ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
to wonder why men are almost always the non-resident parent(508 Posts)
Yes, I know I could win an award for most clueless person, but please humour me.
Why is it that when parents separate, it's almost always the mother that the children live with and who has to do the bulk of the mundane parts of the childcare? While daddy gets to pay a cash sum each week, pursue his own interests most of the time and then be Disney the rest of the time.
Doesn't sound like a good deal to me.
Oh SamU what a sad thing to happen. It sounds like you have dealt wih the situation with grace and kindness.
That's really sad SamU2. Sorry for your loss.
Sounds like you all had/have a good relationship.
Monet it almost defies belief doesn't it. Some people believe what they want to. So sorry you had to go through that.
I should have said that their step mum will have them sleep one day a week but she has seen them every day this week round here and she knows she can see them whenever she want forever.
sorry for the bad grammar and mix up of words. Tired/
There was never any talk about who could be the resident parent when I left my ex.
He worked, I didn't. It wasn't even a discussion on who would be the resident parent. He did have them every weekend though which sometimes sucked as I got most of the hard work. It never went through the courts, we worked it out together and the kids wanted to spend the weekends with them, although sometimes they skipped the odd day if we had something special planned.
We both used to see them Xmas day and on birthdays. While I often felt like I got the bulk of the hard work I was pretty happy with the set up.
During the week he certainly lived like a 'free' man, he and his wife never had to make sure the kids had a proper bedtime because of school in the morning or iron uniform, or any of the day to day stuff that can get on top of you when you have five kids. But, I was happy with the situation for our children's sake. We were all really close and it made them happy.
He died a few days ago so now they don't get to see him at all, but their step mum will continue to see them one day a week. This is the first time I have used past tense to talk about him.
Flippinada I have similar experiences. OW sat in the corridor whilst my Ex received a police caution for assaulting our child. She attended meetings with socail workers and was made fully aware of the extent of his abuse towards both the children and I. She fully supports his refusal to pay maintenance and she and her family (her formerly estranged father in particular ) have gone to incredible lengths to help him to hide our joint assets. She has also had a child with him. For as long as there are women willing to cheerlead and encourage men who want to continue to control and abuse, then children will suffer.
I can remember a DV conference I went to awhile back touched on nrp's who will pay one mother but not another due to perceived bad behaviour (usually involving support)
Wish I could remember who the speaker was
I was trying to find that out earlier Sock, then I saw the bit about living parents, came off the document and got sidetracked by RL!
I will have a dig through when I get a chance.
Do gingerbread give any info about children per csa claim or household?
When my husband and I split three years ago our children then DD13 and DS12 decided between them that DS would live with me and DD would live with dad. We both work full time.
As it was we patched things up and are still together.
45% of single parents have no agreements and orders and the report doesn't say why that is, but it will include other parents who have died. Are you suggesting that dead people be considered non-paying NRPs?
The study that gave the child support stats stated;
Base: All families with a child who has a living liable non-resident parent
So, no, it doesn't include other parents who have died.
I've been lurking on this thread - I'm an RP with an NRP who is involved but pays minimal maintenance/. I've also been through the uniquely unpleasant experience of going through a residence 'battle' (apt name).
I can well believe the figures about non payment of maintenance. In my case, it's down to control and not want to give me any of 'his money', despite the fact the money is not for me but to help clothe, feed and care for our DC and while I appreciate that this is just my experience, there'll be others like him.
Niceguy commented above that men who behave like this need to be shamed and that this kind of behaviour is normalised because friends/famuily/colleagues collude with them. This is absolutely spot on. My ex's new partner, who was involved with him during the residence case went on to marry and have children with him - despite the court reports stating he was unfit to have full time care of his own DC with me.
Yes, when I said 'dads don't do equal hands-on parenting', I meant most dads.
Have you read Gideon Burrows book 'Men Can Do It! The real reason dads don't do childcare.'
