To think this is scandalous yet in plain sight because the patriarchy has no shame

[Webjisroommate]

A year ago I separated from my DD’s father and she was in the middle of her first year of nursery. He paid the cms amount every month, without fail. This was 360 a month, even though I was left to pay over 1,300 on nursery fees alone. Obviously the situation has now changed slightly with the hours but his 360 contribution is quite literally nowhere near half her costs. I have spoken about this with other mum friends and have learned that 360 is actually pretty fortunate! Some women are being paid less than 200 and others have to chase cms when their ex is self employed. I was not aware of any of this before having Dd.

My career is now hugely clipped as I am doing 95% of childcare while ex sees her a day a week… the day I use mostly to clean and get the house in order to start the week again. And yes, I suggested 50/50, he didn’t want that.

I honestly feel like this is a huge joke player on women in plain sight while nothing is actually done about it?! I also can’t fathom how HMRC can chase tax from the self employed but Cms can’t chase these men to pay for their children. It’s a disgrace. Why is this allowed to happen?!

Then why have them? That's such a pathetic argument. We are usually talking here about men who were married, planned the children with their wives, were actually decent dads til the novelty wore off. I know of women whose children were the result of IVF ..most definitely wanted by both parties often at considerable cost who were STILL left without maintenance. It's part of the narrative lots of men give when they leave "I never really wanted them anyway"..well tough, you didn't grow enough of a backbone to say that at the time, they're here now and need food, clothes, hobbies, childcare, laptops, pocket money, braces....

CMS have very strong powers, but lack the resources, skill and will to exercise them. Should definitely be linked to HMRC more. They crucified my self-employed friend who was open and honest with them, unlike most men who are entitled, lying shits - and who are protected/supported by other men to be that way. Absolute fucking disgrace.

My loser ex is retired years ago in his 40s and pays nothing as it's all hidden away and crypto etc. It is unfair.

To get children out of poverty, if I was in charge this is what would happen.
Fathers would always be responsible for 50% of childcare costs or arrangements, regardless of financial circumstances. Childcare would be separate and on top of CMS, and CMS would at least have to cover 50% of basic food, clothing, nappies, their share of household bills. Again regardless of financial circumstances.
Men wouldn't have a get out based on employment status; if they don't pay due to unemployment then their bill racks up. If they have a low paid day job, then they need a top up extra job.

It's not a punishment for the parents, it's about making sure both parents contribute fully to bringing up their children. Something not all men seem to want to do.

Child poverty must be high on Labour’s agenda. Perhaps everyone who cares about this issue should write to their MP? I’d be happy to support the cause even though I’ve not been in that position. Children in ‘single’ parent families are proportionally more likely to be in poverty, even though they usually do have two parents. How some NR parents get away with providing little or no support is appalling!

It’s a disgrace but women don’t even band together.

You see the second wives club on here often saying how the lazy crazy ex is living the life of Riley on the kids CMS while dad has them every other weekend and bought a pair of school shoes last year on top. These men get praised by women for paying their piddly amount on time and doing the bare minimum.

Beggars belief!

Your case does sound very unfair and that the father should be contributing a lot more. Having said that, there are two strands, income and capital. You don’t mention how the assets were split on divorce.

But it isn’t the patriarchy and, as someone else posted above, the reverse also can apply when the father is the main carer or when the CSA amount is large and the mother (or father) chooses not to spend it on the children.

Both parents should always make an equal contribution (assets and income taken together) to a child’s needs. What is more controversial is where one parent wants more things for their children and the other doesn’t see them as necessities (before I am jumped on, I am the one who funds virtually all my children’s hobbies).

If you cannot get any help whatsoever towards your childcare bill, then yes, but unless you earn over £100k, you can claim something. Are you?

Not sure if we can blame the patriarchy for this. It wasn’t too long ago that if a couple split, the man automatically got the children because he was the main breadwinner and could support them. What we have today is due to women demanding the children and the man’s money. The problem is that when you go from funding one household to funding two households, the living standard drops massively for the children who shuttle between two homes that must still be large enough for them.

The current situation is pretty shitty, but we are in it now because of first wave feminism.

Men need to start paying the fair cost of childcare.

Yes I agree.
if you didn’t pay for the things she needs, heating, food, clean clothes etc youd be up for neglect, so the resident parent has to make cuts, sacrifices - to extremes in some cases of things like eating one meal a day.

Why would he need to have a say in the facility? He either does half the childcare or pays for half. That's the only choice he should have. I'd go as far as to have them on the hook for weekend babysitting too if they're doing less than half the parenting.
Inexcusable that we let men get away with this.

There should be threat of court action/imprisonment just as there is for not paying council tax ( which is a lesser crime than not providing for your children).

Well if that's the case, they shouldn't dip their wicks!

Everyone thinks the feckless fathers are the unemployed or down and outs...the reality is more frightening - they earn more, they have more career potential and society favours them but the children are left with mothers, not contributed to, not socialised with, seen as baggage, ditched in favour of the latest flirt in their lives and fundamentally they are shirking their responsibilities and society is paying the price but somehow when they are with the children they are seen as superheroes for looking after them for 10 minutes. Grrrrrrrrr

@SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice are you serious?? That's a new level.of bling women for shit, selfish, lazy men. The situation you're talking about is going back into the 19th century and usually involved property rights and inheritance. Ordinary families, it was still the women left holding the baby ... Ridiculous to blame feminism for this.

Someone could start a petition for a debate in Parliament once they get the Petitions Committee back up and running.

What do you base that upon?

If they don't wish for children, I'm surprised that more don't opt for permanent solutions or become hypercautious and use contraception options available to them rather than relying upon a woman's.

I don’t know how many people noticed that removing most of the CMS’s legal powers and making them a mediator only was one of Reform’s policies in the recent election.

Tell me you’re a party for men without telling me…

No we aren't. We are in it because the government has decided for some reason that it is easier for tax payers to pick up the tab for absent parents than to implement a system to make them pay. It appears from other posts that many other countries have managed to do this so I don't see why we shouldn't.

@billyt

If only it was that simple in the USA, my friend couldn't get anywhere near enough out of her ex in the USA

Angela Rayner was on breakfast tv talking about Labour's desire to reduce child poverty. So pressurise your MP to do something about this, try and get mumsnet to start a campaign about it. Copy any emails to Bridget Philipson and Annelise Dodds and demand they support change. Post in the womens rights section of mumsnet.

I believe this to be one of the reasons the birth rate is falling.

Having children hugely and disproportionately disadvantages women.

Now there is more awareness of this (because women talk about it, on internet forums, for one thing), fewer and fewer women are falling for it.

Cms should be able to suspend driving license and/or their passport. That would solve some of it.