310 P.3d 646
N.M. Ct. App.2013Background
- Mother and Father divorced in 1990; divorce decree required Father to pay $600/month child support.
- Mother petitioned to terminate Father’s parental rights in March 1993; Father did not contest merits and failed to appear at a hearing.
- District court terminated Father’s parental rights in November 1993 based on abandonment, abuse, and other findings; the order did not address child support.
- New Mexico HSD collected about $7,620 from Father 1991–2005; later actions sought to establish arrearages under the divorce decree.
- In 2009–2010, the district court ordered Father to pay past due support; Father appealed.
- The central question was whether termination of parental rights terminates the duty to pay child support under the pre-1993 statutes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does termination of parental rights terminate child support obligations? | Father contends termination ends all duties including support. | Mother contends support obligations can continue post-termination under the code. | Termination ends parental support obligation. |
| Which statutory provisions govern termination and its effect on support in 1993? | Termination analyzed under older statutes; support may survive. | Termination should be read under the 32-1-54/55 framework existing in 1993. | Sections 32-1-54 and -55 govern post-termination effects; they do not preserve ongoing support obligations. |
| Does the 1985 amendment to the termination provisions preserve child support after termination? | Reformer argues no ongoing duty implied; inheritance rights preserved, but not support. | Language elimination of duties suggests no ongoing support obligation. | No intent to preserve support obligations after termination. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wasson v. Wasson, 92 N.M. 162, 584 P.2d 713 (Ct. App. 1978) (earlier meaning of termination and duties of parents)
- In re Adoption of J.J.B., 119 N.M. 638, 894 P.2d 994 (N.M. Ct. App. 1995) (termination severes parent-child relationship)
- In re Adoption of Doe, 101 N.M. 34, 677 P.2d 1070 (N.M. Ct. App. 1984) (termination serves child’s best interests; severance of relationship)
- County of Ventura v. Gonzales, 106 Cal. Rptr. 2d 461 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001) (terminating rights severs parent-child relationship and duty of support)
- State ex rel. Welfare Div. of Dep’t of Human Resources v. Vine, 662 P.2d 295 (Nev. 1983) (support obligations end with termination)
- Ex parte M.D.C., 39 So. 3d 1117 (Ala. 2009) (debates continued validity of post-termination duties)