Why is there no political impetus to enforce child maintenance?

[the2andahalfmillion]

I have never understood how non-resident parents in the UK are so easily able to evade financial responsibility for their children. There are a wide range of potential sanctions but they are almost never used and anyone who is self-employed and with half a brain seems totally safe from the reaches of the CMS.

This isn't a post about my individual situation, and I am far 'luckier' than most. Mostly I want to know why no-one seems to care about this and what we can do to make them care, and change or at the very least, implement, the law.

I want to know if there are countries where the financial burden of raising kids in separated families is truly equally shared between resident and non-resident parents? Why can't we do what they do?

And why does no political party in the UK ever bother to touch this subject? It's potentially a major vote winner even among those who aren't in single mum parent households.

When I was a single parent with an absent, non-paying XH, there would constantly be newspaper headlines about 'new powers to make absent parents pay'. This would be about taking their passports, seizing driving licences, other methods to force them to pay, none of which were new, all of which had been in force for years but were very very rarely used. My ex didn't pay a penny to support his five children, I was on benefits, so if the powers had been used to make him pay it would have saved the country a fortune.

The sanctions were there and I was constantly being told by CSA that they would be applied. But they never were. He got away with it.

Every now and again I receive a letter from the CSA or whoever they are now asking whether they can close my case. Then every now and again I say NO! Despite my children being 38 and 36! In their earlier years I was constantly in debt scraping by while their dad earned 'nothing' running a pub. May they chase him for arrears for the rest of his life.

And! I know a woman who earns loads working for a premier league club who left her children with their dad so she could have a great time being single she also pays nothing towards her kids who are all suffering due to her abandonment. I'm not going to lie I would love to punch her in the face!

Probably because men make up the overwhelming majority of senior government positions and have no understanding of or interest in making women's lives any easier. We're just not on their radar.

It would be a vote winner with women and loser with a lot of...well, losers.

@Crispynoodle may they chase your errant non-paying pub landlord till his dying days and also the football club employee who left her kids behind.

I think we need a TV drama as well done and powerful as Mr Bates Vs, for child maintenance. Something like that is needed to effect change.

Taking the risk of getting flamed here but I think they should actually reduce the suggested amount. For a salary of £26k that’s £200 a month for one child? plus if it goes through CMS that’s an extra £50 the non resident parent has to pay for the “privilege”

I feel like less would be more if it actually meant you got it right? Especially for high earners it’s such a massive chunk of their salary and they’re having to pay rent, bills etc with no benefits to help them. It’s a lot to see go.

I know it’s their child but I feel like that’s not the point of this post. I honestly think If they reduced it more people might be willing to pay and then more money would actually be paid.

This is such a strange way to think though. Paying for your child isn't a kindness or a favour, it's a responsibility. It's to pay for basics.
My ex never paid anywhere near what he was meant to. Had I paid the same amount as him towards my children's living expenses, they would have been homeless and starving.

I agree with the OP. It's mad that there are options not to pay or to pay very little towards your own kids. Food still costs the same whatever their parents' income is.

I know and I kind of get what you’re saying but I’m getting chased for child maintenance being the mother and it’s a lot when he works and gets benefits and gets the child care paid for. Like why come for me and my measly salary. It seems unfair and if it was less I’d be happier to pay

You think £200 a month is a lot? Seriously?

You should be paying half of the cost of raising your child. If you pay less than that someone else is paying for you or your child is going without.

My take home pay is only £1,500 and I have my son every weekend so I’m still funding the bulk of expenses on activities and days out so yes actually I do think it’s rather a lot

Less than a tenner a day is a lot to raise a human you decided should be brought into this world?

Jesus.

You would think it would make both parents be more careful who they children with, but there is also 'don't put him on the birth certificate' but then expect money?

Also when the men manage to get another woman pregnant she complains how much he is paying the previous 'baby mummy'

My ex does pay (private arrangement, legal minimum amount as calculated by the system). Even though he is a high earner, his payments cover about 2/3 of the actual additional expenses I incur by being the resident parent.

