In thinking that 4 billion owing in child support is a national disgrace?

[CreviceImp]

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/absent-parents-owe-4bn-overdue-7025101

Scandalous....

Make the Petition section on here something you visit regularly.

[Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost]

Ynbu. It is bloody scandal.
The government are too fond of hounding the resident parent and giving the absent parent a walk over.
You hear of men running off with a floozy and yet its the women left behind and her children who suffer, and the government wonders why people get angry.

[Fratelli]

Yanbu it's utterly disgusting.

[Babyroobs]

Yes it's so wrong. Surely the government can devise a more efficient system of deducting money from these men who are able but not willing to pay for their kids rather than the state paying for them.

[MrsTerryPratchett]

It needs to be seen as disgusting and shameful to dodge paying for the upkeep of the children you created. Yes it does. Now how the fuck do we make people act like decent human beings? I have no clue.

[LurkingHusband]

The problem is, how can you get the money out of men who fuck off and start new families without punishing/penalising/disadvantaging them ?

I don't deny the sentiment of the OP (it is a disgrace, and demonstrates exactly where childcare fits in the scheme of things).

However, the £4 billion mentioned isn't "disappeared". Just not spread out fairly/properly.

[imeatingthechocolate]

yes it is and now they have changed the system so you have to ask the nrp for child support i asked i got abuse i have not applied for it through cmo because im tired of the abuse the second i do it will start all over again and im just not dealing with it so he has effectively got away with it she is 16 soon

[squashtastic]

Jail. Garnish wages. Lose visitation. It's the only way. How is it not neglect to not contribute to feeding your children?

[cannotlogin]

The problem is, how can you get the money out of men who fuck off and start new families without punishing/penalising/disadvantaging them ?

If you have children with a man who already has children, then you need to accept that he has a responsibility - legal and moral - towards those children and that there will be an impact on your household finances as a result. Any decision to have children with said man needs to factor this in. There is so much crap thrown around about 'single parents needing to take responsibility for their children'. How about new partners take responsibility for theirs? !

In all seriousness, I couldn't give two hoots if my ex and his new partner and her children/their children are disavantaged in some way because he needs to support the children that already exist. They are two people. I am one. Why should it all fall to me and everyone be on my back because I demand maintenance buy - oh my god - have a life and cut my hair every 8 weeks.

[cannotlogin]

Lose visitation.

This impacts on the children in a very direct way - you can't say to a child 'sorry, your dad would love to see you but the judge says he can't until he pays for you'. It's punishing the child twice over for something which is way beyond his control. At least there are benefits to help out parents on low wages - few children will actually suffer genuine 'neglect' at the hands of a non-paying parent. I agree it's neglect and if I spent £0 on my children I would face criminal charges because they live with me.

[CreviceImp]

I have started a petition with the idea that you charge those who refuse to financially contribute to their children with neglect. The idea is that it becomes a criminal offence after a year and then the police can prosecute.

I don't know if it will get anywhere but I am hoping it will open up the debate so it is dealt with more seriously and there is a shift on how this behaviour is viewed on a whole societal level.

It is in petitions if you want to add your support and I have started a campaign on Twitter. It might not achieve much but it won't be for the want of effort 🙂 Will attempt to link.....

[CreviceImp]

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/petitions_noticeboard

[CreviceImp]

mobile.twitter.com/account

[squashtastic]

cannotlogin

I don't think I a child loses out by not seeing a parent who can't be arsed enough to pay their mum to keep them alive and well.

OP: I think there are actually a few petitions about child maintenance on notice board. Does it make sense to have multiple ones?

[cannotlogin]

Really? There isn't more to the parent-child relationship than money? I can only speak from my experience but my children see their dad regularly and have a great relationship with them. His non payment of maintenance is about hating me, not them. It is an adult struggle, nothing to do with them. When they are old enough, they will judge him as they see fit but that's their relationship, it is not for me to influence that.

And that is the view the legal system takes as well. I would not personally back any campaign that suggested denying a child contact with a willing parent is acceptable. Maintenance should be dealt with between parents.

[CreviceImp]

This issue is about the responsibility of both parents to contribute financially to their child/ren.

If you want to discuss the separate issue of contact open up your own thread.

If you wish to engage in being finiancially abused and making excuses as to why you tolerate it then that is your choice.

[TremoloGreen]

The problem is, how can you get the money out of men who fuck off and start new families without punishing/penalising/disadvantaging them ?

I believe that in New Zealand, they have a law that the number of subsequent/other children is not taken into account when deciding the level of child support owed. I think that's fair I'm afraid. You don't get to go and create yet more children that you can't or won't support (or create them with a non-supporter) and then use those children as an excuse to make the existing children suffer.

I'm basing this on my ex-neighbours, I used to be a bit friendly with them, before they started very vocally complaining and campaigning aginst this law because he couldn't afford to support his eldest child back in NZ because they've chosen to have two more children.

[Andrewofgg]

cannotlogin The problem is not (only) the ex who starts a second family - it is the NRP who casually fathers more children. Even if he can be made to pay, he can only pay so much - he is not going to be left to starve in the gutter and if he was he could pay nothing. So what he can pay is divided ever thinner until, I suppose, the older ones reach sixteen and fall out of the reckoning.

I don't even pretend to know the answer.

And in view of my screen-name I need to say that I am not and never have been the NRP.

[TremoloGreen]

Cross-posted there. Strongly agree though. Also think maintencane should be collected through the Inland Revenue for both PAYE and self-assessment/ company returns. They can be pretty persistent when you owe them money.

[wannabestressfree]

I support your petition I really do but I also agree that access and maintenance shouldn't go hand in hand. Children aren't pay per view and I hardly think it's colluding in financial abuse if you make that distinction..
I agree it's a change we need culturally. I would remove maintenance at source straight away and I like the Finnish system. I have struggled for so long and I would like to see change.

[cannotlogin]

In what way am I making excuses, Crevicelmp? Maintenance is a separate issue to contact, surely?

[CreviceImp]

I have never said access and maintenance should go hand in hand.

I have made it clear they are separate issues.

[cannotlogin]

So in what way am I making excuses?

[CreviceImp]

I really don't understand the confusion.

I think you are getting muddled.