Houellebecq:"Maybe they're at UNI trying to better their job prospects after being out of the workforce for a long time."

That's actually a bit of a sore point. My ex did just that, despite already having several degrees, while i was forced to curtail my own studies because I could not afford it thanks to being forced by the CSA to earn as much as possible via a "capacity to earn" determination that somehow came up with a number that was 25% higher than I was actually earning. That meant that i was forced to pay 25% more than I should have had to and meant that even basic expenditure on food and rent was marginal, let alone discretionary spending on education.

In the meantime, my ex, who left a part-time job to go to Uni full-time, was given extra money by Centrelink to do so.

Now, I've no wish to see people excluded from pursuing education, but ISTM that separated fathers are not given the option of choosing that path. If it's good for a woman to improve her job prospects, is it not equally as good for a man to do so?

On the whole, the stats I quoted show that men take a greater personal responsibility for providing for themselves and their family than women do, even men who are left "holding the baby" as it were.

"I don't think it's necessary to attempt to prove single moms are lazy biatches to counter that most men aren't deadbeat dads."

I hate it when I agree with you but it's been happening to often lately.

R0bert

If 'the stats' show that 80% of surveyed parents are 'happy' with shared care - (leaving 20% of the the nations kids at probable/possible risk of emotional or other harm in 'high conlict'cases, what is defined as 'a single parent family'?

A sole parent?

Is it where only one parent has involvement (for whatever reason)

or in shared care arrangement - so it that two single parent families?
effectively giving two bites at the same cherry irrespective of what sharing actually means?

If it includes parents who have have repartnered, is there a distintion between ones who have, and those who haven't? Are they still 'single parent households' irrespective of reality and difference?

Some repartner quickly - even before they left,others doubt they will ever again trust or choose another partner.

Some have vulnerability forced on them, like the real impact of extreme violence, and find themselves, like me, in a wheelchair, excellent business gone, unable to work for two years and never in same industry because of disability,and two young children to raise. Alone. Not because I ever excluded their dad from them, but because he chose and remains unattainable to them.

When he eventually moved on to a new marriage, my kids thought I'd be sad, having never put him down they thought we might get back together. I resisted explaining beyond assuring them I wished them well.

Child support? Infrequent. My wikkid side loves that he is still paying off his meagre csa bill, years after the children have left home. (all growed up, educated to honours standard, teeth fixed as required and employed despite trauma, abject poverty and new beginnings). Surely I can't be the only sole mum to do OK? But I've never been surveyed about what's what.

So if 80% of separated families = 40% mums and 40% dads (we'll sort of gloss over the granparents / same sex, widows, widowers etc etc for the sake of simplicity,) and although we know shared doesn't mean equal , and 21% of non-resident dads are doing their bit with care, what does it all mean really?

'what does it all mean really?'

Don't ask me, I'm having trouble following yours and antiseptics long winded rationalisations attempting to prove your world view.

All I see here is two people who have been dealt a bad hand. That's the sum of what I've taken out of this.

Houellebecq: <"I don't think anyone says women do more abusing. If they have I haven't been listening. Regardless, why is it so important for you to make sure men are rightfully seen as doing more abusing? Isn't abuse bad regardless of the perpetrator.">

All abuse is bad and I am opposed to any family violence especially where children are exposed to it.

The reason it's important to identify which sex is doing most:

1. The Menz sites have been minimizing that attributable to men - which is in keeping with the minimization (as research shows) that perpetrators of all sorts of violence typically engage in.

http://www.xyonline.net/content/use-violence-fathers%E2%80%99-rights-activists-compilation-news-reports

http://www.xyonline.net/content/fact-sheet-3-how-fathers%E2%80%99-rights-movement-undermines-protections-available-victims-violence-

In contrast btw; women who access counselling and other services including womens centres and shelters typically undertake individual and group work concerning drug and alcohol use; relationship issues which usually also explore the use and experience of anger, effects on children, parenting, work skills and so on.

2. When perpetrators hang together and obtain no mediating input the use of violence is normalized and justified amongst them.
(I guess prison culture could be seen as an extreme example of that but there are also examples where followers of the menz groups have used violent means in their campaigns).

3. Perpetrators of each sex need different approaches to finding ways to resolve their issues and meet their needs without using violence. It isn't that their wants and needs are unimportant; it's that they can learn to have them met in non-violent ways or decide whether obtaining them is worth the consequences of violent action.

4. While women are portrayed (incorrectly) as the main source of family violence it detracts from efforts to reduce violence overall. Focusing on female violence is a smoke screen that isn't offering any information at all about how men can be less violent.

http://www.xyonline.net/category/article-content/mens-fathers-rights

Pynchme, there are no "Menz". Furthermore, the current official figures show that most neglect and abuse of kids occurs when they have no father present.

The best way to protect kids is to ensure that their natural father has a close relationship with them. Most fathers want to be close to their kids, but some are not very good at it, just as some mothers are pretty substandard.

Often, the main reason for dads dropping out of their kids lives is the desire of the mother to maximise her entitlement to benefits and child support. If she decides to make it difficult for him, he has little chance of doing much about it. Courts won't enforce orders when mothers breach them, as a huge number of cases demonstrate. I strongly recommend you have a look at Austlii and see for yourself, rather than relying on the silly Michael Flood site.

Pynchme:"there are also examples where followers of the menz groups have used violent means in their campaigns"

And there are examples of the various grrrl power groups using and advocating violence against men.

The point, of course, is that people become inflamed on these subjects. What is needed is a means of decoupling the children from the money, so that there is no incentive on either side to use the children as a lever. A huge amount of conflict is generated around child support and time in care, so if reducing that conflict is really your goal...

Cotter, I appreciate your position. There is no doubt that some people are bastards. The figures don't show that only 21% of separated dads are doing their bit, it showed that dads provide 21% of the child care for single mums. It doesn't mention what the relative custody arrangements were.