbringing, and sharing of holidays. When divorc ‑ ing parents who are joint legal custodians are unable to agree on these matters, the Massachusetts Pro ‑ bate and Family Court has jurisdiction to enter court orders addressing these issues after considering the child(ren)’s best interests. When parties are generally unable to agree on these important issues, judges will consider awarding one of the parties sole legal cus ‑ tody, thereby empowering one party to make these decisions on behalf of the child without the other party having any legal input.
High-conflict child custody cases often require chil ‑ dren to be more involved in the process and, depend ‑ ing upon the child’s age, the child’s input can be quite significant to the court when determining the child’s best interests. Generally, courts do not favour or look to children testifying in court. It is not technically prohibited but instead of a child testifying in court, a guardian ad litem will generally be appointed by the judge and that person will conduct an investiga ‑ tion (including child interviews and observations) and report back to the court in a comprehensive written report that the court can consider in determining the resolution of the issues at hand. In high-conflict child custody cases, there are often allegations and concerns of parental alienation or parental marginalisation. Courts are sensitive to these family dynamics and have the authority to: • order therapeutic interventions (ie, family therapy, supervised parenting time, individual therapy); • order changes in physical custody; and • issue monetary sanctions for non-compliance with court orders. 3.4 ADR in Child Law Matters ADR mechanisms are resources that parties and attor ‑ neys often look to in order to help resolve disagree ‑ ments in a divorce or a custodial case that involve children. Recently, all 14 divisions of the Massachusetts Pro ‑ bate and Family Court have implemented the Path ‑ ways Case Management Initiative (“Pathways”), a case management process aimed to promote timely and effective resolution of disputes. When filing actions seeking to modify a child support order or provisions of a parenting plan, most litigants, even those who are represented by counsel, should expect their case to be directed to Pathways. In many cases, a litigant will participate in two Pathways “steps” before appearing in front of a judge. Many litigants look to mediation and conciliation before bringing a contested issue to court. In these forums, a neutral third party trained in dispute resolu ‑ tion will mediate or conciliate the case. These neu ‑ trals are often retired Probate and Family Court judges
331 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook