"Best Interest of the Child" Lost Child Support Costs $1.3 Billion 02/15/13, 247kb

R1

Orange County Child Support Services is to recommend support orders that will most likely result in payment. Any proposed order in excess of 20% of the father’s income should be viewed as unlikely to be collectable. This study acknowledges CSS’s role per California Family Code § 17000 as an extension of federal law limiting it to the collection of support.42 Again, this study recommends CSS actively aid parents in seeking orders that will most likely result in payment – not just printed numbers on paper orders. See Findings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 14.

R2

CSS should recommend orders that offer the father lower current support so he can afford payment towards arrears.43 See Finding 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.

R4

As appropriate, CSS should seek an order as appropriate for both parents and the child(ren) to complete counseling. (A caveat to this recommendation is that a “counseling order” should not delay an immediate support order.) The cost of such counseling should be paid by the parties if they can afford it or with lag money if possible or from Orange County MHSA funds. See Findings 4, 5, 10, 11, 12.

R3

As appropriate, CSS should seek orders that mandate the father have counseling or attend an educational program. The word “Appropriate” in the prior sentence acknowledges the courts ultimate jurisdiction as to which fathers would benefit. Upon completion of such counseling, father time with the child(ren) should be increased resulting in affordable child support. The cost should be paid with lag money if possible and from Orange County MHSA funds if beyond the father’s ability to pay. See Findings 9, 10, 11, 12.

R6

The Department of Mental Health Services should continue supporting counseling/educational of at least 18 hours. The curriculum should be geared to teaching fathers the skills, rights and responsibilities necessary for parenting. This may be best done with social service agencies in the community. The counseling should be sensitive to Hispanic issues and include classes in Spanish. See Findings F9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. CAVEAT TO RECOMMENDATIONS: The wisdom of the courts does and should supersede any recommendations of this report. Every mother, father and child is unique as are their circumstances. The courts bear an enormous burden in cyphering out justice. Nothing herein is meant to challenge the judgments the courts might make. It must be emphasized that the ultimate goal of this study is to relieve the suffering of the children of divorce and those born without the benefit of a coupled mother and father. They may become better parents improving the peace and joy of future generations. The financial savings to the County is but a side benefit. Near time financial savings may be realized in immediate compliance with more pragmatic child support orders. The big savings will pay off as the next generation escapes unwanted pregnancies, drug addiction, criminal incarceration and other social ills. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the 44 Orange County Jails and Juvenile Detention Facilities are two such groups anxious to lower recidivism by encouraging men with children to assume their roles as fathers. Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section §933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a.) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b.) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making aspects of the

R6

The Department of Mental Health Services should continue supporting counseling/educational of at least 18 hours. The curriculum should be geared to teaching fathers the skills, rights and responsibilities necessary for parenting. This may be best done with social service agencies in the community. The counseling should be sensitive to Hispanic issues and include classes in Spanish. See Findings F9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. CAVEAT TO RECOMMENDATIONS: The wisdom of the courts does and should supersede any recommendations of this report. Every mother, father and child is unique as are their circumstances. The courts bear an enormous burden in cyphering out justice. Nothing herein is meant to challenge the judgments the courts might make. It must be emphasized that the ultimate goal of this study is to relieve the suffering of the children of divorce and those born without the benefit of a coupled mother and father. They may become better parents improving the peace and joy of future generations. The financial savings to the County is but a side benefit. Near time financial savings may be realized in immediate compliance with more pragmatic child support orders. The big savings will pay off as the next generation escapes unwanted pregnancies, drug addiction, criminal incarceration and other social ills. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the 44 Orange County Jails and Juvenile Detention Facilities are two such groups anxious to lower recidivism by encouraging men with children to assume their roles as fathers. Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section §933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a.) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b.) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making aspects of the

R6

The Department of Mental Health Services should continue supporting counseling/educational of at least 18 hours. The curriculum should be geared to teaching fathers the skills, rights and responsibilities necessary for parenting. This may be best done with social service agencies in the community. The counseling should be sensitive to Hispanic issues and include classes in Spanish. See Findings F9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. CAVEAT TO RECOMMENDATIONS: The wisdom of the courts does and should supersede any recommendations of this report. Every mother, father and child is unique as are their circumstances. The courts bear an enormous burden in cyphering out justice. Nothing herein is meant to challenge the judgments the courts might make. It must be emphasized that the ultimate goal of this study is to relieve the suffering of the children of divorce and those born without the benefit of a coupled mother and father. They may become better parents improving the peace and joy of future generations. The financial savings to the County is but a side benefit. Near time financial savings may be realized in immediate compliance with more pragmatic child support orders. The big savings will pay off as the next generation escapes unwanted pregnancies, drug addiction, criminal incarceration and other social ills. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the 44 Orange County Jails and Juvenile Detention Facilities are two such groups anxious to lower recidivism by encouraging men with children to assume their roles as fathers. Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section §933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a.) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b.) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making aspects of the

R5

CSS should form a Parenting Commission composed of following: 1. At least one representative from CSS. 2. One member from Court Services – Mediation. 3. One attorney from the Family Law Section of the Orange County Bar, 4. One attorney from Legal Aid. 5. At least one representative from a participating counseling program. 6. One family oriented social worker. 7. One attorney from the Hispanic Section of the Orange County Bar. 8. One representative from Orange County MHSA. The Commission should do, among other things: 42 CSS is not specifically authorized to advocate what orders should be. This is foolish considering CSS must inject some logical time share and incomes for the parents to determine child support. In fact, parents come to CSS ignorant of anything but their fear. Mother is fearful she will not get enough money to support herself and the children. Father, if he has the courage to meet with CSS at all, fears he will not have enough to live on after paying support. CSS knows that orders for more than 20% of father’s income will likely drive him underground and he will pay nothing at all. Father’s disappearance not only denies Mother of support, it deprives the children of a father. In total Mother should receive more actual support payment than she would otherwise. Father’s benefit is the opportunity to ultimately rid himself of the burden of arrears. 1. Collect money and/or seek commitments from Orange County MHSA. Make the money available to mothers, fathers and children if ordered by the court to get counseling. 2. Monitor counseling programs to determine their effectiveness. 3. Work with other groups that might promote justice between separated mothers and fathers to protect children from the potential devastation of growing up without a father.44 4. Promote orders in the family law arena that will likely yield compliance and maximum contact with both parents. Child Support Services should initiate the creation of this commission utilizing part of its County Contribution ($350,000 in 2011/2012). Future costs should also be borne by CSS. See Findings 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

R6

The Department of Mental Health Services should continue supporting counseling/educational of at least 18 hours. The curriculum should be geared to teaching fathers the skills, rights and responsibilities necessary for parenting. This may be best done with social service agencies in the community. The counseling should be sensitive to Hispanic issues and include classes in Spanish. See Findings F9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. CAVEAT TO RECOMMENDATIONS: The wisdom of the courts does and should supersede any recommendations of this report. Every mother, father and child is unique as are their circumstances. The courts bear an enormous burden in cyphering out justice. Nothing herein is meant to challenge the judgments the courts might make. It must be emphasized that the ultimate goal of this study is to relieve the suffering of the children of divorce and those born without the benefit of a coupled mother and father. They may become better parents improving the peace and joy of future generations. The financial savings to the County is but a side benefit. Near time financial savings may be realized in immediate compliance with more pragmatic child support orders. The big savings will pay off as the next generation escapes unwanted pregnancies, drug addiction, criminal incarceration and other social ills. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the 44 Orange County Jails and Juvenile Detention Facilities are two such groups anxious to lower recidivism by encouraging men with children to assume their roles as fathers. Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section §933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a.) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b.) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making aspects of the

