Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Child maintenance

224 replies

Pankhurst09 · 21/07/2019 00:39

So after reading a Facebook blog from ‘single mum still standing’ and living under the threat of maintenance payments being used as a means of control, and hearing the same issues/grievances from all my resident parent circle, I’m keen to know if the majority feel the same, or just some constructive feedback before I lobby my MP. Thanks in advance.

*This is my experience within the Scottish system.

After reading the very insightful post about maintenance from “Single Mum Still Standing” and the fantastic top comment from Phil Dooner and receiving yet another threat about maintenance, it really angers and saddens me that this country does not have systems in place to allow a fair and adequate system of control for the care of, and fair maintenance payments towards children after separation and divorce.

I have been separated for four years but still after all this time it comes back to maintenance and threats, if I ‘step out of line’

Even if the non resident parent makes a very decent wage but works under a limited company any maintenance payments would only be based on what has been declared. I’ve had regular threats to stop payments and this has happened in the past.

This needs to stop! It’s not just about maintenance payments, it’s about fairness and decency and a just society and actually teaching our children accountability. You have a child, you care for them, regardless of any other factor, they should be priority, period.

What are we teaching children right now? The resident parent must provide all, be all, expect nothing, unless the non resident parent is honest, moral, decent enough, can be bothered to provide.

The system as it stands says;

Resident parent it’s YOUR child, BUT when it comes to rights and access, it’s both ‘YOUR’ child/children, therefore if the non resident parent decides not to pay for whatever reason they deem fit, there’s not one thing you can do about it.

Non resident parent wants 50/50 access ‘YOUR’ child could well be subject to this growing ‘trend’ in court systems. Non resident parent wants to return after many days, weeks, years of not being present ‘YOUR’ child most probably will be forced into contact. Non resident parent has committed a crime? even towards the resident parent! Still a good chance ‘YOUR’ child will still have to endure contact. ‘YOUR’ child has to move house, schools, quit groups, have less than they would have had, not have what their peers have, not participate in the same clubs, not have the same life chances and opportunities? because the non resident parent just decides not to pay towards ‘YOUR’ child, tough, it’s actually YOUR child, and they can walk away from every last bit of responsibility if they so choose.

Resident parent, ensure you have a safe place to stay, food on the table, school clothes, trip money, activities, transport, homework done, emotional care, hygiene, clean beds, clean clothes, good communication with schools, groups, non resident parents (in fact be their PA because it’s your fault if they’re not kept up to date), Keep your own calendar up to date, make play dates, read parenting information, discuss well being, attend events, parents evenings and plays and sports days, do school runs and drop offs, attend doctors and dentists, make Halloween costumes and complete projects, make packed lunches and diners, and of course WORK! But understand your work isn’t important, the non resident parent’s work is much more important and you also need to source childcare and that is your responsibility. Child is ill... that’s your responsibility, not the non resident parent, and there is absolutely, not one iota of responsibility that they need to take, and there is absolutely not one iota of accountability enforced.

Resident parent however, if you don’t/can’t be bothered to provide?. have another family and can’t be bothered with your children from your first relationship? lose your job and can’t feed your children, self employed and choose not to declare all of your earnings and spend the majority on yourself to the detriment of your child’s well being?decide not to care adequately or communicate about your child because of another partner,Just don’t bother to turn up for your child?... ABANDONMENT and NEGLECT. And we will not just advocate those rights for your child and non resident parent, we will enforce them.

So, what is this teaching OUR children? Future generations? And where is the fairness or balance in this system?

The government needs to take this seriously when it comes to enforcing adequate care of OUR children. They are keen to promote a country that is child centred. There is nothing child centred in this archaic, toothless system. Non resident parents are afforded all the rights of a resident parent with zero responsibility. A system that actually allows and fosters control and abuse.

Other countries such as America or Australia have powers to arrest wages. In our tax system that can quite easily persecute a single parent that hasn’t declared their exact earnings or who can wipe out a local business with investigations I find it very hard to understand how they can’t ensure EVERY non resident parent is paying the pitiful bare minimum that the government suggests.

This bare minimum (if you’re lucky, equates to pounds a day) let’s see any of you non resident parents bring up well rounded, well adjusted individuals that deserve all the life chances that any child deserves whether their parents remained together or not, on a few pounds a day.

And this is where the Adverse Childhood Experiences really kick in, although the separation is traumatic, it’s the prolonged control and negativity this backward system allows.

It should be very simple, make non resident parents accountable just like resident parents. Have laws to enforce this, have a system with teeth, arrest wages, have a fair standard amount awarded to the resident parent at time of separation that is not controlled by the non resident parent, that does not allow any form of control, don’t allow abandonment, neglect, or abuse from either parent. It really shouldn’t be this difficult.

