Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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:
hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 19:19

jaques trying to make me look thick is not making you look any better you know.

JacquesHammer · 21/07/2019 19:20

I dont have an ex

So basically you’re telling separated couples you know better?

You’re pretty much attempting to spousesplain.

Dp does not do 50/50 with his ex but its what he has persistently asked for

So he’s a decent bloke? So no need to be offended at the suggestion that feckless NRPs who don’t pay their way are shit. Assuming of course he did....

JacquesHammer · 21/07/2019 19:21

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

BitchQueen90 · 21/07/2019 19:22

I actually don't think that 50/50 is best for children, not younger ones anyway. It's constant upheaval.

BitchQueen90 · 21/07/2019 19:24

Joan right, we'll see how you feel about the situation if you ever separate from your DP.

Are you one of those women who resents their DP paying maintenance?

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 19:25

Iv seen the damage that game playing and arguing (by both parties) does. I have been the child with the useless dad who i now have 0 contact with so dont fucking lecture me about what i dont know.

Put it this way my child will never go through what i did or what dss did. Never.

Yeah dp is a decent bloke and still pays now even though he probably doesnt have to. Neither of us can be arsed with another argument or our car window being smashed or being threatened with our lives so....

I agree that those who dont pay they way are shit and i have NEVER said otherwise.

Maintenance and access are somewhat seperate though and i do think a lot of nrps arent even given the chance to have more than the standard every other weekend

maiafawnly · 21/07/2019 19:25

My kids dad has been missing for years. We were marriage and the kids were actively tried for and much wanted. He doesnt see them or pay. 50/50 is never going to happen yet cms still disregarded a full years income because i didn't challenge it with in 30 days. I assumed they didnt take his word for it an actually checked. They dont. But its my fault for not appealing.

I also work sometimes 72 hour weeks to support my kids.

JacquesHammer · 21/07/2019 19:26

I have been the child with the useless dad who i now have 0 contact with so dont fucking lecture me about what i dont know

So clearly and understandably you’re angry because your dad left you.

Don’t take it out on other people trying to have a reasonable debate.

You simply cannot apply your situations to a reasonable and amicable split.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 19:50

No bitch why would i?

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 19:51

So clearly and understandably you’re angry because your dad left you

He didnt leave me. Try again. Im not angry about it either tbh. It was a long time ago. My life is v different now.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 19:53

jaques the point is these arent reasonable or amicable splits are they! If both parties were being reasonable, cms would be paid and access would be agreed.

The whole bloody point is that its not happening. People are NOT reasonable when they split.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 19:54

And bitch why so you assume id change my mind? I cant think why id need to...

Angrybird123 · 21/07/2019 19:56

mavis.. Sorry for bei g two pages late to reply but yes he absolutely did leave them because he moved 2 hours away to be with her, taking a job that made even full weekends impossible. I love my kids but I really need the 4 days a month 'off' I get and if he had stayed nearby I absolutely would have jumped at 50/50 but there is no way he would want it.. Even now if I ask him to sort some parental duty like a haircut or buying trainers he forgets or fucks it up. There is not one single aspect if raising these kids that I can properly and confidently hand over to him. I absolutely 100% wish I could. To say he left me but not them is 100% inaccurate.. Or maybe I'm just not seeing the invisible other parent who's there when one if then is sick, upset, wet the bed, needs to be in three places at once.. Oh yes, silly me.. [hmmm]

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 20:01

Ok apologies for that. I assumed you were saying it when hed moved down the road and still had them twice a week like so many do. Sorry Flowers

Angrybird123 · 21/07/2019 20:12

Even if he did see them twice a week I would still be the default parent for all the mental load stuff, as I would bet money is the case in most of these situations, even when physical residency is 50/50. My ex, even with his limited 4 days a month still sometimes finds it too onerous and doesn't always make the Friday night if he has something else to do. He always prioritises his new life over his kids. And if this is ever pointed out (or if he is reading this, as I know he stalks me on here) it gets dismissed as bitterness... I'm disgusted by how many women on here are gaslighted by having their ongoing anger at their exs continued crapness referred to as 'bitterness'. My ex loves to say I haven't moved on but he misunderstands. My ongoing frustration relates to the situation I am in now, day to day, relying heavily on my elderly parents for childcare when I have to work til 11pm sometimes, not the fact that he left some years ago. I am sure I am no different to many many RPs who bear the brunt of all the parenting and 3/4s of the cost. So to return to the original point of the thread, absolutely maintenence laws need to be tightened and the powers already in place, used. It is far far to easy for NRPs to just decide its too much effort and wander off and there is nowhere near enough public condemnation of (usually men) who do this.

Pankhurst09 · 21/07/2019 20:29

Angrybird I completely agree with everything you’ve said, and you’re right it’s frustration at the situation.

OP posts:
hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 20:33

I agree with all that. It is a shame that more parents dont equally share all responsibility. But failing that absolutely maintenance should be paid and its crazy that cms seem to do very little about it.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 20:35

However i will say that some women, and it probably is a minority, are bitter and do use their children as weapons. I think a lot of men do use the "shes crazy" card but having experienced it myself first hand it does occasionally have some truth behind it. Of course this is no excuse for not paying maintenance either.

Angrybird123 · 21/07/2019 20:53

Of course there are always examples of every version of this story, good and bad exs, RP, NRP, male and female but saying that doesn't change the argument one jot. Whoever is not the RP should be paying decent, not the minimum, maintenance and ideally both parents should be actively and equally involved. I can't see how anyone can genuinely argue against that, regardless of which way round it is.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 20:56

I dont think anyone is tbh. But again "decent" to one parent might be peanuts to another. The cms is crap but im not sure what kind of system would be better? One that takes into account every factor but i feel it would be too complex to roll out on the scale of the cms?

Angrybird123 · 21/07/2019 21:08

Just a higher percentage and actual enforcement would do it surely? Plus a system suggested above whereby the RP receives an amount in leiu of maintenance (on top of any existing benefits they are entitled to) if the NRP isn't paying. That then becomes a debt to hmrc that the NRP is responsible for. That way the child or children get what they need at the time they need it.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 21:14

Im not sure i agree with a higher % but the rest yes.

Angrybird123 · 21/07/2019 21:19

Maybe it could be banded.. So NRPs salaries below a certain amount is x % and higher if they earn more so that the kids benefit from the weathier parent but low earning NRPs aren't in genuine difficulties. And the amount should not change if subsequent children are born and definitely should not be lowered for stepchildren. If the NRPs partners income is irrelevant yo maintenance, then their children should be also. Even if it is a small amount, its the principle.

hsegfiugseskufh · 21/07/2019 21:21

Agree about step children but not bio children. To me that says that first children are more important than subsequent children.

Angrybird123 · 21/07/2019 21:27

No, it means that you have to uphold your existing commitments before taking on more. If a couple jointly decide to have subsequent children that distributes available funds more thinly that's fine, but an NRP should not be able to make a deliberate decision that reduces their ability to support their existing children unilaterally as it has a huge impact on the other parent.