Child Maintenance - when does it stop?
Discussion
Moonhawk said:
It is pretty bonkers that even today - a father can have no parental responsibility unless he is named on the birth certificate - or that a woman can effectively block a man from having parental responsibility by registering the birth without him.
It's a very tricky one.To put an extreme slant on it. A man rapes a stranger and is sent to prison for it. She chooses not to abort and has the baby. He gets out of prison five years later. Should she be forced to share parental responsibility with the stranger that raped her?
The current system is probably about the fairest way, if both parents register the birth then they have 'equal' (appreciating they're not really) rights.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
WinstonWolf said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Kentish said:
And you'd probably never see your kids again and have no input into their lives from that point on. Apart from handing over the cash each month via the CSA if the child went back to education after 16.
It's not about wining and losing when you have kids.
No, it's about making sure you do the best for your kids. Not dealing with neglect out of fear of the unpleasant consequences is not doing the best for your kids.It's not about wining and losing when you have kids.
Ari said:
'Thank you for your concern sir, I can assure you the matter will be looked into, but data protection means I cannot furnish you with any details. Thank you for your concern, goodbye'.
Next?
Come on. You have no parental responsibility. You have contacted the relevent authorities. They have assured you that they will look into it but refuse to discuss it with you any further. Next?
Which bit of 'heaven and earth' are you going to move next?
Kentish said:
My ex went to the CSA and completely stopped any visitation and the CSA asked for payments from the day he was born (2 years of back payments).
You were likely stitched up by the CSA not knowing their own rules. Which, if you have dealt with them for 10 years, will probably come as no surprise.The CSA could only impose CM from when they contacted the NRP.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Kentish said:
My ex went to the CSA and completely stopped any visitation and the CSA asked for payments from the day he was born (2 years of back payments).
You were likely stitched up by the CSA not knowing their own rules. Which, if you have dealt with them for 10 years, will probably come as no surprise.The CSA could only impose CM from when they contacted the NRP.
Ari said:
Come on. You have no parental responsibility. You have contacted the relevent authorities. They have assured you that they will look into it but refuse to discuss it with you any further.
Which bit of 'heaven and earth' are you going to move next?
And the next time we have another Baby P, you'll be the first on here says "why didn't anyone do anything."Which bit of 'heaven and earth' are you going to move next?
I actually think, contrary to your made up phone conversation, that allegations of child neglect are treated quite seriously in most cases. As for your bulls
t re data protection, you're not asking for info, you're giving it.PurpleMoonlight said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
And the next time we have another Baby P, you'll be the first on here says "why didn't anyone do anything."
You think that not being educated properly is the same as being beaten to death?One shouldn't ignore child neglect for fear of life getting awkward. Especially your own child!!
TwigtheWonderkid said:
And the next time we have another Baby P, you'll be the first on here says "why didn't anyone do anything."
I actually think, contrary to your made up phone conversation, that allegations of child neglect are treated quite seriously in most cases. As for your bullst re data protection, you're not asking for info, you're giving it.
So, 'They' investigate, and find mother and son both agreeing that home education is going on and professing themselves happy. 'They' go away satisfied no problems.I actually think, contrary to your made up phone conversation, that allegations of child neglect are treated quite seriously in most cases. As for your bulls
t re data protection, you're not asking for info, you're giving it.But they won't tell you anything.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
One shouldn't ignore child neglect for fear of life getting awkward. Especially your own child!!
From recollection of previous comments from you regarding access to your children, I simply don't believe that you would risk access to your child over this subject.Is it scandalous that the child has gone uneducated for the last 3 years? Yes
Was the OP in a position to challenge this through official channels? Without PR, no.
Muzzer79 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
One shouldn't ignore child neglect for fear of life getting awkward. Especially your own child!!
From recollection of previous comments from you regarding access to your children, I simply don't believe that you would risk access to your child over this subject.I have full access to my children, given that I live in the same house as them and am happily married to their mother!!
PurpleMoonlight said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I have full access to my children, while I live in the same house as them and am happily married to their mother!!
Just corrected that for you.
I do breathe a sign of relief each night when I put my key in the door and the locks haven't been changed, even after 30 odd years!
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Muzzer79 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
One shouldn't ignore child neglect for fear of life getting awkward. Especially your own child!!
From recollection of previous comments from you regarding access to your children, I simply don't believe that you would risk access to your child over this subject.I have full access to my children, given that I live in the same house as them and am happily married to their mother!!
Apologies if that wasn't you.