Us resident parents are tired, we’re tired of fighting a fight we shouldn’t have to. The majority want the best for our children, we want laws in place to protect our children and us and ultimately our country’s future.

This is a much bigger debate but to kick it off I’m asking for a petition to award an initial standard amount to the resident parent at the time of separation (in the exact same manner as government child tax payments would be awarded) that comes directly from the non resident parents wages/benefits/income. A payment that cannot be controlled or adjusted by the non resident parent and is not ‘means based’ on the non resident parent, what an utterly preposterous system in the first place. We have an actual living, little human being here, who needs care and food and much more, not a ridiculous tiny little percentage of an often made up income. Because at the moment you can have a situation where the non resident parent is required to pay nothing, so by this logic ‘their’ child should have nothing? How can this be right?
(*taking into consideration that many non resident parents are pushing for extra nights access only because this backward system then reduces the amount they have to pay, many are self employed and only declaring a little while their lifestyle tells a very different story, many straight up just don’t pay, many just pay when they want, many use maintenance payments as means of control for years and years and years, it should be a fair, standard amount in line with the cost of living and inflation, and bringing up a child in line with costs such as weekly/monthly food, childcare, health, activities, clothes, shoes, housing, utility bills, phone contracts, prior commitments etc... the list could go on) a fairer, further amount should then be based on what was a prior lifestyle for the children, house, area, clubs, activities, bills, and also future clubs, activities, needs, college/university etc... (not the now made up wage of the non resident parent).

The funny (or not so funny) thing is, I instantly imagined an outcry at that above list! “Phone contracts”?! And that is exactly where the problem lies...

The percentage of female judges in Scotland and the rest of the UK was sitting at an all time low when a study was conducted in 2016 (24% in Scotland and only 30% in England and Wales while the continent wide average was 51%)

Women struggle to get above 30% in the Scottish Parliament and 20% in the House of Lords...

Taken from gingerbread.org ...

In the UK “There are around 1.8 million single parents – they make up nearly a quarter of families with dependent children (i)”

“Around 90 per cent of single parents are women.”

I’ll let you draw your own conclusions from these statistics.

I’m proposing a standard amount at time of separation that is paid directly into the resident parents bank account at time of separation that comes directly from the non resident parents income without any penalty to the resident parent/child (as is the current system) and this must be enforceable by law with the same penalties as not paying your council tax etc... (again highlighting the importance being placed on our children in this current system)

It’s still not morally right or fair but it’s a start.

OP posts:
Spaghetticarbanana · 21/07/2019 07:43

My ex was using maintenence payments as a reward for my 'good behaviour' and only giving them if I pleased him in some way. I now know this was part of his coersive control over me. Next month will be the start of our maintenence agreement through CMS (which he is refusing to agree to) I am not expecting to get any money but it at least takes the pressure off me. I'm so sick of seeing people use the phrase "pay per view" for children. Pay towards your bloody kids, it shouldn't be optional. My ex's mum recently used the excuse that my ex only gets £x so he can't afford to pay, but it was the same amount my husband earns and that has to support us and 4 children! I can't see there being a change any time soon because it's still the norm (and socially acceptable) for the majority of men to just do the bare minimum and still be considered great dads but women who left their partners with the children and enjoyed the single life, refusing maintenence payments etc would get their arses handed to them. 50/50 contact isn't a solution for many because a) the disruption to the children's lives b) split schooling when parents live in different towns c) the control issue.
My own dad always told girlfriends my mum stopped him from seeing us when the reality was he was a violent drunk who gambled and didn't care about us, only about getting to my mum.
For the women and men who actually genuinely have controlling exs, or exs who are truly only using the children to get at them 50/50 would be a nightmare.
I wish society would shame parents who dont financially support their children. It's rediculous that "parental responsibility" gives you rights without responsibility.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 07:48

It's rediculous that "parental responsibility" gives you rights without responsibility

It doesnt. It gives the child rights.

stucknoue · 21/07/2019 07:59

All custody should be assumed to be 50/50 unless there's good reason otherwise. The kids deserve a relationship with both parents. I've seen coparenting work really well and be a disaster, anger and hatred (often deserved) is the principle reason for poor coparenting. Obviously where there's been abuse this doesn't apply but firstly we need to choose our future partners wisely, secondly we need to remember that kids aren't pawns in adults games following a split and thirdly there should be a system for the removal of parental rights and responsibilities where a nrp doesn't have contact or pay maintenance for a set period so the big gripe of waltzing back into lives isn't possible

CellularBlanket · 21/07/2019 08:01

It really isn't that simple. People should do the financial planning before they have children. Of course things change but in reality the majority of babies are conceived without any real thought about the money.

Penguincity · 21/07/2019 08:06

My ex did not need to pay any maintenance as he was on benefits and saw dd a max of 3 nights every 2 weeks however if he was low paid he would have had to pay something. That used to irritate me from a principal point of view (I understand it would have been reduced so maybe just £10 a month but he should have had to pay something) Previously when under csa I had the maintenance stopped as he was jailed for attacking me, when he was realised it did not start up automatically so I went without for a long time as at first I did not know he was realised and it was such a small amount it took me months to notice. When I eventually contacted csa I was told it couldn't be backdated as it was up to me to keep them informed

Angrybird123 · 21/07/2019 08:16

What rights do children have when the NRP goes to court for access mainly just to piss off their ex? Their kids don't want to go because the NRP doesn't use the contact time to build a good relationship but feeds them MacDs and ignores them. If the kids are too young or feel bad about saying this then their 'rights' are overridden by the court in favour of the NRPs rights to access which are not in the child's best interests. There are posters on here whose violent, abusive exes have been granted access, including overnights because of this idea that a parental relationship is sacrosanct no matter how shit, selfish or uninterested a parent is in genuinely caring for their child. Different issue to maintenance I know and no children aren't pay per view but I do totally understand why some rps might be reluctant to allow their ex to play Disney parent, often to impress a new partner.

SeaSidePebbles · 21/07/2019 08:22

OP, you make a very good point.
Sweden, I believe, has a system similar to what you are proposing.
So, in first instance, both parents sit down and agree on a sum, according to needs and income.
In my experience, a 50/50 residence arrangement is favoured, but if that’s not possible, then you sit down and talk money.

If the NRP cannot afford a reasonable amount, the child maintenence sum gets paid by the Försäkringskassan (The system is different from uk, but it is essentially what you are suggesting, HMRC foots the bill and then chases the other parent to ensure they’re not being defrauded).

In effect, it takes away the NRP’s power to use the payments as rewards/punishment. But most importantly, it ensures that the Govt takes responsability for that child’s welfare and doesn’t let him/her go without.

I receive enough maintenance a week to cover DD’s school lunches. That is all. Her dad says that this is the amount the govt requires of him, I should be able to manage on that, the govt says I should. He also uses (tries to) the payment/non payment as a carrot-stick, if I behave, I get the money.
I do need more financial assistance with raising my child. I supplement my income with extra shifts, which in turn doesn’t allow me to be at home with DD and parent her.

Should the government intervene?
Of course it should. A child cannot be raised effectively on 5,10, 20 pounds a week, it is absurd.

Where the parents cannot provide, the government must.

I think the first thing to do is calculate how much each child needs per month in order to have a decent standard of living. And make it law.

Musereader · 21/07/2019 08:26

As someone who has a cms case, though ex only ever pays while on benefits, yabu we can already deduct money from the employer and put nrp in prison. 50:50 would not work for me. And standard amount does not work.

Making government pay and retrive from nrp was standard on 1993 scheme for any woman on benefits, it did not work, some men owe thousands and it is getting written off now. Basically pwc got benefits and when nrp paid money equal to the amount of benefits was taken off the payment before it was passed to pwc. But some times nrp did not pay and it became debt. So yabu your idea already did not work

Musereader · 21/07/2019 08:30

Oh, also pwc gets child benefit and tax credits or universal credit so government do step in to pay for child and it is absurd to say you are raising a child on only nrp contribution.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 08:30

angry a child has a right to have a relationship with both parents. A judge decides on this, not the nrp thankfully.

If a child is old enough not to want to go they can explain this and that gets taken into consideration by a judge. Younger children arguably shouldn't be making that kind of decision.

Everyone parents differently and everyones standards are different and i dont think you get to point blank say who is a "worthy" parent and who isnt.

I can understand the issue with abuse but because someone was an emotionally abusive partner doesnt mean they are an abusive or bad parent imo. They can be, of course, but not in all cases.

Penguincity · 21/07/2019 08:37

Not all single parents get benefits, I don't. It should be both parents that provide for their children and a resident parent getting benefits is not a reason for a non resident parent not paying

SeaSidePebbles · 21/07/2019 08:43

muse, I don’t get any benefits, I earn a bit more than the threshold.

Verily1 · 21/07/2019 08:46

100% agree.

IceCreamAndCandyfloss · 21/07/2019 08:49

I agree with scrapping RP/NRP and the norm being shared care.

I also agree with harsh penalties for failing to support a child financially but they need to apply to both parents not just the NRP. Plenty of both don’t pay. Benefits don’t count as parental financial support.

So many seem to think children should cost them nothing or still subscribe to the old fashioned view of men work and women don’t. We could change the perception of parenting for future generations if we so wished by having role models who ensure their children see it as an absolute necessity to work and leave home with the knowledge of how much life actually costs and how to work out if they can afford children. Using a benefits calculator should never factor into that.

