Csa

[Jamboree87]

I know this will be probably be a very unpopular thread but here goes....

My partner had a one nightstand a few years ago and was not informed of pregnancy but was told once said female had had the child. He pays csa but has no contact with the child as the mother has made things difficult let's say.

I'm not saying he shouldn't pay but they take an extortionate amount leaving us struggling most months.

I wonder what everyone's thought are on being made to pay csa when:

A) you were never informed of pregnancy and had no say whether you were willing to be a parent. Asking this as if a female is not ready she can decide either way regardless of the fathers wishes.

B) not being on the birth certificate, surely it makes sense that any parent paying csa should be on the certificate. You are paying for a child you have no say over.

I just want people opinions I feel so upset that we are constantly skint because the csa payments are so high and he gets nothing in return.

We have a child together and we struggle to put clothes on her back yet we pay £££ to child that he has no say over and never sees.

He’s presumably paying even less now that you have your own child - roughly 10% instead of 12%. He should’ve factored in his CM and other bills before choosing to have another child as he was already aware he’d had one.

You don’t say how old your partner’s previous child is. He’s possibly had years to try to see the child.

The fact that he got someone pregnant on a one night stand and didn't find out until AFTER she had the baby is the 'version' of events he's chosen to give you. Once the mother gets an opportunity to put her story across, I bet you will find out the real truth. If she was able to track him down to pay CSA payments, that suggests in itself that it probably was more than a one night stand.

Paying a small percentage of your wages towards the upkeep of your child doesn't make you a parent. Her life will temporarily have gone on hold to raise this child alone including the loss of a substantial amount of wages, etc. She doesn't get any of that back from him in any way whatsoever. She also has to act as both mother and father to that child while he swanned off into the distance.

I will say this, if his child was genuinely so important to him he would have done something about it years ago and finally 12% of his income goes towards the upkeep of his child. YOUR family unit gets the other 88% of it... yet you begrudge the other child that. Before he made any further children, he should have factored into the equation whether or not he could afford them.

Get a solicitors letter to request access. Failing that take it to court.
If he wants a paternity test, then arrange to have one done (if paternity is proved, he will end up paying for the DNA test anyway - more expense!).

'still expected to fund that lifestyle'... Wow!

He's not 'funding' anything, he is contributing towards the upkeep of his child. I imagine she has more of an 'existence' than a 'lifestyle'.

Talk to a family solicitor, sometimes the first appointment is free, find out what you can do legally.
Can you have the child support re assessed?
You will always have to pay cs, look at your capacity to earn, and what your partner earns minus the cs, can you work out what works best for you financially, can you both work part time? That way you still contribute to the other child, but possibly will have more to live on.
A friend in your situation went back to work four days a week and her husband worked three days. They paid much less in child support.
If the child's mum won't allow your partner to see the child then she can't expect child support.

If you are against men being forced to pay maintenance in those circumstances you are actually saying that a man's right to consequence-free sex is more important than the right of a child to be supported by the people who created them. Do you think men ejaculating with abandon and kids being left in poverty is something to aspire to?

I believe the birth certificate should list the birth mother and farther in all circumstances where both are known (even in cases of adoption) so I find it perverse that the CSA can take money off of men who are not listed on the certificate.
And I realise this won't be popular but while I don't think men should be able to force an abortion I do think in some circumstances (any point before 23 weeks, or at any time if the man was significantly more drunk than the women, was pressurised into sex, was sexually assaulted by the woman or reasonably believed the woman on contraception) was the men should be able to sign away all rights and responsibilities towards unborn children or children they have only just become aware of.

You do know women can't put men on the birth certificate unless the father is there.



The percentage he pays is not funding any "lifestyle" it's a small contribution towards a life he created

I'm a resident single parent and I get maintenance from the father for the children. I can assure you that the percentage he pays... funds a teeny tiny percentage of what they need. I pay the rest....

I can also assure you that on a low wage myself... even if I was a man... needing to pay the percentage that CSA would want off me... I wouldn't be struggling to put clothing on the back of any resident child with me because of it. I mean maybe if I had other debts and expenses it might be nice to pay out less but those are what I would be looking at reducing if I was struggling financially rather than what the child had from me.

Which is stupid.
The law should be changed so the fathers name and address has to be provided (where known) when the birth is registered and then the father should have 6 weeks to formally contest that the child is his and ask for a DNA test (funded by him if found to be the dad and by the mother if found not to be). If the father is not declared when the birth is registered they should be officially regarded as unknown and therefore not liable for any maintenance until a DNA test has been submitted proving who the father is (which should be funded by the mother but compulsory for men to submit samples for).

He gets nothing in return?! He has chosen not to pursue a relationship with the child. Using the mother as an excuse for not doing so is a poor excuse.

