Frequently Asked Questions

You should file a Voluntary Declaration of Paternity (VDP) with the Department of Health. This form may be obtained at the hospital where your child was born, at a local health department office, or at the Office of Vital Records and Statistics.

Yes. If you are a possible father and refuse to submit to genetic testing freely, a judge has the authority to order you to undergo testing in a paternity case.
It should be noted that either parent may file a paternity case in court, asking a judge to declare that a specific person is a child’s father. When making this determination, the judge can also issue related decisions about child support, custody, and parenting time (visitation) at the same time.

Ultimately the court will determine how decisions and time with the children will be divided between the two parents. But before that, can the two of you come to an agreement on terms? A judge will accept the parents’ agreement as long as it is deemed to be in their child’s best interest.  But if you cannot agree, then custody becomes a matter for the judge to decide, taking into consideration various factors:

• The way each parent has interacted with the child to date, and how dependent the child is on each parent
• Each parent’s willingness to shield the child from any conflict between the parents
• Who is more likely to put the child’s best interests first — including sharing the child’s time
• Whether a child’s overall well-being will benefit most from joint custody
• The wishes of the child – assuming the child is capable and old enough to weigh in reasonably
• Where each parent will live after the divorce is finalized.

“Joint physical custody” describes a situation in which each of the parents gets to spend at least 111 nights with their child. This joint solution typically does not result in both people having exactly equal shares of parenting time.

“Sole physical custody” means one parent is entitled to 254 nights with the child. To be awarded the desired custody plan, a parent must be able to show multiple overlapping factors, such as keeping relationships between siblings intact, offering a stable, nourishing environment for the child, etc. Note that a court is likely to put a strong emphasis on which parent had been the child’s primary caregiver throughout the marriage.

Legal custody is the power of a parent to access information and contribute to decision making with regard to a child’s schooling and cultural activities, spiritual upbringing, and medical care. Naturally, less weighty decisions about a child’s food, clothing, transportation, and so forth generally need to be made by whichever parent is caring for that child on a given day. In the event of disagreement on any of these issues, the parent may turn to a dispute resolution provision which should be included in their custody plan.

It should be noted that Utah law favors joint legal custody, as it is currently seen as serving a child’s best interests.

Child support payments are intended to provide for the care and financial needs of minors.  The relative level of need is often determined by the lifestyle and living conditions of the child prior to his or her parents’ separation and this can play a role in calculating child support payments. The non-custodial parent, therefore, may be obligated to help maintain the standard of living that a child enjoyed before the divorce. Similarly, the court will typically consider needs that are specific to a child, for example, children who have a mental or physical disability.

In addition to considering the needs of a child, a family law judge will typically factor in the income of both a child’s parents, as well as other available resources. The custodial parent may earn more money and/or have a higher net worth than the child’s other parent. As a result, he or she may be required to pay less child support. On the other hand, a child’s non-custodial parent could be obligated to pay more child support if the court determines that he or she maintains a suitable income.

One tactic some parents take is to purposely reduce income by becoming unemployed or underemployed (when a person purposely takes a lower paying job.) Since child and spousal support obligations are based (in large part) on a person’s ability to pay, eliminating or reducing monthly income would theoretically reduce a person’s support obligation. However, most states recognize this unethical tactic and have passed laws to prevent people from reducing their support obligations in this way. Under these laws, courts may impute income to a party who purposely becomes unemployed or underemployed to avoid paying (or to reduce the amount of) child or spousal support. To be clear, IMPUTED INCOME DOES NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL INCOME. Imputed income represents an amount of income a party should or could be making based on the facts presented.

Utah’s imputed income statute is provided under Utah Code § 78B-12-203(6-7). In short, the code provides that the court may impute income if: 1) the party stipulates to the amount imputed, 2) the party defaults, or 3) a hearing is held and the judge enters findings of fact as to the evidentiary basis for the imputation.

Therefore, it can be seen that income may be imputed in situations other than when a party is purposely trying to reduce income to minimize or eliminate a support obligation. The first situation referenced above (where a party stipulates to the imputed income) may occur when a party’s income is difficult to verify through regular methods (e.g. the party doesn’t receive regular paychecks) rather than when a party is purposely unemployed or underemployed. Or it could occur where a party is capable of making income but isn’t for some reason (e.g. he/she chooses to be a stay-at- home parent). “Stipulates” in this context means that the party agrees to an amount of income being imputed to him or her.

Filing bаnkruрtсу will nоt diѕсhаrgе dоmеѕtiс ѕuрроrt оbligаtiоnѕ. The Bаnkruрtсу Abuѕе Prеvеntiоn аnd Cоnѕumеr Prоtесtiоn Act оf 2005 рriоritizеѕ thе payment of alimony аnd сhild ѕuрроrt – еvеn оvеr thе рауmеnt оf back tаxеѕ. During a bankruptcy, thе “аutоmаtiс ѕtау” ѕtорѕ thе соllесtiоn оf debt temporarily. Hоwеvеr, thiѕ dоеѕ nоt аррlу tо dоmеѕtiс ѕuрроrt рауmеntѕ.

Many states tend to prefer that guardians be related to the individual or that they have an established relationship whenever possible. However, this is not a requirement. What is most important is that they are over the age of 18 and can make the decisions for the person they are serving as guardian for with the best interests of that person in mind.

Because of this last requirement, convicted felons and those who have been determined to need a guardian themselves should not serve as a guardian for another person. Also, some people serve as guardians professionally; an institution, either public or private may also be appointed as a guardian but only if they are not providing services where they may benefit from the decisions they make for the person they are guardian for. Financial institutions sometimes act as guardians for matters related to a person’s estate.

Different guardians are appointed by the court when parents are deceased or determined incapable of making choices for their children, or when an adult is deemed incapable of managing some or all of their own affairs. That said, simply being disabled does not mean an adult needs a guardian. It must be demonstrated that they lack the capacity to make decisions in a number of different areas including health care, living arrangements, education, financial matters, and care of minors they may be legally responsible for.

In order to appoint a guardian for an adult, it must be first be determined that the individual is incapacitated and then that the guardian is qualified and that the guardianship itself will protect the individual and help to keep them safe.

There are times when an individual may need assistance in a certain, specific area (or areas) of their life A limited guardianship looks at the individual capabilities of a person or the prospective guardian, and a court order will outline specifics where a guardian is necessary and when it is not. For example, a person may be qualified to make everyday financial decisions, such as buying groceries or personal items, but will not have the mental capability to understand making financial investments. In this case the individual may need a guardian for major financial decisions only.

 A person may need a guardian for different areas of their lives. They may be considered “incapacitated” in one area, but may be fully qualified to handle their own care in another.

Guardianship of the person oversees the physical and emotional well-being of the person they are guardian of. They will be called on to make decisions regarding health care, releasing confidential information, when necessary, and placement in a residential facility.

Guardianship of the estate oversees the person’s financial interests, including any income, inheritance, property, or real estate that they own.