AIBU to think Child Maintenance is fair?

[R2G]

Just that. Does anyone have any opposite views? Anyone feel they ask to much? Etc

The boy is now a father, he never wanted this at nineteen and doesn't want it now.

That sucks, it really does. But...

He didn't have a choice

...he did. To not have sex or at least use condoms. But ultimately, he has sex, that’s the risk he takes.

Surely he should have some rights?

Well, yes. He has the right to not see the child and contribute nothing except $.

What he doesn’t have the right to do is

a) tell a woman, once he’s impregnated her, what to do with her body; or

b) deprive his child, once it’s born, of any financial support, keeping all his income for himself.

As an adult who had consensual sex...those are the rights he has.

sad situation not many people can finance 2 homes from 1 wage everyone loose out.

*On the face of it my contribution of over £800 a month and having them 2 nights per week seems generous. Whereas after childcare costs even with Ctc etc my dh and children would be struggling. 3 under 5 - childcare presumably over 2.5k. Leaves 1300 for everything else including mortgage, car, council tax, bills, food for 4, clothes

Not sure how me having a significantly higher disposable income left is fair when my children are struggling*

That is much more than i have each month- as pp says- it works out at 70k, hardly struggling. We get by on £20k.

If dh left me i’d be better off as i’d then qualify for singly parent benefits, which then wouldn’t be affected by any maintenance. Dh would be significantly worse off as he’d then have to house himself, and pay all his bills, plus cms. Would leave him very little.

It’s down to individual circs. If you are a high earner chances are you’ll be fine. Middle to low and splitting the income between two households is tough.

Can you imagine it? New list of priorities, 1. Do pregnancy test 2. Ask man if he wishes to financially abort

So where's the cut off point? Do they have to tell you they wish to financially abort BEFORE the cut off point for an abortion? What if you don't find out your pregnant quick enough? what if they say they want to financially abort and then change their mind? What a stupid idea

Yes it's fabulous. I get £37 a month off ex DP who earns £70 quid a day plus plenty of sideline work. Self Employed and tells MHRC he earns £40 a week (what sort of arsehole believes an adult with a car etc to run lives on £40 a week?) I've reported him, provided his employers' details etc But i'm female and a dreaded Single Mum so what do i (and DD) matter? Oh and the service wasn't fit for purpose when all this got set up 4 years ago; staff giving false names, stuff not getting done, lie after lie after lie.

I think both parents should pay 50/50 re childcare, food, clothes and school related costs for the chidren. Rent, bills etc are standard for all adults and both parents would need somewhere for the child to live not just one.

Is the minimum enough? Depends on the salary. Whilst it's not for many for some it will be way more than enough.

Rather than change the percentage, I'd rather see a goverbrave enough to clamp down and make it illegal not to financially support a child they chose to have for both RP and NRP. Plenty of both who don't or make the token gesture.

I think both parents should pay 50/50 re childcare,

Not sure i agree with this. Ex-dh uses after school clubs. He is self employed and picks his own hours. We have 50:50.

I managed to get my hours work changed so i dont use after school club. Ds only goes in on the days he is with his dad. And its a choice.

Why should I pay for half of the after school club?

Personally, I think a man should have the right to "financially abort" - i.e. absolve all financial responsibility for the child in return for giving up all custodial/parental rights

What?

It’s a gnarly system that could be much improved. A friend recently had her payments reduced because her ex chose to move in with his girlfriend. She has three kids - they’re not his, he has no obligation morally or legally to support them but the law says it’s fine for my friend to struggle as a result of his choice. Ridiculous.

littlemissrain Why do you think the right of a man to have consequence free sex should be prioritised over the right of a child to be supported by the adults who created it?

I agree with the person who said that it needs to be individualized to some extent. For example, nursery fees shouldn't completely fall on the RP's shoulders. Perhaps NRP should have to pay half of the fees (after WTC). There would need to be the option to borrow from the state to pay later but it's extremely unfair how many NRP leave it to the RP to pay. If this led to more NRP seeing their children more then great.

Obviously the self employment loopholes need to be sorted. If you tell CMS you earn £40 a week, this needs to be match what other financial services like loan and mortgage companies are told you earn.

The person who claimed 25% is too high - your baby gets 75% of his Dad's wages, 100% of CB, CTC and all of your wages.

I think that CMS need to make it clearer who pays for what. Judging by posts on here, some NRP are not providing clothes, toys etc at their house and think it's for the RP to pay for it all. I've even read about NRP telling the RP to add their name to Christmas gifts. 😵

And how do you think your proposals might impact on child poverty?

