Contact and Child maintenance

I agree with zonked!

In the cases that the court finds that withholding contact is just a way to get back to the ex and is a way for retribution, then they should order from the RP to pay back the legal and court fees to the NRP by withholding a certain amount of money from the monthly child maintenance payments.

Things like that cannot go unpunished!
They just contribute and reinforce unjust and immoral behavior.

I really dont think that stopping child maintenance is the answer because one way or another a child will be affected.

However, I do think that the courts should use the sanctions they have in their power to punish PWC if they breach contact orders.

How about 3 strikes resulting in a couple of days in prison? That should do the job. Alternatively, give residence to the nrp and contact to the rp.

The courts also, however, should insist that absent parents who do not wish their children interfering with their new lives, ie. want no contact with them, for whatever reason, are forced to have contact with them. If they reruse, they should be forced to take parenting classes.

sillywoman wrote:

I really dont think that stopping child maintenance is the answer because one way or another a child will be affected.

However, I do think that the courts should use the sanctions they have in their power to punish PWC if they breach contact orders.

How about 3 strikes resulting in a couple of days in prison? That should do the job. Alternatively, give residence to the nrp and contact to the rp.

The courts also, however, should insist that absent parents who do not wish their children interfering with their new lives, ie. want no contact with them, for whatever reason, are forced to have contact with them. If they reruse, they should be forced to take parenting classes.

Yes, enforcement would do the trick alright. No one wants anything more than that.

I don''t understand, though, why you want to force children into the care of parents who don''t want to look after them. Who benefits from that? Do you think it wil benefit the child - surely it will just make things worse for them?

I am a strong believer that children need both parents, unless of course there is a history of child abuse.

My ex was a dreadful husband, but a good dad. The children have very fond memories of good times with him and we do recall them, as just because he no longer has contact with them I do not want to think unduly badly of him.

However, because he cant have me, he doesn''t want a relationshp with them.

Parenting classes would be good for fathers/mothers who wish to absolve all responsbility of their children to the hands of the resident parent to perhaps help enable them to see that their children need them. Maybe more absent parents would then want to reform relationshps with their children which would be good for all parties concerned.

Its just a hope I suppose. I know my girls miss their dad. The oldest (22) said so only the other day and it made me sad especially as she graduates next week and he wont be there to see her.

Divorce your spouse but not your children.

MathisFun wrote:

Just because the government hasnt listen to NRP concerns re contact at the moment. Doesn''t mean that they wont in the future.

Many changes have started with people debating what should happen.

Family law reform needs to be based on evidence from scientific research and evaluation rather than the Government listening to anecdotal evidence from people on one particular part of the spectrum. Otherwise all that happens with "debate" is that those with the loudest voice win and that isn''t justice.

zonked wrote:

Well perhaps the answer is for NRP''s to be able to recover legal costs of enforcement actions/court applications from PWC; either directly or through reduced maintenance.

That may sound good in theory but in practice it wouldn''t work in the majority of cases given that the DWP(2010) research put the figure of single parents receiving child maintenance at 38% (Table 15.1 p367)

research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2009-2010/rrep656.pdf


and according to the Child Maintenance Commissioner''s reply to a Parliamentary Question 40% of those assessed by the CSA as liable to pay Child Maintenance pay less than £10 a week. (Hansard 18 Apr 2012 : Column 390W)

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm2012...text/120418w0002.htm

Having read this thread with interest I agree that the system is unfair.
I used to hand over my son to my ex who would take him on skiing holidays, sunshine holidays etc whilst paying no maintenance and I watch my friend do the same, her ex picks the children up in his new car, spouting excuses that he wont be seeing them for a few weeks as he''s going on holiday with his "family" (sorry, but are the older children not also family or does he class the latest model family now?) and yet he''s made to pay just £5 a week maintenance as his accountant (self employed, ltd co) says he earns less than £100 a week. Pathetic!