has little or no practical effect in Chapter 13 situations. In such a situation, the proper course of action for appellants was to file for relief from the stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d): When requested, such relief should be liberally granted in situations involving alimony, maintenance, or support in order to avoid entangling the federal court in family law matters best left to state court. See In re White, 851 F.2d 170, 173 (6th Cir.1988); In re MacDonald, 755 F.2d 715 (9th Cir.1985). Moreover, “it would result in great injustice to require children to await a bankruptcy court’s confirmation of a debtor’s Chapter 13 plan before permitting them to enforce their state court-determined right to collect past due support payments.” Caswell v. Lang, 757 F.2d 608, 610 (4th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>). Such considerations clearly constitute
holding that the conversion of a chapter 7 petition to a chapter 13 petition was not final until the plan itself was approved holding that child support arrearages may not be included in a chapter 13 plan holding the amount imposed to reduce child support arrearages must be reasonable recognizing that child support arrearages are imposable by law from the date of a childs birth holding that a chapter 13 debtor should be able to obtain a copy of his transcript in light of the broader discharge provision of chapter 13