AIBU that not paying child support / turning up for visits is child abuse!

[raspberryroop]

After reading so many sad stories on MN I'm coming to the conclusion that we need a shift in thinking that not paying child support and not turning up for visitation should be thought of by society as child abuse. It needs to become socially unacceptable the same way that drink driving was once ok and is now not. Even more cat among the pigeons think maybe visitation and ''parental responsiblity' should be lined to financial support. I could be wrong but it feels wrong to me that a child can virtually starve but the non paying parent still has ''rights''

At what level would you then set the punishment - if the non resident parent (NRP) is in work and refuses to pay an attachment can be made to his or her wages to ensure the children are supported properly. If non-payment in classed as a criminal offence carrying the same punishment tariff as child abuse the NRP may well be jailed, this will not improve the children's lot or the relationship between the child and the NRP.

Conversely I assume that if the resident parent (RP) refuses to make the children available to the NRP, or gives them choices such as sit around in a damp flat with a black and white telly miles from your mates, or come with me and my new parter to Thorpe Park so the child naturally chooses the latter option and the NRP is told "he/she doesn't want to see you - I'm not stopping them its their choice" this is also child abuse on behalf of the RP and the same tafiff (possibly prison) applies?

Where do you stand of parents who get financial support but whose children are in clothes and shoes that are too small but the RP smokes, or puts petrol in the car to go and see their new partner, is that child abuse too if so who has the right to monitor where maintenance is spend?

I am appalled by the amount of neglect both physically and emotionally suffered by children of separated and divorced parents, however it should be noted that the perpetrator of the neglect is not always the "absent" parent.

I think it should be separate, money and contact, just because I think linking them leaves more opportunity for either parent to manipulate things to their advantage. I think the contact system also needs massive overhaul though. Someone said above that a non resident parent messing the child around with contact, being often late, canceling at the last minute etc is a good reason to renegotiate the terms of contact, which I totally agree with, but the courts don't seem to see it that way. Also glossed over is the dynamic of contact after an abusive relationship has ended -whether physically or emotionally abusive. The partner who was abusive doesn't magically stop being as soon as the relationship has ended. Often the abuse will continue either in the form of using the children as pawns or bargaining chips, whether this is by spoiling the children with presents or messing around contact times, or the abuser will continue to be aggressive and threatening to their ex in front of the children, or just straight up the abuse is transferred to the children. Obviously this doesn't happen in every case but somehow it just seems to be ignored which I think is appalling when we know children are damaged by witnessing DV and EA.

Sorry for lack of paragraphs. Posting on phone.

Sunshine I love you a bit

i fail to see how it is abuse... my ds didn't see his dad for 12months, that does not mean he was abused children go through much worse than daddy not going to see them, ds's dad neglected his duties as a father but ds is not neglected in any way because of it, he has all his needs met.

The thing is most separating parents do not end up with these sorts of problems. Things may be difficult initially after a breakup with both parents possibly behaving badly, but even in acrimonious divorces most people love their children more than they hate their XH and eventually find a way to deal with things so that the child does not suffer.

We're talking about a minority, and within that minority things like abusive behaviour feature disproportionately (single mothers are 3x more likely to have experienced violence from the father of their child than the rest of the population). I hear a lot about evil XPs preventing contact but in more than half of cases it turns out there is a lot more going on (like his not bringing the DC back on time on more than one occasion).

Now that' not to say that there aren't RPs out there who use their children as pawns. Given the broad spectrum of human behaviour it's a statistical probability and some of us even know people like this. My condolences to anyone who is in this situation.

However, all the evidence (which is state-financed and uncontested) suggests that irresponsible NRPs way outnumber the number of RPs abusing their children. To find a solution that helps NRPs who are unfairly treated we have to create a system that cracks down on NRPs who abdicate their responsibilities (whether that's contact or maintenance or those who use their contact time to manipulate the children or to continue to abuse the RP). Then the NRPs who are left will have a much stronger claim when taking the RP to court for failing to co-operate with contact.

Agree generally sunshineandbooks but there are some difficulties.

First, don't even think about trying to force NRPs to have contact - if they won't, alas, they won't.

Second, an NRP who goes to court about contact cannot be met with a defence (which is what you seem to be suggesting, I'm truly sorry if I have misunderstood you) that "until the system cracks down on irresponsible NRPs this sort of application should not be allowed". The case concerns this child now, this RP now, this NRP now.

And finally: don't kid yourself that the crackdown can ever be 100% effective. Some people get away with not paying debts of all sorts for ever more. The mechanisms for the collection of debt could and should be more efficient but many NRP-debtors have other debts too and RP should not assume she will be first in line for payment.

Andrew I agree. That would be extremely unfair. That's not what I was suggesting so apologies if I didn't make myself clearer. What I'm saying is that there is far more chance of the wronged NRP getting justice if we deal with the problematic ones first. And in terms of priority (priority being the biggest number of children affected), this is also the area that first needs tackling.

What would be better would be a thorough overhaul of the entire family court system that would benefit all decent parents (whether RP or NRP) but primarily the child. Ultimately it's not about what's fair for the parents but what's best for the child.

alphabetti we got to the point were my dd had been sitting at four on the stairs with his coat on waiting four hours, he was so convinced my ex was coming dd wouldn't take is coat off and fell a sleep on the stairs with it on I didn't have the heart to get him to take it off

Even times when I rang his mobile to ask him were he was he would be like

Oh yeah I driving down your road now, then I would ring the house phone and his mum would say oh he's just in the garden I will just get him gurrr

Worse still I had times when he would get hear basically get out of the car get a phone cal
From his girlfriend turn and get back in his car and drive off with dd standing their

I would then get a text saying sorry something has come up I might come back later tell little
man sorry or me

Whatever any one says you can only keep trying for so long

And allowing this type of behaviour to go on because their might be a off chance they might actually show up is very harmful to a child

In the end when he did evenly start seeing him the ex left 6 year old dd alone over night with his step sister who was a toddler at the time

I promptly stopped contact from then

And to be honest the fact that he was so shit and Turing up for contact should have gave me clue about him in general

YANBU, though I'd count it as neglect rather than abuse. I think absent parents who fail to turn up for planned contact on a regular basis should be prosecuted for neglect- a resident parent who 'forgot' to pick up their child from nursery or school would be, so why not absent ones?

"If you believe not financially supporting a child is abuse, then it would have to apply to PWC and NRP"

I'm a semi-unemployed single parent, who knows many others, and all of us are working, and would like paid work if we could get it. I don't know anyone who 'chooses' not to work. But if you want to put it like that, why not also make the government responsible for abuse when they cut benefits for children? Because that's the duty of civilised society, to support the vulnerable.

Wibbly, the government did not choose to bring these children into the world. Individuals made those choices.

A single parent is not automatically vulnerable just because they are a single parent, and I would have had huge objections to being called vulnerable when I was on my own with a baby and an SN toddler. I was not vulnerable, I was perfectly capable of providing for my children, as was my ex, who if he had chosen not to pay, should have been made to pay by law.

The thing is that outright not having contact, while terrible, is nowhere near as bad in terms of upset and potential emotional/psychological damage as a NRP who keeps the kids waiting, expecting them and then not turning up. Repeatedly. For years. THAT'S when I think that parents should be allowed to say okay, that's it, I don't want my ex having contact any more. It IS an all or nothing thing.

my friend's dad was physically abusive. her mum left him, he fought through the courts to get access, and was only allowed supervised access. so her mum would take her to some court approved centre, she'd wait, he wouldn't show. again and again and again. now age comes into it I'm sure, but she can't remember the "abuse", only the endless waiting for a father who never loved her enough to show up. and it has damaged her emotionally. I'd say the not turning up for visits counts as abuse, yes. not paying I don't think is on the same level, though still obviously very wrong.

Thoughtless, mean spirited, neglectful fuckwittery yes. Abuse, no.

Babybarrister - please don't take my comment out of context - I was talking about parents who kill their children out of revenge. Not the petty spitefulness that goes on.

Male LPs account for a mere 8% of single parent families, and of that 8% a further 12% will be widowed rather than separated or divorced. Among those where there is an NRP involved the complaints made by single fathers seem to very similar indeed to those made by many single mothers. It's not about biology but about culture and circumstances I think.

babybarrister would you say that the female NRPs behaviour is genuinely more spiteful or simply that it is perceived to be more spiteful? We live in a culture where men walking away from their children has been normalised for centuries and even now still occurs in way larger numbers than it should. Whereas a mother doing the same is treated with absolute condemnation. When it comes to children mothers are held to a much higher standard of behaviour than fathers. That doesn't mean the standard should be lowered but that parents of both sexes should be held to it.

"We live in a culture where men walking away from their children has been normalised for centuries and even now still occurs in way larger numbers than it should. Whereas a mother doing the same is treated with absolute condemnation."

I know - it's bloody outrageous!

There already ARE orders that prevent parents with care for moving - all the NRP has to do is apply to the courts. Since my Ex-H cheated on me with one of my so-called-friends and we divorced when our ds (my DS1) was 9mo, There has been an order over me preventing me from moving outside the boudaries of the town I am living in. Until DS1 is 18yo. He is currently 9yo. I HATE this town. I would move tomorrow if I could. If I was allowed to move to the town 30 miles away, I would have family support that I don't have close at hand, I would have a job waiting for me (in my uncle's company), and the schools are much better with SN which would benefit DS2 and DD. But I am not allowed to move, even though I am unable to gain employment in my town.

OP - YANBU. My Ex-H decided he was 'too busy' to see my DS1 for 6 months when he was 2yo, and then for another 6 months when he was 4yo. He has NEVER paid a penny in maintenance, as he refuses to work, and has been on JSA since leaving me, has had a baby with his new partner (who doesn't work either), and she is pg again. Yet all that is fiiiiiine and not in the least a problem....

No way a child can starve in this country unless the resident parent is an arsehole, someone on drugs, a drinker or a child abuser.

The state pay sufficient money for a child to be fed on benefits.

And about single mothers working - if NRP's were MADE to pay a reasonable amount (more than £5 a fucking week), maybe these mothers would be able to afford the childcare that would enable them to work.

WHY is it always the MOTHER'S fault?? Is it MY fault my Ex-H cheated? No? Is it my fault he has been on JSA for 9 years? Even when I was working 60 hrs a week, he couldn't be bothered to get off his arse, and the government don't make him. He's gone on to have a relationship with someone else, who had one dc already, so my maintenance went down from £5/wk to £3.66/wk. Then she had a baby with him, and my maintenance went down to £1.50/wk. She's pg again, when this baby is born I will get NOTHING. Even now, WTF does £1.50 buy for ds1??!!

I find it unacceptable that a NRP can still take the RP to court [fucking stressful] for a contact order; and then be allowed to ignore it.

It happens too often.

Why ahould [mostly] absent fathers be allowed to look like fucking martyrs and then abuse everyone and everything via the family courts?

I think trying to classify not paying child support/not turning up for contact as a form of child abuse is akin to trying to class drink driving as attempted murder. Ie. a leap too far.

There's absolutely nothing stopping society from making being a feckless parent as frowned upon as drink driving without trying to twist it into something it's clearly not.

At the end of the day though I think it's important to look at why it's not socially unacceptable. There's no one single answer but often I blame their mothers who bring up son's to think they are golden child. They don't have to do anything for themselves and think their shits don't stink.

I think also if women stopped going out with men who plainly don't give a toss about their kids from a previous relationship then that would stop a lot of broken relationships.

Just remember that no man will ever say "I don't see my kids cos I can't be arsed". He will always blame his ex. If you then leap into a relationship with them then don't be surprised if at a later date you split up, he can't be arsed to see your kids too!