CanILeavenowplease · 21/07/2019 08:51

What if your base amount is more than they earn or is so much of their earnings it leaves them without rent/food?

What if the non-pay,ent of maintenance leaves the RP without the means to pay for rent/food?

How far do you go when the NRP is not compliant as doing so would leave them homeless?

What if the non pay,ent of maintenance means the RP and children are left homeless?,

Ultimately it's prison, is that how far you are happy to go?

Yes. It is child abuse. If I refused to put a roof over my children’s heads, or feed them, or prioritise myself over their needs, ultimately they would be removed from my care and I could face prosecution. On the other hand, my ex pays not one penny for his children but enjoys a lovely, carefree, every other weekend relationship with his children and is straight on his keyboard pointing out how shit I am if a child has a hole in their sock. A well publicised crackdown with serious punishments including removal of passports, driving licences and prison for long term offenders would bring the majority into line. As it is, it is all too easy to circumnavigate the system and have your social circle applaud you for not giving the greedy bitch a penny.

child has a right to have a relationship with both parents. A judge decides on this, not the nrp thankfully. If a child is old enough not to want to go they can explain this and that gets taken into consideration by a judge. Younger children arguably shouldn't be making that kind of decision

A child absolutely has a right to a relationship with both parents. Infortinately, the courts promote this to the nth degree and we see children who have seen their father put their mother in hospital having to endure contact to avoid a change of residence. Young children absolutely should have an opinion on who they have a relationship with.

HollyGoLoudly1 · 21/07/2019 08:52

I agree the system isn't great and there are NRPs who exploit loopholes or use maintenance as a means to control. I don't agree that a standard amount is a workable solution though.

What would the standard amount be? Say for arguments sake it's £500. That might go quite far in some places but not so much in London. Will if need to be weighted for location? It might be plenty to some RPs but nowhere near enough to others. It might be more than half the NRPs wages or it might be less than a day's pay for some lucky sods. Percentages are a better way to do it IMO.

The underlying problem that I fear means we'll never have a truly fair system, it that no-one can decide what 'fair' is at a governmental level. Every family's circumstances are different, there's no way (that I can see) to create a one-size-fits-all system that is fair for everyone. What would help would be more assistance such as mediation to help the parents sort it out on an individual basis, both maintenance and contact, making sure that they get the best deal for the children.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 08:52

How young?

CanILeavenowplease · 21/07/2019 08:54

Oh, also pwc gets child benefit and tax credits or universal credit so government do step in to pay for child and it is absurd to say you are raising a child on only nrp contribution

Not always. Plenty of RP earn above thresholds. But do go ahead with the stereotype of ‘single mum on benefits’, won’t you?

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 08:55

How does prison help though?

Your ensuring you get fuck all if theyre in prison arent you?

We have enough people in prisons as it is and if were going to focus on increasing those numbers its needs to be rapists, murderers, actual dangerous criminals we should target. Not nrps.

CanILeavenowplease · 21/07/2019 09:01

If it was clear to NRPS that prison was a very real threat if maintenance is ‘t Paid it would, I believe, seriously reduce the problem. If there was a chance you would lose your job, lose lie ta if self employed, have everybody know just how you have neglected those children your Facebook feed claims to adore....

And why shouldn’t it be a criminal offence to neglect your children in this way? Surely it is the equivalent of putting your children out on the street with no food, clothes, warmth, stimulation etc?

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 09:04

Its not the same as directly neglecting your children though is it...

TeachesOfPeaches · 21/07/2019 09:05

@Musereader plenty of us RP don't get benefits. I don't even get child benefit.

Pankhurst09 · 21/07/2019 09:05

Spaghetti carbonara, I agree, and yes you are right I am finding it’s a societal norm that one parent, predominantly the mother is just expected to have all the responsibility but the NR gets equal rights. Sadly I don’t see it changing anytime soon either.

OP posts:
IceCreamAndCandyfloss · 21/07/2019 09:07

Prison would be a waste of money. Community service would be better along with maybe notices in papers, courts etc of any parent (RP/NRP) who fails to provide like they do with bankruptcy etc.

I also think that far more responsibility needs to be enforced so any child benefits claimed should be given in the form of a loan that is not written off and has to be repaid with interest within a certain time frame. That way, people will have no choice but to think how they will fund a child before proceeding. Far too easily currently to decide on children despite not being able to fund them.

PookieDo · 21/07/2019 09:08

My ex does not want 50/50 and my DD14 doesn’t seem him anymore

The system hasn’t worked well for me but I have managed to get to a point where accepting a shit amount of regular maintenance is better than none and animosity

Swipe left for the next trending thread