1. Christopher, a citizen of the United States (US), married Lila, a Filipino, in Dallas, Texas. Their marriage was later terminated by a divorce decree issued by a US court. At that time, their child, Amado, was only 18 months old. Lila and Christopher returned to the Philippines and settled in El Nido, Palawan. Christopher allegedly promised to give support to Amado in the amount of US$1,000 per month, but he never did. Subsequently, Christopher also settled in Cebu where he cohabited with another Filipino woman. When Lila learned of the whereabouts of Christopher, she filed a complaint against him for violation of the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act for his refusal to support Amado. Lila also invoked Article 195 of the Family Code, which provides for those who are obliged to support each other. She argued that notwithstanding their divorce, Christopher is not excused from complying with his obligation to support Amado. Is Lila correct in invoking Article 195 of the Family Code? Explain.