R6

The Department of Mental Health Services should continue supporting counseling/educational of at least 18 hours. The curriculum should be geared to teaching fathers the skills, rights and responsibilities necessary for parenting. This may be best done with social service agencies in the community. The counseling should be sensitive to Hispanic issues and include classes in Spanish. See Findings F9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. CAVEAT TO RECOMMENDATIONS: The wisdom of the courts does and should supersede any recommendations of this report. Every mother, father and child is unique as are their circumstances. The courts bear an enormous burden in cyphering out justice. Nothing herein is meant to challenge the judgments the courts might make. It must be emphasized that the ultimate goal of this study is to relieve the suffering of the children of divorce and those born without the benefit of a coupled mother and father. They may become better parents improving the peace and joy of future generations. The financial savings to the County is but a side benefit. Near time financial savings may be realized in immediate compliance with more pragmatic child support orders. The big savings will pay off as the next generation escapes unwanted pregnancies, drug addiction, criminal incarceration and other social ills. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the 44 Orange County Jails and Juvenile Detention Facilities are two such groups anxious to lower recidivism by encouraging men with children to assume their roles as fathers. Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section §933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a.) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b.) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making aspects of the

R6

The Department of Mental Health Services should continue supporting counseling/educational of at least 18 hours. The curriculum should be geared to teaching fathers the skills, rights and responsibilities necessary for parenting. This may be best done with social service agencies in the community. The counseling should be sensitive to Hispanic issues and include classes in Spanish. See Findings F9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. CAVEAT TO RECOMMENDATIONS: The wisdom of the courts does and should supersede any recommendations of this report. Every mother, father and child is unique as are their circumstances. The courts bear an enormous burden in cyphering out justice. Nothing herein is meant to challenge the judgments the courts might make. It must be emphasized that the ultimate goal of this study is to relieve the suffering of the children of divorce and those born without the benefit of a coupled mother and father. They may become better parents improving the peace and joy of future generations. The financial savings to the County is but a side benefit. Near time financial savings may be realized in immediate compliance with more pragmatic child support orders. The big savings will pay off as the next generation escapes unwanted pregnancies, drug addiction, criminal incarceration and other social ills. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the 44 Orange County Jails and Juvenile Detention Facilities are two such groups anxious to lower recidivism by encouraging men with children to assume their roles as fathers. Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section §933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a.) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b.) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making aspects of the

R6

The Department of Mental Health Services should continue supporting counseling/educational of at least 18 hours. The curriculum should be geared to teaching fathers the skills, rights and responsibilities necessary for parenting. This may be best done with social service agencies in the community. The counseling should be sensitive to Hispanic issues and include classes in Spanish. See Findings F9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. CAVEAT TO RECOMMENDATIONS: The wisdom of the courts does and should supersede any recommendations of this report. Every mother, father and child is unique as are their circumstances. The courts bear an enormous burden in cyphering out justice. Nothing herein is meant to challenge the judgments the courts might make. It must be emphasized that the ultimate goal of this study is to relieve the suffering of the children of divorce and those born without the benefit of a coupled mother and father. They may become better parents improving the peace and joy of future generations. The financial savings to the County is but a side benefit. Near time financial savings may be realized in immediate compliance with more pragmatic child support orders. The big savings will pay off as the next generation escapes unwanted pregnancies, drug addiction, criminal incarceration and other social ills. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the 44 Orange County Jails and Juvenile Detention Facilities are two such groups anxious to lower recidivism by encouraging men with children to assume their roles as fathers. Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section §933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a.) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b.) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making aspects of the

R8

One representative from Orange County MHSA. The Commission should do, among other things: 42 CSS is not specifically authorized to advocate what orders should be. This is foolish considering CSS must inject some logical time share and incomes for the parents to determine child support. In fact, parents come to CSS ignorant of anything but their fear. Mother is fearful she will not get enough money to support herself and the children. Father, if he has the courage to meet with CSS at all, fears he will not have enough to live on after paying support. CSS knows that orders for more than 20% of father’s income will likely drive him underground and he will pay nothing at all. Father’s disappearance not only denies Mother of support, it deprives the children of a father. In total Mother should receive more actual support payment than she would otherwise. Father’s benefit is the opportunity to ultimately rid himself of the burden of arrears.