Bill
HB 2062
Enables child support to begin at conception for an unborn child, with courts required to factor pregnancy-related expenses into support calculations.
Status and timeline
- Introduced: January 24, 2025.
- Passed the Legislature, vetoed by the Governor, and veto override motion prevailed (Yea: 31 Nay: 9) — bill enacted.
- Effective: as provided in the enrolled act (takes effect upon publication in statute book; related enrolled text references a July 1, 2025 effective timeframe for some provisions).
Purpose
- To authorize and structure child support obligations beginning at conception for an “unborn child,” require courts to consider the mother’s direct medical and pregnancy-related expenses in child support calculations for unborn children, provide a state income‑tax personal exemption for unborn (and stillborn) children, and change how certain retirement and pension assets can be treated to satisfy child support obligations.
Key provisions and changes
- Child support from conception:
- Defines “unborn child” as a living Homo sapiens in utero at any stage from fertilization to birth.
- Requires child‑support amounts tied to an unborn child to be calculated starting from the date of conception.
- Interest on amounts determined under this provision accrues at the statutory rate set out in K.S.A. 16‑204 until arrearages are paid.
- Pregnancy‑related expenses:
- Direct medical and pregnancy‑related expenses of the mother must be a factor considered in the Supreme Court’s child support guideline rules when the child is unborn.
- The maximum child support ordered for an unborn child may not exceed the mother’s direct medical and pregnancy‑related expenses.
- “Pregnancy‑related expenses” exclude any costs related to an “elective abortion” (defined as any abortion not performed to prevent the mother’s death; narrowly defined to exclude claims that a mother will engage in conduct that would result in her death).
- Income‑tax exemption:
- Adds a personal income‑tax exemption for an unborn child of $2,320 beginning in tax year 2025; the Department of Revenue may assign a taxpayer identification number for an unborn child upon taxpayer application (per Senate amendments reflected in committee reports).
- Retirement accounts and support enforcement (as reflected in enrolled bill language and summaries):
- Requires courts in certain circumstances to consider the value of retirement accounts when setting support.
- Authorizes use or distribution from certain qualified retirement accounts to satisfy child‑support arrearages and removes or limits previous statutory exemptions protecting retirement/pension funds from child‑support claims (details in enrolled statute amendments).
Who is affected
- Mothers who are pregnant, alleged fathers/obligors, and other parents involved in support actions.
- Department for Children and Families (DCF)/Child Support Services, courts, Department of Revenue, and private vendors (for testing/case management).
- Taxpayers claiming the new personal exemption for unborn children.
- Retirement-plan participants whose accounts may be reachable to satisfy child‑support arrearages in specified circumstances.
Fiscal and administrative impacts
- DCF estimated increased state costs due to earlier initiation and longer duration of child‑support cases, additional case management, parentage testing and possible back‑dated orders/arrearages.
- Kansas Dept. of Health & Environment data: ~13,000 out‑of‑wedlock births annually; estimate that ~8,667 would apply for support; if 10% begin support actions during pregnancy → ~867 new cases in a partial year.
- Estimated FY2026 state cost: ~$269,637 for case management (at $311/case) plus potential in‑utero genetic testing (avg. $1,750/test) if needed — combined illustrative estimate ≈ $573,087 (state general fund).
- DCF noted a likely shift of costs from federal OCSE funding to state funds because federal rules do not generally permit establishing parentage prior to birth.
Notable procedural, legal, and policy considerations raised in hearings
- Supporters: argued pregnancy‑related expenses begin before birth and should be considered in support determinations.
- Opponents: raised concerns that the statute does not provide services or payments to assist pregnant individuals, and questioned how orders would operate if a pregnancy ends in miscarriage, stillbirth, adoption, or abortion. Others warned of implications for fetal personhood and conflicts with federal rules restricting pre‑birth parentage determinations.
- Federal limitations on establishing parentage prior to birth create administrative/legal constraints and funding implications.
Practical implementation notes
- Courts must follow Kansas child support guideline rulemaking (K.S.A. 20‑165) which the Supreme Court will update to incorporate required factors.
- Interest accrual and limits on amounts (cap at pregnancy‑related medical costs) are statutory.
- Agencies (DCF, Department of Revenue) must adopt procedures for pre‑birth case handling, assigning taxpayer IDs for unborn children (if claiming the exemption), and processing any retirement‑account distributions under the new rules.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
