To not agree to wipe off CSA arrears?

[OhSammyBoy]

DS2 (9) dad has not seen him since 2010. This is his choice (dad not DS). Prior to this he only saw him 5 times in the previous couple of years.

He pays maintenance through the CSA. He left his job last year and failed to notify the CSA. Now as far as the CSA are concerned he has still been building up arrears in this time, as the assessment changes at the point of telling them your circumstances and they wont backdate.

The CSA in a rare show of actually being useful have chased up the case this week, and contacted me to ask if we have set up a private arrangement (No) and if I have received and maintenance directly (No), if I want them to chase the arrears (Yes) and if I still want them to retain the case (Yes).

They have rang DS2s dad, and obviously made him aware of this. He has now text me asking if he can ring me, as "there is a CSA issue that he needs to sort". I know he is going to ask me to wipe the arrears and close the case.

WIBU to tell him no?

In the interests of full disclosure

• DS2 is the result of a 1 night stand.
• His dad did not know about him for the first few years of his life (I couldn't find him - as soon as I did I told him about DS)
• I do not need the CSA money to get by - it goes into a savings account.

I have no experience in these matters, so have no idea whether this is a good idea or not, but here goes: take the money, and arrange for him to get a certain amount back after he has taken his child out somewhere nice for the afternoon? Could be done on a monthly basis. Could be interpreted as paying him to spend time with his child (which is what the child wants, or I wouldn't suggest it) but could make it sound like it is a convenience thing? While your here.... etc. Sorry if that breaks CSA rules or anything.

Needaholiday Unfortunately the CSA don't operate like that. The change of circumstances happens from when you tell them of the change not several months later. I didn't realise at the time of saying yes chase the arrears that we were talking about this period where he hadn't told them hed resigned his job. I thought it was the original £500 from when he was refusing to pay, on the basis that he didn't want his partner to know. He has now told them, and asked what happens to the arrears, they have told him they stand unless I agree to clear them. Hence his text to me.

I'd take the money. I wouldn't necessarily bank the whole lot for the child's future, either. I would use it to fund expenses created by a father choosing to be absent. Presumably you have some childcare expenses that would in a together family be met by parents juggling leave. Obviously if you really can afford to its a nice thing to do for your child, but the important thing you are doing for your child is loving and caring for him. Loads of people including parents lose their jobs. Most of us seek to minimise the negative impact on our offspring. This man's problems are not your problems - you have enough on your plate raising the child you both created.

"Should I accept this penis inside me knowing no contraception is 100%? YES I will choose in"

Well there should be no abortions then, as pregnancy is just clearly a risk you take. Don't want to get pregnant? Don't have sex. If that rule is fine for men it should be fine for women?

So he's resigned his job and now he won't have to pay you because his parents are supporting him. You're not going to get anything more out of him so there's no way I'd waive the arrears.

Do his parents know about DS?

Well there should be no abortions then, as pregnancy is just clearly a risk you take. Don't want to get pregnant? Don't have sex. If that rule is fine for men it should be fine for women?

Or how about if a woman chooses to have an abortion, a man should have a tube stuck up his urethra into his bladder and waggled around for a bit? After all, if it's fine for a woman it should be fine for a man?

That makes as much sense as your stupid non point.

See the usual crap is being spouted about how men should get a choice after conception so to make it equal. Yet again 'equality' means all the consequences must be taken by women and men get to do what the fuck they like. Just as they have been doing for thousands of years.

Neither abortion or childbirth is completely risk free, its unfair that only women face that risk, how would you make that equal? Or will biology suddenly be an acceptable answer then?

Time to resurrect the pit, I see.

At the point of sex, men and women have the choice to proceed or not. Both know that conception is a possible consequence of that. Both know that if conception does happen, it is solely the woman's decision thereafter, to bear the consequences to her body of pregnancy, MAP, or abortion.

This isn't news to anyone. There are no false pretences. If you don't want to have penetrative sex on that basis, then don't.

The end.

needaholiday I doubt he is that disorganised in other aspects of his life, I wish I could drift through life thinking things like council tax and rent would pay themselves because I was a little disorganised - child support is no different!

"Because of being a little bit disorganised on his part, it's like he's now being punished for it."

Yep. Same goes for, I
Dunno, late taxes etc.

The contraception/abortion argument is irrelevant here because the child already exists. The OP has brought up her DS alone from day one and contacted the father as soon as she could to inform him he had a child. Unlike the child's father, she has taken responsibility for the child conceived on a ONS (probably not the OP's ideal situation, either). On the other hand the father has messed the child (and OP) around and now doesn't see his child, leaving a devastated and confused child in his wake = feckless. He left his job because he got arrested = feckless. He failed to inform the CSA he'd, ahem, 'lost' his job = feckless. The CSA money is clearly the only part of the whole situation that he's taking responsibility for and even then, only because it's enforced by a government agency. He sounds like a pathetic embarrassment to the male gender.

OP, keep the case open and keep the arrears request in place. The money is for your son and can go into a savings account as normal. As someone else suggested, text and tell him to deal with the CSA himself. He needs to learn the lesson here that should he have any future changes in circumstances, he informs them straight away. Otherwise, tough shit.

Women take risks with both childbirth and abortion. Deciding to abort can haunt a woman. Deciding not to changes every aspect of her life and subjects her to the changes to her body, her whole life and yes, her disposable income.

The only thing affected by giving men a choice to support the child or not is his bank account and subsequently in many cases, the child's standard of living.

And you people think this is an equal choice?

If the man knows he doesn't want to take responsibility for a child he should make bloody sure he doesn't get anyone pregnant...SAME goes for the woman - she actually has far more contraceptive choices than the man does....and interestingly the OP is choosing to ignore mentioning WHY she got pregnant.

He chose not to use a condom I guess therefore he chose the option of fatherhood. It's not exactly news to anyone that there are consequences of that...The 'no condom' is an assumption.... the OP hasn't told us whether SHE bothered to take responsibility to use anything! And even if it was a lack of condom issue - there is such a thing as the 'morning after' pill which is the WOMANS responsibility (unless you think a man has the right to force a woman to take it?).....

Deciding to abort can haunt a woman. Deciding not to changes every aspect of her life and yes, her disposable income...like it doesn't haunt a man or affect his whole life when he is tricked into being a sperm donor and then forced to pay for the child he never wanted in the first place?

You want to hold men financially accountable for accidental pregnancies and unwanted fatherhood....but not the woman? Or for FORCING that upon a man?! So all a woman has to do is decide whether she wants to keep it and then everybody else around her is held 'liable/responsible' for the financial upkeep of that child? A woman is NOT taking personal financial responsibility in the same way a man is expected to because she is receiving CHILD BENEFIT & CHILD TAX CREDITS and other help to support HER decision to keep it. Even if she doesn't work she is still supported financially by the system for her choice.

cue the 'condom split & i didn't know/can't use hormonal contraception etc

you want to hold men responsible based on their sex/physiology/biology but at the same time absolve the woman of ALL responsibility based on her sex/physiology/biology?!!!!!

.....and you consider yourselves intelligent 21st century women who believe in EQUALITY?!!!! Wow! No wonder Fathers For Justice exist!

no contraception is 100% This is the ONLY thing i agree with.

Do you raving, hysterical MRAs know that actually men can receive child maintenance, child benefit and child tax credit? Strangely enough, the forms for none of these demand to know parental gender when applying, they only ask if you are the one caring for the child. Therefore your misogynist arguments are based on nothing, and you had probably better crawl back under the floorboards now.

So as we recognise that all the physical consequences, and therefore responsibility, of an unwanted conception lies solely with the woman, then we accept that the woman has the choice over what happens within her own body.

That's fine.

Then we get to the financial responsibility, which is a different thing. No one should have the right to decide what happens to someone else's financial obligations and responsibilities. So just as a man shouldn't have the right to make a woman carry a child she doesn't want, a woman shouldn't have the right to make a man pay for a child he doesn't want.

There are always going to be problems in those situations, but as we have a welfare state that provides adequately for lone parents without considering what NRPs pay, it seems to me pretty unfair to make a man pay into a savings account for a child that he didn't even know existed until it was a few years old.

There will always be biological boundaries to equality, but we could achieve financial equality. Which, incidentally, would probably result in absent fathers as a whole paying more than they currently do.

tricked into being a sperm donor

Ah yes. Because every woman's deepest desire is to raise a baby on her own and have that child be utterly distraught because the father thinks he can shirk his responsibilities. Which in most cases he gets away with because society is broken in that regard.

And as for "tricked", I assume you're across the basic biological principle that sex leads to babies? I don't see where there is a trick?

No way would I agree to wipe off the arrears, his tough luck if he failed to inform them of a change of circumstances. He sounds exactly like my ex. Ignores the child for an extended period of time and only when money becomes an issue do they rear their ugly heads. My ex also did not want to pay the arrears and I have told the CSA to chase it haha

You want to hold men financially accountable for accidental pregnancies and unwanted fatherhood....but not the woman?

I'm yet to encounter a single mother who thinks raising a child hasn't cost her anything. So I don't see how you think women escape financial responsibility?

I am a single mum. I offered my DS's dad the choice- in or out. He chose out, and I ask him for nothing. Life is much simpler for us, we know where we stand. I considered us as equals, facing parenthood, and we had a choice. I chose one path, he chose another. I get the benefits of my path (DS), he gets 'freedom'.

I think otherwise we risk putting men in the position women were in just a generation ago- unable to have sex without the possibility of being forced into an unhappy commitment. Women have attained sexual liberation via contraception, I have no wish to now deny men then as some sort of punishment for past generations inequalities.

I think knowing you have a child out there you will never see grow up could be as psychologically painful as an abortion, so I think the two are comparable. Abortion is always safer than birth, so once the woman is pregnant, she's stuck doing one or the other anyway, and that's not the man's fault any more than her's- that's biology as it is just now.

You should have posted this on a Saturday afternoon op when all the mra are in McDonald's with their kids.

It would have been a totally different thread.

I have just googled 'MRA'. I am not one. I'm just a feminist who actually believes men and women should be as equal as equal as possible, and don't believe the sons should be punished for the sins of the fathers, literally.

That's an insightful and interesting post lessgym.

SOMUCH.....UNPROTECTED sex leads to babies....and OP WAS aware of that. AND responsible for that because it is HER body.

aand she DID use him as a sperm donor and trick him into fatherhood....His dad did not know about him for the first few years of his life She even says she only bothered to track down this one night stand she had unprotected sex with when she needed the money.

she's now doing this purely for greed I do not need the CSA money to get by - it goes into a savings account

Yes SugarOnTop and the OP is being responsible for her decision to have sex by raising her son. Why does that mean she should be solely responsible?

And the rest of your post is bollocks and pertains to a scenario which only exists in your head because there is no evidence the OP did any "tricking". The only reason she says about why he didn't know was that she couldn't find him to tell him.