CSA may start to charge single parents for their "service"

[CubaCat]

I saw this article in the paper at my parents house today and quite frankly, am disgusted. How the CSA can expect us to pay for their shoddy service is beyond me. Not only that, but the Govt are being spectacularly naive if they think that this will stop couples splitting up, which according to this article, is their aim. People will still split up, but all this will do is allow non resident parents to get away even more with not paying maintenance because their ex may not be able to afford the CSA's fee, especially as they'll already have to deal with the costs associated with splitting up and becoming a single parent, such as moving house, dividing finances, hiring a lawyer etc.

If they start to charge us I for one will have to withdraw my claim, as it won't be worth my while paying the CSA just for them to administrate the measly £6.25 per fortnight that I get from my twat of an ex. It took three years for the CSA to get that out of him, even though I gave them his address at the time, his full name, d.o.b, employer details, his bank details, mothers address, where and when he played his sport and even sent them a photo of him when they requested one. I rang them fortnightly (at my own cost, to their expensive "helpline"), wrote to my MP three times to complain about the CSA and see if she could hurry them up, and kept the pressure on them so my DS would get the maintenance he's entitled to. In short, I more or less did their job for them - they should pay me. There's no way on God's earth I'll be paying for that "service".

I just hope this dickwad of an idea doesn't become reality.

My MP was on BBC Breakfast this morning talking about the proposals. She hasn't had a letter from me lately, must be time for another one .

I don't like gingerbread as I hate the term "single parent". My kids still have 2 parents, we just choose not to live together. It perpetuates the myth of 1 real, resident parent and 1 replacable nonresident parent.
Some mothers don't help by not considering the father of their kid/s that important either. A father should be more than a sperm donor.

Well, it's hard to see a father who has no positive input in his children's lives, as anything other than a sperm donor, tbh.

But most separated parents (well most I know) aren't in that position. Most women after all choose the man they have children with, it isn't a random process.

If all fathers paid maintenance, we wouldn't need the CSA at all. You can't make something expensive and then claim nobody wants it - of course they don't use it, it's now unusable! They still want and need it.

It's like saying Ethiopians have small appetites, and that you can tell by how little they eat.

A father SHOULD be more than a sperm donor, that's right. You're preaching to the converted, kid. You want to get your butt down to the working men's club in the evening, or the bookies on a Saturday afternoon. Catch the sperm donors.

I've been getting a annoyed of late with the amount of sexisum on these threads of late.

I know your speaking for your own personal view point about the majority of cases. But from time to time I can't help reading "If all fathers paid maintenance, we wouldn't need the CSA", an infering that you think it's OK for mothers to not pay maintenance in the cases where the RP is male.

Mehh, I'm sure I'll wake up on the right side of the bed tomorrow.

I think you're right most people will be talking from personal experience, I know that I am, so apologies for only talking about father's not paying, I know it can be other way round....ok

Maybe it was the fact that this thread is discussing govenment policy and I perceive some of the sexisum as loss of objectivity.

The thing I find really abhorrent about the suggestion of charging for the CSA/CMEC, is not the fact of charging, though it does make me uncomfortable. But maybe a charging system could be devised that would protect those most at risk and only affect say NRP and RP where they've seperated because, "hell it seemed like a really fun thing to do at the time", and their basically rolling around in cash as everybody knows goes hand in hand with supporting a child, especially in the current echnomic climate. And maybe the extra money would be pumped back into turning the CSA/CMEC into a super efficent fast accurate responsive service, that effectily traced and collected maintenance from parents trying to avoid financial responsibilty for their children.

No what really offends me is the thinking behind it is, as stated "The aim would be to be act as a deterrent and help convince parents that splitting up should be an option of last resort when all other avenues had been taken. The whole system needs to be made more family friendly"

Hold on you have to convince parents that splitting up should be an option of last resort. Speaking from personal experience it's got to be the hardest most soul destroying part of my life, did anyone else just seperate from their because it seemed like a cool fun kind of thing to do at the time?

whiteandnerdy how on earth do you make that mental leap? The reason people say "if fathers paid maintenance..." is because 90% of NRP's are fathers. No-one has ever said that Non Resident Mothers should not have to pay maintenance on MN, not as far as I have ever seen and I'm at a loss to know why you think anyone would think that that would be a reasonable position. I have literally never heard it argued, by anyone.

How strange that you should choose to get angry about that, rather than about the fact that 3/5 of non resident fathers, 90% of whom are male, don't feel the need to support their children and the law supports them in that.

You can bet your life that if women were 90% of NRP's, you'd go to prison if you didn't pay maintenance.

It's pretty obvious that if a resident parent has to use the CSA, then any charge levied, should be billed to the NRP.

StewieGriffinsMom

RE -

Actually, i can't believe how angry your post has made me.

Do you have any empathy at all?

