Short answer. No. Article 204 of the Family Code gives the support obligor the option to fulfill the duty by paying an allowance or by receiving the person into the home — but the home-housing option is blocked whenever there is a moral or legal obstacle. You cannot force the choice on the recipient in those circumstances.
What the law says
The latter alternative cannot be availed of in case there is a moral or legal obstacle thereto.
Family Code, Article 204 — The Obligor's Option: Allowance or Board. Read the full provision →
The two ways to give support
Article 204 of the Family Code gives the person obliged to give support a choice: pay the fixed allowance, or receive and maintain the beneficiary in the family dwelling. This is an obligor's option — the person giving support, not the one receiving it, normally gets to choose how to fulfill the duty. The first method means a periodic cash payment. The second means bringing the beneficiary into the home and covering their needs there.
When the housing option is blocked
The housing option is explicitly taken away by Article 204 whenever there is a moral or legal obstacle to housing the beneficiary in the family dwelling. The statute does not enumerate all such obstacles — the language is broad enough to cover situations that are obviously untenable: a person who poses a risk to children already in the home, a former spouse whose presence would violate the peace of the current household, or a situation that a court has found unsuitable. When an obstacle of this kind exists, the obligor must pay the allowance; the option to house does not exist.
What moral or legal obstacle means
A legal obstacle might be a protective order, a court ruling, or a provision of law that makes housing the person impermissible or impossible under the circumstances. A moral obstacle is less precisely defined but covers situations where placing the person in the home would violate the reasonable expectations of decency and propriety — such as bringing a mistress or an estranged adult relative with a history of misconduct into the family home. Whether a specific situation qualifies as an obstacle will depend on the facts, and disputes over this can be brought before a court for resolution.
The recipient's protection
Article 204 protects support recipients from being forced into an inappropriate living situation in the name of satisfying a legal duty. Where the home-housing option is blocked, the obligor must pay the allowance — there is no third option of providing no support at all. The obligation continues; only the method changes. If you are the person receiving support and you believe there is a moral or legal obstacle to being housed with the obligor, that argument can be made to protect your right to a cash allowance instead.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Ma. Belen B. Mangonon etc. vs. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 125041, June 30, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →