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''

In my experience Courts do seem to be geared in favour of the father, not the children. My ex hadnt seen my 2 ds's for 2 years, through choice, excuses such as he had to work, or didnt have anywhere to live etc, etc.

He then decided he wanted to see ds's, but both ds's were enrolled at a football team and had been for years, which meant training on Sat, match on Sun. I agreed he could see the boys, but that he would have to take them on his weekend.

He took me to Court stating that he had ALWAYS seen the boys and that i was now stopping him from seeing them (all he wanted to do was to stop the boys playing football on his weekend, because he couldnt be bothered to take them)

The Court ordered that the boys couldnt play football on his weekends, they gave him every other weekend, half of all school holidays and every other Christmas.

The icing on the cake was i had to drive to drop the boys off and pick them up on his weekend, because he didnt have a car and had a bad knee (he lied again) despite him not paying a penny in child support.

The Court totally ignored the Court Welfare Officers report, which stated she made a family tree with them and they did not mention dad, which suggested that he had NOT had contact with them.

The minute we walked out of Court, he did not want them for half of school holidays, every other Christmas. All he wanted was not to take them football on his weekend and for me to do the running about.

That was years ago, i stuck to the Court order despite not receiving a penny and it costing me money for him to see them. My boys are 18 and 15 now, they dont have a very high opinion of their dad and rarely see him, their choice. I hope losing the respect of his children, was worth every penny to him.

The family court told my Ex to do a very specific thing and adjourned the hearing. At the next hearing, he hadn't even attempted to do the thing he had been told to do by the court. No-one seemed to give a shit.

How the fuck are family courts to operate in this pathetic amateurish way.

Children starving and being emotional upset, is a form a child abuse.

If the resident parent, usually the mother was to allow her child to starve she would be hauled up for child abuse, same as if the child was showing signs of emotional distress.

The fact is everyone knows the mother (usually) isnt going to let this happen, no matter how hard things get, you are not going to let your child starve, even if that means starving yourself. You are going to protect your child from emotional distress and even make excuses for the 'missing' parent in order to shield them.

Its only child abuse, if it actually happens.

Yabu. Contact and child support should never be linked.

Isnt child support already linked to contact?

The amount of CS is worked out and reduced, by the amount of contact the non resident has. So if the non resident parent has the child for 3 days a week overnight, they pay less than a non resident parent who sees their child for one day every 2 weeks for example.

Im sure thats how it used to be.

Claw3, Yes I think it is linked in that way by the CSA. But a NRP may have contact without paying any child support.

Works in favour of the non-resident parent usually the father. The more contact he has, the less he pays. So he is seeing more of his children, but paying less.

Yes i was aware of the NRP having contact without paying any child support. My ex did it for 13 years. Funnily enough the Court didnt seem to mind it costing me money for my ex to have contact either, i had to drive them to and from visits. It was handed to him on a plate, no effort required on his part at all.

I have no patience with the "why should I pay when she won't let me see the kids" argument. How is punishing the child going to help? Because that's what happens when you with-hold maintenance. Rent, council tax, utilities, food still have to be paid for

I have every patience with this - if those things have to be paid for, and access to the child also has to be given, then denying access is IMO damn good cause for denying payment.

This isn't pay-per-view, this is correcting a loophole in the current system (the other loophole is allowing the NRP to pay nothing)

A few days ago my H told me that our neighbours had split up. H was amazed that the Hubby was paying his ex £400 per month. I waid why d do youfind that hard to understand? H replied that he would pack up working if he had to pay money to his ex (me). I just looked at him in disgust and replied that, actually, some men do give a shit about their kids and don't mind paying towards their upkeep. He didn't even have the decency to look embarrassed.

It's true that, for men especially, it's far too easy for them to just walk away from all responsibility.

Ouch, NickRobinson, that must have been horrible to hear

Not really. It's taken me a long time, but I have finally realised that H is so completely self absorbed and all me me me that nothing he says suprises me.

In my experience Courts do seem to be geared in favour of the father

And I bet you would find a lot of men who would swear it's the opposite.

The truth is that "fair" is a relative term.

NickRobinson, Sorry. That's a horrible thing to hear.

I think it is incredibly easy for men in the UK to walk away, I agree.

Niceguy, im sure there would be a lot of men who would swear the opposite, which is why i said 'in my experience'

Im quite sure what you mean by "fair" is a relative term?

not

If a NRP does not show up for contact, imo that is emotional abuse. For the people on here saying it is neglect rather than abuse, neglecting a child is classed as abuse.
If a NRP wont, rather than can't pay maintenance to support their DC, again that is financial abuse towards their DC imo.

If a RP is refusing to make sure the DC are ready for contact and is refusing to allow the NRP to see the children, that is also classed as emotional abuse in my book.

I agree with everything Claw3 has said so far. IME, family courts expect the RP and the child to accomodate the NRP.

Since there are no consequences if an NRP fails to support or see his DC, I believe the courts try to accomodate the NRP as much as possible in the hope that the NRP will adhere to contact, and will pay maintenance, because there's jack shit anyone does if the NRP doesn't adhere to either.

Ime, going to family court for a contact order, then going back to court to vary the contact order, because XP had changed his mind about what contact suited him was a complete and utter waste of everyone's time, public funds, and public resources.

Any parent who neglects their DC should be held accountable by professionals, regardless of whether they are RP's or NRP's. If a RP denies contact, or a NRP refuses to adhere to contact, then of course their concerns should be heard, their reasons, and a decision should be made by professionals as to whether contact resumes, the decision should not be made by the parent. If they continue to neglect their DC's needs, then they should be suitably punished, and if that involves a spell in prison, then so be it.
To the poster who said 'How will a NRP being sent to prison benefit the relationship between NRP and child?' my response is that if a parent is prepared to break the law, then prison is a possibility.
If I break the law in any other way, I could be sent to prison. My child would suffer, yes, but surely to god I cannot expect to evade justice because my child would suffer.
If that were the case, there would be many parents who would break the law, quite confident that they wouldn't be punished because they have a child.

There is no other responsibility that I can think of off of the top of my head where a person takes on a responsibility then just ignores it and incurs no consequences whatsoever.

If I do not pay my council tax for an extended period of time, and make no effort to, I face the prospect of going to prison.
I think it is a very sad fact of life in our society that non payment of council tax faces harsher punishment than neglecting a child's right to see their parents and develop a relationship with them, and deliberately withholding financial support from your own child!!