What, unfortunately, some do not know is that everything must be done to provide for their maintenance.
An unemployed father who makes his child lack the means of subsistence, continuously and not sporadically, thus morally and materially disinteresting himself, commits the crime of violating family assistance obligations.
Satisfying the basic life needs of children (therefore not only food and lodging, but also the cost of clothing, medical visits, education, etc.) is an obligation. The Court of Cassation establishes it with sentence n. 34952/18.
Moreover, since it is a matter removed from the free autonomy of the parties, the agreements NOT approved by the Judge, which appear to have existed in the case in question, are void.
“The minor age of the descendants, recipients of the means of subsistence, represents “in re ipsa” a subjective condition of the state of need, which obliges the parents to contribute to their maintenance, ensuring the aforementioned means of subsistence; the crime also exists when one of the parents fails to provide the means of subsistence in favor of minor or incapacitated children, and the other parent provides for the maintenance of the offspring".
In the present case, given the particular seriousness, the benefit of the conditional suspension of the sentence was not considered to be granted.
Therefore, to avoid conviction, it is necessary to demonstrate the absolute impossibility of meeting the obligations through the proof of a fruitful activation in search of stable employment. In other words, the parent must PROVE that they have made an effort to find employment (any occupation, even the humblest) or that their health conditions prevent it. Furthermore, it is necessary not to have income from which to draw to help the children (for example, current accounts, even if modest, or real estate). This is because being unemployed does not mean having no property, not receiving help from parents, not engaging in undeclared work or not having some savings in the bank!
