AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 36-5-101, relative to the periodic review of child support guidelines.
Impact
With the passage of SB0247, the implications extend to the way child support calculations and guidelines are established and maintained within the state. By reducing the frequency of mandated reviews, the bill could lead to less frequent updates in guidelines that ultimately reflect changes in the economic landscape or cost of living. This could leave child support arrangements less adaptable to changing circumstances affecting the financial responsibilities of parents.
Summary
Senate Bill 247 (SB0247) amends Tennessee Code Annotated, specifically Section 36-5-101, to alter the frequency of periodic reviews of child support guidelines. The bill seeks to extend the review period from every three years to every four years. This legislative change aims to address the administrative burden associated with more frequent reviews and potentially offer a more stable framework for child support determinations that could remain relevant for longer periods.
Sentiment
The bill garnered significant support, as evidenced by its unanimous passage with a vote of 96-0, indicating a strong bipartisan consensus on the issue. Many legislators view the reduction in the review frequency as a practical approach to streamline state operations regarding child support while still ensuring that families have access to necessary financial support. However, there are concerns that extending the review period could overlook necessary adjustments as family and economic conditions evolve.
Contention
While the bill passed without opposition, discussions around periodic reviews often touch on broader issues of family law practice and how best to serve the interests of children. Critics from advocacy groups may argue that less frequent reviews can lead to outdated guidelines, potentially disadvantaging parents who struggle to meet their obligations amidst changing financial realities. Thus, while the bill simplifies administrative processes, it raises important questions about balancing efficiency with responsiveness to families' needs.