To think that men who evade paying for their children are a burden on society?

[ASimpleLampoon]

Not my situation as not divorced but I'm fed up of hearing about thousands of men who don't pay child support or only pay the minimum, or fiddle their employment status/ declared income to pay less

They should pay at least half the actual costs of raising their children, more if they earn significantly more than the other parent

If they can't pay they should be supported to get a better job

If theyre self employed and can't pay enough well get a job that allows you to pay.

If they're getting paid in cash, take on more work to pay or find a job where they can't hide their income so they have to pay.

They are the real burden on society , fed up of seeing disabled people and carers torn apart while these feckless men get away with it year after year.

Where is the government and media campaign against them?

As someone who used to work on a helpline dealing with this issue daily. It’s a 95-99% male issue. I’d like to see the CMS given actual power. £400 in 18 years is what my son (not me) got from the man that fathered him.

It's from age three

CMS actually have loads of powers.

There is just no political will for them use them.

There needs to be a societal change so that forces a political change. If society turned on non payers then government of the day would push CMS to do more.

It's not a vote winner though so it'll never be a priority.

As much as I think it sounds like a great idea, we are talking about people happy to dump on society and don't give a shit about anyone else but themselves.

All you'd end up doing with this one, is having a bunch of people driving around the roads without a licence and therefore insurance. And that then would be passed on to good citizens the second they had an accident in their nice shiny BMW.

It would be better to revoke a passport - or to link up with HMRC. People who love their lifestyle more than their children will value their holidays and there'd be nothing better than trying to get on a plane and having the social embarrassment of being refused because your passport has been voided due to none payment. Or to find your tax code has been changed or you owe the tax man for none payment of maintenance.

Honestly I think it's a big vote winner for Labour.

I think there should be a low minimum payment that should be due to the resident parent regardless of income of non resident parent. E.g. £100 per month for first child and £50 per month for any other children. This amount will accrue over time and there should be consequences as with any other debt if there is non payment.

If non resident parent doesn't feel they are even in a position to pay e.g. they have a permanent disability then they need to apply to have the debt set aside.

Significantly more men then women. A gendered problem needs a gendered solution

I disagree. I do think it's a vote winner - especially for a party who has a larger female voter base than the Tories.

This is the kind of evidence needed if a campaign was ever to go ahead. Thank you.

The whole reason they had to unlink it from benefits (because it used to be deducted) is because "parents" (mostly men if we are honest) pissed around with the child support not paying paying late paying too little quitting work

maybe they should have made the DWP responsible for collection and it can be deducted so the men are paying the government back for money they are paying so for example I get £1000 for my benefits he is supposed to pay £30 a month he pays to them not me I still get my £1000 a month and the government get £30 towards it from him when I go back to work and no longer require benefits the money gets transferred to me directly as soon as he messes about they start taking it off him again plus back pay Plus interest

This is exactly the kind of person I'm thinking about. It's so common.

It’s mostly men though. I would be staggered if it is less than 95% of the problem.

if we went after the low hanging fruit, fixed the 95%, then it will be much easier to go after the second category.

edited to add, if we get distracted with the 5% we won’t fix the main issue

Currently the burden of proof is on the resident parent (almost always the woman). When our CMS claim started my ex who owns his own large company just instantly stopped paying himself properly. He paid min wage to ensure that was all that CMS payment were based on. Despite the history of far higher income and a company making huge profit and paying other staff very well. CMS weren't interested at all, and said I had to prove he was getting income elsewhere.

It took a few years to get anywhere near a sensible payment, and that was only by going to tribunal. Despite all the lies there was no punishment. So there is absolutely no incentive for NRPs to be honest.

There are lots of websites and social media dedicated to helping men reduce/stop their CMS payments. So many loopholes.

David Cameron tried on this, actually:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/jun/19/runaway-dads-drink-drivers-cameron

It turned into a manosphere binfire with awful stuff about women who “force” men out of their lives and “use” them for babies. Complete with handmaid female columnists saying the same. It was quietly dropped.

Added in to that as it stands "paying parents" can pay you £1000 a month and you get to keep it in some areas it's counted towards your council tax but not all areas do that because again they don't pay regularly

The money spent making life hell for disabled)carers could be better spent making feckless men pay, I think.

I disagree. I do think it's a vote winner - especially for a party who has a larger female voter base than the Tories.