It's an eye opener. By a dad, so you might be less sensitive about reverse sexism knowing that the author is male. I'm sure he meant 'most dads', btw, that's pretty clear in the book.
amberleaf But 62% DON'T pay, you really can't argue with that figure [well you can, but it isn't logical]
No, you're wrong. You are not reading and taking in the maths or the logic.
Imagine you have 100 children from 60 different mothers. If you say 60% of the children are read to every night, you can't say 40% of the mothers don't read to their children. Do you not see that knowing the percentage of single parents receiving payments tells you absolutely nothing about the percentage of parents making payments because the number of NRPs will not the same as the number of RPs. My father had 3 children with 3 different women, so he would account for 3 RPs not getting paid but only be 1 NRP. You can't count him 3 times!
But anyway, going back to the actual figures.
The 38% is part of 55% who have agreements or orders, i.e. the majority of single parents with agreements and orders are receiving maintenance. The report clearly states that.
45% of single parents have no agreements and orders and the report doesn't say why that is, but it will include other parents who have died. Are you suggesting that dead people be considered non-paying NRPs? It will also include people like myself who don't want/need/ask for maintenance or all sorts of things.
I have just been told the fee now is £215
(I normally get named in them as opposed to applying for them)
And it does not matter if the nrp has no idea where the pwc is, under section 33 of the FLA they can apply for whats known as a seek and find order.
This means that anybody from family members to schools to gov agencies even DV intervention partnerships can be forced by law to disclose the address where they live.
You can even get a order to force the police to trace a mobile phone.
This is the form you use
And last time I applied for one the court fee was less than £100
But 62% DON'T pay, you really can't argue with that figure [well you can, but it isn't logical]
The fact that some NRP do not pay does not eliminate the fact that some RP refuse to enter into an agreement
As sock says, the RP not engaging with the NRP doesn't stop the NRP from paying via CSA. I have a friend who was contacted out of the blue by the CSA about a long since disappeared ex/NRP, he had contacted the CSA and volunteered payment. She then received child support without having had any contact with him.
Is that the same straw that has 62% of NRP don't pay CM written on it?
If that's the case he should have asked them to follow procedure
Now your grasping at straws.
The pwc even if they are not the applicant could be subject to none compliance actions and the nrp could still pay csa direct.
If you were a NRP who was in conflict with your DCs Mum, would you put a cheque through the door (assuming you knew where they lived) without evidence you had done so?
Yes, NRP can pay the CSA directly in that situation, but unless the CSA have some way of contacting the RP, they can't and don't pay the monies to them. How many posts have you seen saying my ex doesn't know where I live and that's the way I want it to stay ?
The CSA have been known not to act on applications from the NRP at all - waiting instead for the RP to contact them. That's what they did when my ex contacted them.
Should have added that I know they can do this because it happened with my ex, we had a private arrangement for school dinner payments to be met by him, he found out that because he receives an army pension he could get a £5 pw assessment so transferred the company I gave him to his gf then applied to the csa.
He then got his £5 pw assessment and paid that for 3 years before the csa agreed to take into account earned income ( he gave gf company then claimed he worked for her).
But bottom line is he applied I didn't, when I received the paperwork I said I was not interested in using the csa and was informed (did check with a solisiter and it is correct) that as he had applied I was legally obliged to comply with there requests.
In my case, and that of 8 of the 9 divorced couples I know, the arrangement has been decided outside the courts and the mother is RP. In the 9/10 examples I know, including me, it is simply this: the mother wanted to be with the child more. That simple.
A nrp can also make application to the csa to pay. It does not have to be the pwc who does.
If a nrp wants to pay and the rp is refusing to engage with them then they can apply,provide the info requested and obtain an order and even if the pwc refuses to engage with the csa if the nrp has given all the info they can still order and nrp can put a cheque through the door.
If the pwc does not engage with the csa then she would be subject to exactly the same sanctions as the nrp would.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.