An act relating to filial support
H.108 would amend Vermont’s criminal nonsupport statute to remove the provision that makes it a crime for an adult child, with sufficient means, to refuse to support a destitute parent who is unable to support themselves and resides in Vermont. The bill leaves intact the existing criminal penalty for a married person who deserts or willfully fails to support a spouse or children, but deletes the filial-support language that currently extends the statute to adult children and parents.
The measure is framed as a repeal of the criminal penalty for nonsupport of parents, and it would take effect immediately upon passage. In practical terms, the bill would narrow 15 V.S.A. § 202 by eliminating the adult-child-to-parent support obligation from the criminal code, while preserving enforcement authority for spouse-and-child support cases and the ability of Office of Child Support attorneys and other authorized persons to prosecute under the section.
If enacted, H.108 would amend 15 V.S.A. § 202, Vermont’s penalty for desertion or nonsupport, by striking the criminal filial-support provision. This would remove the possibility of imprisonment or a fine for an adult child who refuses to support a destitute parent, while leaving the statute’s penalties and enforcement mechanisms in place for nonsupport of spouses and children. The bill would therefore reduce the scope of criminal liability under domestic-relations law and affect only the parent-support portion of the statute.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the available record suggests a straightforward, targeted policy change rather than a highly contested measure. The bill’s stated purpose is narrow and reform-oriented: to repeal an outdated or undesirable criminal penalty for adult children’s support of parents. With no transcripts or vote history provided, there is no documented opposition or support to gauge beyond the bill’s formal introduction.
The main point of contention is likely the policy choice to eliminate criminal enforcement of filial support obligations. Supporters would likely view the current provision as an unusual and potentially harsh criminal penalty for family support disputes, while opponents could argue that removing it weakens a safeguard for destitute elderly parents who lack other means of support. Because the bill only addresses the parent-support clause and not spousal or child support, any debate would center on whether adult children should face criminal consequences for failing to support needy parents.