If it was a true vote winner then it would have been jumped on by a party imo.

The last really big change was when people on benefits were only allowed to keep £20 a week of maintenance and the rest was owed to the Sec of state to go toward the welfare bill. The amount owed got so high it was declared something must be done. Off all the options, all the potential hard line endorsements, they chose... let the RP keep the money. (Let them keep the money we know doesn't get paid....).

Not a single government since has tackled it.

And having worked for CMS briefly there is zero push on people to pay. I was told off for being "too aggressive" for refusing a man who hadn't paid for 4 years an extension. Not because of my tone or manner with him, or for not following the rules, but just that no extensions is aggressive.

In training two of the powers they have (without going to court) my trainer had never heard of. I had because of my ex's games over paying. They're so infrequently used staff didn't know they existed.

Until society changes there's no reason for politician to push it. Everyone gets angry with their ex if they don't pay, but on a societal level very few people take issue with their son, partner, brother or friend not paying. The "she just uses it for hair/nails/night out" trope is used as an excuse and men get away with it.

And it is mostly men. In two 3 month spells working for CMS I can count the number of women non payers that came across my desk on my fingers. This is a male issue.

I'm afraid I have to disagree.

The affect on the child doesn't depend on the sex of the non-paying parent.

Yes, in the vast majority of cases the problem is the man, but by having a gendered solution only targeting men would allow the few feckless mums to get away with it.

All non-paying parents need to be targeted.

I would love to hear Starmer taking action on this. There should also be no discount for subsequent of step children and there should be a public information campaign to focus men’s minds on the risks they take whenever they don’t wear a condom.

I would get behind a campaign. My ex-H hasn’t paid a penny in nearly 5 years. Claims to the CMS he isn’t working. He is but he’s self-employed and I don’t what bank account he uses for his wages, not the 2 I knew about when we married as he uses those to show ‘no earnings’.

CMS are useless and the burden is on me to prove he’s earning.

11% of lone parents are men. There are way more men not paying child support than women. That being said I did read some stats a while back that said that proportionally, female NRPs are less likely to pay child support than male NRPs.

Totally agree. With benefits etc being slashed, child benefit cap, they should absolutely be going after anyone who doesn't support their child, they made it.

I would have an independent body, similar to Joseph rowntree, who would work out what it costs to raise a child. Not fancy but the basics and would include the average cost of half a full time childcare place from 6months. Because I dont understand why they can opt out of paying for one of the most expensive aspects, both parents should be afforded the opportunity to work full time and the NRP should cover their share unless they have the child 50/50 (I bet this would encourage more focus on the issue).

Once that number is decided, it's adjusted based on days both parties have and then that is the amount that's owed. If an NRP cannot pay then the gov fronts it, because its not the childs fault and they still need to eat but they can claim it back from additional taxes, reduced benefits and taken directly from the estate when they pass with interest.

Problem is we would need great family courts and more support for abused partners as everyone would suddenly desperately need 50/50 for their beloved children which could lead to neglect and a whole host of issues.

Yes, I totally agree with you OP. I think that this is also something that isn't spoken about anywhere near enough. So many conversations go on in the public sphere about many different issues, but how many men don't contribute financially towards the upbringing of their children is rarely discussed.
If a man sires a child, he should be made accountable to pay for that child. And not working/receiving benefits should not be an excuse. (I've used 'sires' deliberately, not because I'm old fashioned, but I think the word 'fathered' is giving too much credit to some men.)
There are many reasons why the mother and father might not be together, but none of them warrant a father not paying. Also, if there are any reasons why the father is not allowed to see the children, they must still be made to pay and not use that as an excuse.
It would be wonderful if this financial accountability became the norm and was taught to boys from their teenage years. If you have a child, you (and the mother) are financially responsible for it.

Even if maintenance is paid it is excluded from a claim for benefits

If it was a true vote winner then it would have been jumped on by a party imo.

Given the majority of MPs are still men, and this is arguably a 'women's issue', it doesn't surprise me that it's dismissed as not a big deal.

If a system was arranged that the government could potentially make a lot of money, they'd probably take it more seriously. But as the prisons are currently so full they're releasing prisoners crazy early, the US system isn't going to be adopted anytime soon.

That is because so much is unpaid.

It used to count toward benefits, then it was taken to go toward the welfare bill with parents on benefits only keeping £20 a week.