I consider the “missing third” to be the price I have to pay in order to avoid the aggro of dealing with him.

I know but life happens sometimes right and the person you thought you were starting a family with isn’t who you thought.

Maybe somehow like treating it like pension contributions might help if it’s not already. Not sure if it comes out of your net pay or gross. Also the fact it has no impact on your benefits is baffling to me, maybe increase benefits for those that don’t actually receive the money they’re due somehow. But this is also more money and resource to implement

It’s not just enforcement, it’s a general attitude that the NRP isn’t responsible for financing the child.

The biggest expense of raising a young child is child care, yet that is not considered in the cms calculation. Many other jurisdictions add this as a separate line item and split it between the parents regardless of when costs are incurred so that both parents have the opportunity to earn money.

children who do not belong to the NRP are considered in maintenance calculations if there is cohabitation. Taking money away from the biological children because dad’s new girlfriend already has kids is just such a strange idea, I can’t even understand how it started. it definitely illustrates the attitude that only the children in the household matter that seems to guide policy.

CMS are absolutely useless. Exh has 2 successful businesses and 2 cars. Doesn't claim any benefits and told them he earns less than 100 a week working part time! Payments have gone from £31 a month to £6 for 2 dc! How do they honestly believe he pays his rent eats, heats and pays cars etc on this amount. Apparently its up to me to prove it!

I wonder if it could also be a vote loser to clamp down on maintenance.

The Fathers for Justice and other MRAs would likely protest this and highlight how unfair it is for men to have to pay for their children.

Just to make it clear I want a crackdown.

I wonder if it could also be a vote loser to clamp down on maintenance.

If it was a vote winner, they’d be saying it. It’s not. The thread the other day on single mothers vs widows showed the same.

And since people want to let grown men in women’s spaces, we know that other issues of women will not be a priority.

If I had daughters, I would urge them not to have children unless they are able to bring them up comfortably without assistance from the fathers.

Not because it's right, but because I wouldn't want them to end up in poverty, which seems to be so common due to men refusing to take responsibility.

Unless the government decides to sort out the entire mess that is 'enforcement' of child maintenance, women will never have a level playing field.

It was ever thus. Thirty years ago a relative failed in her mission to get the ex to pay something - the CSA contacted his employer, who was a personal friend, and accepted the lie that he was earning much less than he really was. Seems nothing much has changed

Contrast this with California - a friend there said their CSA or whatever it's called had the power to visit her ex's business and take assets and cash, and the ultimate sanction his driving licence. In the US this is used as ID by almost everyone and is needed for many transactions, and life is difficult without one.

Thanks for theese considered posts. Agree with (almost) everything.

I don't think they can take driving licence in the UK, but have a feeling passports can be seized

I’ve seen a few articles online of the feckless bastards being jailed.
The CSA or CMS whatever they’re calling themselves now are not fit for purpose and should be abolished and nonpayment treated like council tax non payment.

Even an attachment of earnings order is meaningless, and some of the judges angry men who will take any opportunity to fuck over the women unfortunate enough to miss the multitude of red flags before having children with absolute losers, I am including myself.

I am not bitter, just tired of the broken, backwards system.

Where we live its done as a case by case basis, the costs associated with the child/ren are worked out, then they look at the housing costs etc for both parents to work out the most appropriate amount to get a balance between providing for the resident parent, and ensuring the non-resident parent can adequately house their child.

If they refuse to pay the state will pay a set amount, this is then accrued as debt for the non-resident parent.

Essentially here its

child maintenance = childs cost x (NRP surplus/surplus for NRP and RP). You use the link below to work it all out

https://www.forsakringskassan.se/english/parents/parents-who-do-not-live-together/calculate-child-support-and-create-agreement-document#!/

You are joking - children cost far more than £50/week.
Far more needs to be done.