... erm, sorry I thought I made it pretty obvious when I was being sarcastic maybe not. Sorry, a quick rule of thumb is, the bits that sound totally stupid and unreasonable is where I'm being sarcastic.

Are 90% of men NRP through choice though?

HerBeatitude - no that's the point I was trying to make with my badly thought out sarcasm.

If the govenment thinking is as stated, that the rational is to "act as a deterrent and help convince parents that splitting up should be an option of last resort." There just as likely to hit both the prosepective RP and NRP, those that can affort it and those that can't.

Hence finding it really abhorrent.

Urrgh, OK no sarcasm this time.

Truckulent I think it is a choice in that men know that if they split with their partners, the parent who has invested most time and energy in their children by being the primary carer, will get residency. If men choose not to be primary carers or to take 50:50 caring responsibility, then they are running the risk of not getting residency and that is a choice most men are still making. Of course, it's not a choice in circumstances of their own choosing, but it is a choice, however hemmed about.

If more men want residency rights, then they are going to have to take up more of the burden of looking after their children while actually in relationships with the mothers of those children. Obviously in the first year that's not currently practical (breastfeeding, maternity leave law etc.), but after that, there is no reason why men shouldn't do like women do, and prioritise the needs of their children over their careers and juggle as much as women do. The more men who do it, the more will be awarded residency.

BEfore we all get worked up about this... have a look at this document.

The CSA is being phased out and replaced by the CMEC. Just reading the first page of this document has given me more hope than the CSA has in many years (HAve not read it all, so may change my mind later!). They are planning to calculate maintenance based on last gross income reported to inland revenue so I guess it would be more difficult to hide parts of the income, and they are prepared to take thougher measures to ensure non complying parents pay (even to seize the passports of those non paying).

I complelety agree HerBeatitude, most RP use the CSA because the NRP won't pay, or so I always thought. T
The Government Consultation paper has some odd statistics, that in a survey in 2008 of some CSA users, 1/3 of the RP surveyed using CSA are happy with arrangements with their ex, including maintenance, and say that it is easy to discuss financial issues. It also says that of those surveyed 51% of RP and 74% of NRP would be likely to make an arrangement between themselves if they received impartial advice, this is why the Government believe that this will work. They believe that the just over half using the CSA could have worked it out with a little help and then not had to use the CSA.

Personally I think that is is b**cks!

Maelstrom, I think that document ties in with what the Government have announced. It doesn't take away from the point of charging people to use the CSA. In fact the tougher measures would only be relevant if the RP pays the CSA to deal with it!

Click here for the Telegraph Artical.

I'm now not sure if the bit about coalition source, it doesn't really say who and what their position is in regards to policy decisions.

But it does go on to say that CMEC is on a list of quangoes facing the axe under government cutbacks.

HB-

I've said this to you before this is why I'll advise both my children, be financially independent, pursue a career and split child care 50-50.

OMG Tonight on Radio 4 at 10PM - they'll be asking if absent fathers are the biggest problem for children's life chances.

I literally cannot believe that a mainstream news programme is even asking that question. But very happy they are. It's about time that questions regarding the bad outcomes facing the children of lone parents, were centred around the lack of support from fathers, rather than the supposed limitations of the mothers who bring up their kids on ludicrously little money.

And yes of course I recognise there are exceptions, before anyone anxiously points out that 10% of LP's are men etc., so let's worry more about them than the 90%.

Reading the posts on the first page of this thread, it sounds as if the CSA is a really badly-run, ineffective organisation.

I left my husband before the CSA came into existence, and I remember thinking how disastrous its effect would have been on my life and my kids'. I decided to split and not to ask him for maintenance, because I knew he would react badly. As a result, a few years down the line, things got a little better between us and we were able to be civilised. I went to uni and got a job and supported them entirely alone - and I feel so proud of that! (Need an icon for blowing my own trumpet).

I know that is not an option for many of you and feel so sorry for what you have had to go through, on top of the horrors of splitting up. But, the kids grow up before you know it, and then they start earning (hopefully) and it's far more important to them that their parents behave civilly towards each other than whether or not the absent parent was paying maintenance. As they grow older in any case, they soon realise what went on, and they appreciate what you went through.

The people who say the government have another agenda are right, imo. They need to be seen as the party who try to keep families together (as if we split up for the fun of it, as said above ...) and they are pandering to the people who blame single parents for all of society's ills. This government is not good news for women, children, poor people, people on benefits or disabled people. It's a government of bullies for bullies by bullies.

HerBeatitude, can then point out that I'm the NRP but still see myself as a Lone Parent. I take it the program is about absent fathers, where all contact between one of the parents and one of the children has been lost.

I'll have to tune in as my DSS that I've been fathering as my own for the last 11 year hasn't been in contact with his biological father for a few years now.

As for whether his father contributes financially how would I know, his mothers never givin me any of such maintenance if it does get paid.