to wonder why men are almost always the non-resident parent

[womblesofwestminster]

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.

Brandy wasn't it changed to NRP from absent parent? because absent parent lumped dads who see their children EOW/weeknights in with the ones who never bother?

Some people are very angry and bitter at their exes and do find it difficult not to project their own situation onto everyone elses. When a bunch of people are going on and on about how crap their ex is, how crap most men are and making jokes about "men" in general, that is where stereotypes come from and there is a stereotype that NRPs are feckless fathers

Hmm, I could say the same about some of the things posted on step parenting about those evil bitter ex wives. Lots of projection over there too.

You might be surprised how many men are embarrassed/ashamed that contact with their DCs has been withheld - it's really sad

My DH is being really open about his current situation (his ex is withholding contact, has applied to court to prevent it and is considering applying to remove PR) - and several friends/colleagues/acquaintances have disclosed that they also have DCs with whom they have been prevented from having a relationship with by their Mum

I was talking about needaholidaynows DH/P though, who does have contact?

Ok, so I absolutely did not read through every post but I am surprised to find so many people thinking that the RP has a bad deal?? I have my daughter full time, never had much contact with father and when she did I was present and I wouldn't have it any other way.

I adore my daughter and I certainly do not feel hard done by doing all the work by myself. She is my beautiful little girl and I do not and will never grudge her a second of my time.

Here's another one for ya:

Only two-fifths (38 per cent) of single parents receive maintenance from their child’s other parent - Gingerbread

Pretty amazing...

Amber - Hmm, I could say the same about some of the things posted on step parenting about those evil bitter ex wives. Lots of projection over there too.

I don't disagree. It's not right either or helpful. It just creates more bitterness between people.

But that isn't the case Brandy. The courts no longer think the kids should be with the mother if the father works and the mother doesn't. They uphold the right of the child to equal contact with both parents. There doesn't have to be any benefit demonstrated from this. Shared residence is favoured because it gives children the right to equal access to both parents. In my case even when the parent is absent and his place is taken by a nanny because "the nanny is acting in the place of the parent".

SomePeople - Does that take into account private agreements or is just just those NRPs not paying through the CSA when a case has been opened?

Only two-fifths (38 per cent) of single parents receive maintenance from their child’s other parent

How do they know?

Aren't most maintenance agreements informal arrangements that don't involve the CSA?

It is taken from Family and Children Survey 2008, Table 15.1. DWP, 2010. I imagine they asked parents rather than just checked with the CSA.

NoNoNo - That is not the general view of the courts in my experience. It depends on the Judge on the day. I would say that your experience is actually very rare.

I know personally a father whose ex walked out on him and their daughter. After several months she applied to court to have the child returned to her. The courts ordered daily contact for the Mum to build up to 50/50. That is NOT the normal experience for fathers. A Father would be very unlikely to be given daily contact. The norm is every other weekend.

The courts no longer think the kids should be with the mother if the father works and the mother doesn't. They uphold the right of the child to equal contact with both parents

Unfortunately, that is another generalisation.

"Some courts sometimes uphold the rights of children to equal contact...." would be more accurate.
Many fathers are pursuaded not to apply for shared residency by their own legal representation - instead counselled to apply for something considered 'more reasonable'.
And, like me, many Mums are represented by solicitors who question their clients instinct to consider equal/shared parenting.

I wonder how accurate it is if its done by the DWP. Are all people going to admit to receiving maintenance if they think it could affect other income?

Well there must be lots of PWCs receiving private agreement maintenance on here. Were they ever asked for the purpose of this survey? Anyone remember?

Maintenance doesn't affect benefits, if that is what you mean.

SomePeopleNeedHelp yes thats right, I posted upthread about that and said that a lot of those that do get child support get the min amount or £5 a week [the amount someone on JSA has to pay]

It is a fact that the majority of NRPs dont pay a penny.

It is often hotly disputed though!

Maintenance doesn't affect benefits, if that is what you mean.

Oh yes, it does.

It doesn't currently. It used to. Who knows if it will again? Will people really want to risk having it on record if they could struggle in the future as a result?

Buffy maintenance is discounted when assessing benefit entitlement.

Oh yes, it does

Oh no it doesnt!

Well, it does mine. It is considered part of our household income.

Yes I think it's more likely people are lying about getting maintenance than the fact that lots of nrps don't pay.

I know I saw it AmberLeaf but I thought some cold hard stats might be enlightening.

For what purposes Mumallthetime?

Mumallthetime What benefit? You need to check that out because it's not anymore for income support, tax credits etc. Ask CAB.

Well, that table is from 2008, yes? It only changed in October so prior to that maintenance did affect benefits. Wonder when in 2008 it was carried out.

And I know it's discounted now amber but I think we cross posted.

I think it's disputed because the methodology isn't transparent.
Noone knows how that statistic has been arrived at.

Even if RP were asked the question - did they realise what they were being asked? For instance, if a NRP has been court-ordered to pay the mortgage on the FMH (which is in turn considered maintenance by the CSA) - does the RP consider that they are being paid maintenance or not?

Supporting a DC financially can be achieved in ways other then handing a cheque over every month. School fees, paying for housing or household bills or providing a vehicle are all arrangements I have heard of in my local area. Few, if any of those mums would say they are receiving maintenance if they were asked.

He told me that 40% of CSA claims are against mothers. I was really surprised. I have yet to check out whether this is fact.

It's not. In 2011, for example, 95.1% of assessed cases involved a male NRP. Those stats were provided to Parliament directly from the CSA.

I agree that assuming 38% of single parents getting maintenance via CSA means that 62% get absolutely nothing is suspect; firstly because as has been mentioned it excludes private arrangements, when not going via CSA doesn't mean nothing is being paid, yet it assumes that; secondly because it excludes widows and those who have never involved the other parent at all; and thirdly because some NRP are themselves on such low incomes they aren't liable to pay - doesn't mean they don't care.

Again from that 2011 report: In 862,100 cases (75% of the live total) there was a liability to pay child maintenance. Maintenance was being paid in 669,400 cases. In 143,300 cases the parent with payment liability was ‘nil compliant’ (i.e. not making the expected payments during the preceding quarter).

But the fact is, a hefty number of NRP pay sod all for their kids, even if the proportion paying is probably a lot higher than 38%. It's not an inherently unfair claim to make.

A really interesting report came out earlier this year. It found having more kids with a new partner was one of the biggest factors in whether fathers saw their kids by a previous relationship; more than any other, including attitude of the first family's mother. It seems having a new family they live with fulltime can cause some fathers to lose interest in the old. That is, sadly, certainly something I recognise from my own anecdotal observations, so having research explore it was interesting to read.