NewsTalk 1010: Child Support Arrest in Nova Scotia - Featuring Laura Paris, Shulman & Partners

Laura Paris, Associate Lawyer at Shulman & Partners LLP, joined NewsTalk 1010 to discuss two very different support stories and what they reveal about enforcement and entitlement. The conversation opened with an extreme child support enforcement case involving more than $500,000 in arrears, then shifted to a headline-making spousal support claim in a celebrity separation. Together, the examples highlight two realities families often face: support orders can be enforced through increasingly serious steps when payments are avoided, and support amounts are often tied to income and the goal of financial fairness after separation. For Ontario families, the segment also clarified how the Family Responsibility Office operates and why early, practical problem-solving matters when circumstances change.

“To get to the point of arrest means that the government agency that collects support, which is the Family Responsibility Office in Ontario, exhausted all other options.”
— Laura Paris, Associate Lawyer at Shulman & Partners LLP

The segment began with a Nova Scotia case involving a parent arrested after allegedly avoiding more than $500,000 in child support and interest over several years. Laura explained that, in Ontario, arrests related to support enforcement are generally a last-resort outcome, not an early step. She noted that when enforcement escalates that far, it usually means other options have already been tried and did not work.

Laura then outlined how support enforcement typically functions through Ontario’s Family Responsibility Office, often referred to as FRO. In many situations, support payments can be facilitated through the agency by providing banking details so funds are withdrawn on schedule and forwarded to the recipient. If payments stop or money is no longer available in the disclosed account, FRO may move toward enforcement measures. Laura described common tools such as wage garnishment or attempts to locate and garnish other accounts that were not previously identified.

The discussion also addressed why support payments may stop. Laura acknowledged that circumstances vary, but she drew a distinction between people who genuinely cannot pay and those who are actively trying to avoid payment. In her view, when a payor has a legitimate reason they cannot continue paying at the ordered level, it is usually better to deal with the issue proactively rather than waiting until enforcement escalates. She also mentioned that enforcement can become increasingly serious, potentially including measures like suspending a driver’s licence or a passport, depending on the situation and the tools available.

From there, the conversation moved to a high-profile separation involving Kelly Clarkson and reports of a very large monthly claim for spousal and child support. Laura emphasized that support rules can vary by jurisdiction, and she focused her comments on Ontario concepts. She explained that where one parent has primary care of the children in Ontario, child support may not apply in the same way as it might elsewhere. On spousal support, she noted that Ontario matters are generally guided by the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines and that spousal support is typically tied to income, with an underlying goal of addressing the parties’ respective financial positions after separation.

Overall, Laura’s key theme was practical: support enforcement can be powerful when obligations are ignored, and support outcomes are heavily influenced by income, parenting arrangements, and the legal framework in the relevant jurisdiction.

Listen to the full NewsTalk 1010 segment here.

This media appearance is part of Shulman & Partners LLP’s ongoing contributions to Canadian family law discussions. Explore more of our media features in our In the Media  archive.