I wouldn’t be able to help but reeent him for being such an idiot.

friend in your situation went back to work four days a week and her husband worked three days. They paid much less in child support

That sums up this society’s attitude to child maintenance, doesn’t it? Do everything you can to reduce your liability and that’s fine. It’s the mother’s responsibility to make up any shortfall.

I believe the birth certificate should list the birth mother and farther in all circumstances where both are known (even in cases of adoption) so I find it perverse that the CSA can take money off of men who are not listed on the certificate

Again, for the hard of understanding, you have to be present to sign the register if not married. Why should you simply not have to pay maintenance because you didn’t turn up?

which should be funded by the mother but compulsory for men to submit samples for

Why should the mother have to pay for a DNA test? I don’t understand your logic here.

Get him to have a paternity test, and if he genuinely has tried to have a relationship with the child and been blocked; perhaps think about going through the courts. Perhaps when the equal rights everyone wants are in place things will even out, but the situation is what it is.

Court is £220, you dont need solicitors it is easy to represent yourself. Get visitstion sorted and especially a dna test.

he gets nothing in return

The child gets fed and clothed from that money. Your partner sounds like a selfish prick

Get a DNA test.
If the baby is his suck it up.
This is what happens when a man shags anyone and they get pregnant.
No point complaining about whether it's fair for women to have rights, at the end of the day, they do (thankfully). And this is known by everyone, so it shouldn't come as a great surprise or be annoyed about it.
Why don't people wear condoms, especially in one night stand situations is beyond me.

Yep obviously all her fault 🙄.

Yes he should want to ensure his child is supported.

He can self represent in court . However not sure how positive it would be as you seem to resent child . As you have one you will know they cost money.

If he can't afford to pay for the child he already has or try to go to court for access then he had no business having one with you. I can't understand people who do this.

As a single parent who receives maintenance I can assure you it's not "funding my lifestyle" and you would understand that if you were ever in that position. If I were single with no children I would happily go and live in a room in a shared house, but I need a 2 bedroom place and to feed and clothe my child.

If she isn't letting him see the child for no good reason then she is a horrible person but he should not withhold maintenance because of that. He should still do right by the child. And he should try for access.

To be honest I find it baffling that women get involved with men who are in these situations. I'd never get into a relationship with a bloke who has children he doesn't see regardless of the situation.

I see where you are coming from OP, over the past 10yrs I have not had a penny or requested any money from my10yr old DD's sperm donor as he did not want anything to do with her.

I know you have no money so a first step might be going to see someone at CAB who will probably be able to advise you as to what you can go and what legal steps you can take.

I assume your partner tries every week to get in contact with his child or tries to get contact with him or her?

You are complaining about the amount of money being taken, have you questioned why so much and are CSA aware of the situation that you have a child to care for and it is financially putting you in the red? If they are and you are still paying as much then there is more to this story than is being relayed to us.

Also can I just add, CSA would not be taking money unless paternity has been proven whether his name is on the birth certificate or not. It is down to him to ensure his name is on his childs birth certificate.

I really, really hope you’re my ex’s wife as this rings true with what I believe she’s been told. None of which is true.

It wasn’t a ONS, I fell pregnant before I realised he’d already met you. A baby wasn’t convenient for him.

He ignored all calls and texts after the birth, didn’t come to the hospital, didn’t come to register the birth (a blessing I now reslise).

I spent months trying to persuade him to meet his child, trying to get his family to meet my DS. He told me to stop contacting him as he never wanted to see him. 10 years later he’s been true to his word.

CSA now take his money before he’s paid due to years of sporadic payments and thousands of ££££ in arrears. I rely on that money, sadly.

I’m sure we are not talking about the same person but just be aware that there are two sides to every story. And the child still needs to eat.

I bet it wasn't a one night stand...
Your partner chose to have unprotected sex, apparently with a stranger. I'm willing to bet he's not sought any legal avenue to see his child because you both sound like you're not interested, you just don't want to pay the "extortionate" amount which unless he's a high earner is a fucking pittance in relation to the true cost of raising a child

CSA would take less money if your DP saw his child more and had her overnight.

A man shouldn't have sex with a woman if he isn't prepared for the possibility of becoming a father. Plain and simple. No birth control method is 100% reliable, if he did use contraception...

Maybe he should make an effort to be part of his child's life - have a dna test to prove paternity, go to court for access if the mother is unwilling to co-operate. It's not rocket science.

He created a life and should absolutely pay his share. He is choosing the easy road of not fighting for access.

I suspect he did request a dna when cms contacted him and it came up as proof positive he is the father. I bet the mother pays more than 12% of her income to feed, clothe, keep warm and house the child.