Unless the man had sperm ripped from his body his decision to have sex was his decision to potentially become financially responsible for the child he could father. No contraception is 100% effective.

No one needs to have sex. If a man doesn't want to pay for a child he should just not have sex.

A woman has the right to continue with a pregnancy because anything else is barbaric. Once that child is here the father becomes financially responsible for it. In theory anyway.

There are many men who father children who don't take financial responsibility by manipulating the system. They become self employed. Or don't work. Or use emotional blackmail to avoid paying. Or even domestic violence to make the women too scared to claim. They declare themselves bankrupt when the arrears get too high. Switch employers to avoid attachment of earnings orders.

Instead of the poor menz as a society we should be making men more accountable to that shag they had that might have made a baby. Having a baby is life changing. For the mother mostly. Having to tip up 15% of your salary for 18 years is a pretty small change compared to what women lose financially.

The financial abortion idea could end up being used to abuse the other parent. A mother who suspects that the partner is not keen will just delay registering for medical services until after the cut off date and an abusive father could use it to control the mother but leave her with the baby and not pay anyway. Both put the foetus and mother at increased risk.
Nothing stops couples using 2 methods of contraception. Eg They could use Pill and Condom

But if NRP having to pay 50% of costs they would need to be able to veto the RP descions because otherwise they could pick the most expensive care / school options and the NRP would be forced to even if they could not afford too....

The minium is fine because the NRP needs to house the children too and pay bills their own bills people forget that.

Rent, bills etc are standard for all adults and both parents would need somewhere for the child to live not just one

I think this only works if custody is split strictly 50/50. In most cases it isn't. If, for example, there are two children then the parent they live with may need a three bedroom home. If they only see non-custodial parent every other weekend (so maybe one night a fortnight) then the non-custodial parent may just have a one-bedroom home and sleep on the sofa when they visit. If both homes are in the same location, then rent for the three-bed home is going to be substantially more then for the one-bed home.

Having 1/2/3/4/+ children living with you certainly increases your bills even if living in the same size house. If you factor in heating, council tax, etc for a larger home then the bills could be substantially more.

Frouby even if the man is sexaully assualted by the woman he still has to pay child maintance. There was a case recently were a woman drugged a man had sex with him she was convicted of sexaul assult but got a suspended sentence.

She went to cms and he is being forced to pay his attacker tribunal said their hands are tied his is the father so he has to pay no matter how it came about.

I don't think one or two incomes living apart can ever be easy and much harder than two incomes living together.

It's hopelessly badly administered and that sometimes harms both parents. When a man (let's assume!) is paying regularly the amount needs to be sensitive to changes to his pay; quickly and immediately. If there is less overtime going he can't be expected to carry the whole loss.

The company car question needs sorting out: a company car is very nice, but it's not money and should not be treated as if it was. As it is, whether it is counted depends on the precise terms of the deal between the man's employer and the leasing company which will depend on the employer's tax considerations - which makes no sense for either parent.

As for contributions to nursery fees or school trips: No. CMES set the figure in pounds and that is the end of it.

Your DP should have tried to improve his financial situation before he committed to having more children. Quite apart from contraception failure that's not how the human psyche, male or female, works, is it?

Hahahahaha oh dear

My friend won't claim it..she gets enough in tax credits so dosnt need it

Having been on MN for years I often wonder how many men want children.

Whether they do it to please their partner, haven't been in a relationship long, contraception failure or are tricked idk, but I hate the feminist argument that 'if he has sex he commits'.

No it wouldn't. Once the man had made clear that he wouldn't financially support the child, the woman could decide - in full possession of the facts - whether to continue with the pregnancy.

I'm in N Ireland. I knew from the day and hour that I first had sex that there is a possibility that it might end in pregnancy and that if it did, I would have no option other than to become a parent. My partner knew the deal as well. Hence we both took responsibility for contraception. Men like to say that they have no power over these things, that women lie to them and say they are on the pill. But in reality they could always use a condom and whilst they are not 100% reliable, they are a lot more reliable than leaving your future in someone else's hands.

If dh left me i’d be better off as i’d then qualify for singly parent benefits

No, you wouldn't. There is no such thing.

On the face of it it can seem unfair for a man to pay for a child he tried to prevent being conceived and there was birth control failure.

But the alternative is or the state to pick up the tab. And that certainly isn't right.