Anyhow, whether I agree with that or not, the point is that if you couldn't bear to be apart from your children, how can you advocate a legal battle which would potentially limit what little access someone does have to their child?
Muzzer79 said:
Anyhow, whether I agree with that or not, the point is that if you couldn't bear to be apart from your children, how can you advocate a legal battle which would potentially limit what little access someone does have to their child?
Because the kid didn't go to school for 3 years. And no parent should accept that neglect of their child by the other parent.What is acceptable neglect and what isn't. If his ex was stubbing out cigarettes on their son, should he have tried to stop it, or just put up with it and not risk the fallout??
Muzzer79 said:
On another thread, I seem to recall you being of the opinion that parents should stay together for the sake of their children, remaining unhappy for years if required. The basis of this being that one should not live in a separate house to one's children.
Apologies if that wasn't you.
I think I've said in the past that parents can underestimate the damage done to kids in a separation, and if both parties are reasonable, then it may be better to just make the best of a bad job for the sake of the kids.Apologies if that wasn't you.
But I've never advocated staying in abusive or violent relationships. Nor have I advocated ignoring child neglect in order to get on with an rubbish ex.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Muzzer79 said:
On another thread, I seem to recall you being of the opinion that parents should stay together for the sake of their children, remaining unhappy for years if required. The basis of this being that one should not live in a separate house to one's children.
Apologies if that wasn't you.
I think I've said in the past that parents can underestimate the damage done to kids in a separation, and if both parties are reasonable, then it may be better to just make the best of a bad job for the sake of the kids.Apologies if that wasn't you.
But I've never advocated staying in abusive or violent relationships. Nor have I advocated ignoring child neglect in order to get on with an rubbish ex.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Muzzer79 said:
Anyhow, whether I agree with that or not, the point is that if you couldn't bear to be apart from your children, how can you advocate a legal battle which would potentially limit what little access someone does have to their child?
Because the kid didn't go to school for 3 years. And no parent should accept that neglect of their child by the other parent.What is acceptable neglect and what isn't. If his ex was stubbing out cigarettes on their son, should he have tried to stop it, or just put up with it and not risk the fallout??
Stubbing cigarettes out is physical abuse - you don't have to be the Dad to report this to the Police, who would intervene straight away.
But then the child would likely go to a family member of the mother or into care as, crucially, the OP doesn't have PR.
A child not going to school results in reporting it to an LEA or similar. They intervene as and when they see fit, to what level they see fit.
The OP can't step in and demand custody whilst this is going on, he can't force the child to school whilst this is going on, he can't bang the drum whilst this is going on, he can't even find out how the case is progressing because he doesn't have PR.
All the while, the mother gets wind of it and guess what? What access he does have is removed and there's sweet FA he can do about it.
No-one is disagreeing with your opinion of the unacceptability of non-schooling, the point is to give the OP a break as one can understand his fear of not seeing his son.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
And the next time we have another Baby P, you'll be the first on here says "why didn't anyone do anything."
I actually think, contrary to your made up phone conversation, that allegations of child neglect are treated quite seriously in most cases. As for your bullst re data protection, you're not asking for info, you're giving it.
I admire your I actually think, contrary to your made up phone conversation, that allegations of child neglect are treated quite seriously in most cases. As for your bulls
t re data protection, you're not asking for info, you're giving it.
Update...
I have spoken to the Child Maintenance Service and maintenance is payable until child benefit stops being paid.
She is getting child benefit because she states that our son is receiving a home education. She says there is no syllabus so online learning courses, reading, tv, maths tutor.
Home education is classed as supervised study for at least 12 hours a week
I see him often enough to know that he does nothing and certainly does not have a tutor.
Is it up to her to provide evidence that he has a 'home education' or do I have to prove that is not.
Basically, I have to report her for benefit fraud for all the time that I reckon (but basically cannot prove) that he has not been receiving the 12 hours a week.
What a nightmare
I have spoken to the Child Maintenance Service and maintenance is payable until child benefit stops being paid.
She is getting child benefit because she states that our son is receiving a home education. She says there is no syllabus so online learning courses, reading, tv, maths tutor.
Home education is classed as supervised study for at least 12 hours a week
I see him often enough to know that he does nothing and certainly does not have a tutor.
Is it up to her to provide evidence that he has a 'home education' or do I have to prove that is not.
Basically, I have to report her for benefit fraud for all the time that I reckon (but basically cannot prove) that he has not been receiving the 12 hours a week.
What a nightmare
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff