In Kimock v. Jones, 47 A.3d 850 (Pa.Super. 2012), the Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling in the parties’ child support proceeding. The parties were married for eleven years, having one daughter during such time. Father was physically and verbally abusive to Mother and the child. After the parties’ separation, Father went extended periods without seeing the child, including a four year period without having contact with his daughter. Reunification therapy with Father and daughter was unsuccessful. A custody order was entered that provided Mother sole legal and physical custody and limited Father’s time with the child to periods permitted by Mother. Father then filed a petition to terminate his child support obligation regarding his daughter. Father alleged that the custody order was the equivalent of a termination of his parental rights and that he should no longer be required to pay child support. The trial court rejected Father’s argument. The Superior Court affirmed
the decision of the trial court, stating that the obligation to support one’s child does not depend on a parent’s custodial rights or the amount of time the parent spends with the child. The Superior Court reasoned that Father had failed to prove that the custody order alone constituted a material and substantial change in circumstances warranting modification of the support award, especially in light of the fact that the restrictions on Father’s custody time were the result of his own improper behavior.