Antiseptic (RadFems under the bed)- as you are always so fond of statistics, why don't you look up the costs of maintaining a child per week which have been calculated by independent bodies, and tell us the number of separated fathers who are actually paying that amount. (My guess would be zero but you may know differently). Perhaps also you may tell us why the 620,000 children for whom their fathers make NO maintenance payments are not being financially supported by those fathers?.
The tactic of alleging mental illness of Chiara is rather a worn out ploy now, don't you think, and tends to be the last desperate tactic used by sociopathic fathers in FC to distract attention from their own psychoses.

"The tactic of alleging mental illness of Chiara is rather a worn out ploy now, don't you think, and tends to be the last desperate tactic used by sociopathic fathers in FC to distract attention from their own psychoses."

I guess you have not noticed a number of Liz's posts recently. BTW I was not asking for personally attacks on Chiara, rather enough honesty from the likes of you to point out that her claims were seriously at odd's with reality. I didn't expect that to happen.

As a separated father who's son lives with him most of the time and who does not get any child support and is on the low end of the scale for FTB benefits etc I'd have to say that your estimate of "none" for separated fathers paying the costs of raising a child is out by at least one, possibly more.

It all depends on how you count it, my ex pays for expenses when our son is with her, I pay them here. We occasionally share extraordinary expenses if it's agreed that it's something we both want for him and it's not viewed as part of the normal day to day expenses.

So much less troublesome than me thinking my ex owe's me, far better than having her looking at anything new I buy and wondering how much of it she paid for etc.

You could have a look into the review of shared parenting done for the attorney general and see what it says about financial contributions by fathers when parenting is shared. You might also see what it says about mothers income and lives.

R0bert

vanna wrote "Throughout, the father has to pay child support which can be automatically taken out of his pay, and without his permission."

He gave permission when he had sex with the mother.

In the "every picture tells a story" report, there's a published part submission by a father that states that after he's paid for his mortgage and paid for his child support he is left with about 50% of take-home pay.

This is revealing on two levels.

Firstly, it's a clear indication that fathers overwhelmingly directly relate their children to their finances. Secondly, it's a non-argument. As all single mothers who try to survive on a pension when their littlies are young know, the rent takes 52% of their entire net income....and that is before they've even fed, clothed, schooled, transported their family, let alone attempted to pay any bills.

Here's a message for fathers "Children cost a lot of money" and unfortunately, it is mothers that bear the brunt of most of the cost.

Antiseptic wrote: "women can access legal aid wth almost no strings".

Almost no strings? One has to be stoney broke. One has to be almost homeless. One cannot own any assets, have no money in the bank, and cannot be earning a wage, even if it is part-time. In some cases, some women are told to sell their car before Legal Aid will be available. Fees are capped at $10,000 which means that many respondents (mostly women) are given inadequate representation. Protective mothers questions are left unanswered and many get called up to court and they have no idea what they are there for.

In addition, Legal Aid is now denied to Applicants in Family Law. The reality of this is that mothers (and some fathers) who have run from extreme violence and substance abuse do not have the power to invoke the Family Law in a bid to protect their children. The advice they receive is to "lay low and keep your head down, maybe he (or she) will go away and not chase shared parenting". This is all a rather dismal reality when it comes to child protection.

Antiseptic wrote, "when she'd only be sitting home watching Days of Our Lives" resorting to stereotypes is not becoming. Parenting is the most challenging, busiest and frustrating occupation of all. It is actually easier to go out to work in a managerial position and attempt to make a dysfunctional work team productive. And you get paid for it! It's much more difficult to manage 3 kids under 5, get a pension that ensures the family stays in poverty, and then for an added bonus, the mother gets stereotyped.

Antiseptic wrote: "That is how the law works: you make a claim, I deny it and say "where's your proof". You disappear in a puff of logic. See?" And you have described exactly how our child protection system operates through the FLC. Not a skerit of the child's best interests being paramount in sight.

"He gave permission when he had sex with the mother."

I've seen similar comments before and am intrigued by the use of the idea of consent in that.

Are you suggesting that when two people have consensual sex that there is an implied consent to take on the responsibilities of parenthood even if that may not be something explicitly consented to at the time and regardless of the personal hardship involved?

R0bert

Shivers

"He gave permission when he had sex with the mother."

So as soon as any man has sex with you, that makes you entitled to a percentange of his pay? Interesting!

"a father that states that after he's paid for his mortgage and paid for his child support he is left with about 50% of take-home pay."

But you cannot feel any empathy for a bloke who loses half of his pay.

"a clear indication that fathers overwhelmingly directly relate their children to their finances."

But it is implausible that many mothers might also want the kids because of the benefits. Why is complaining about money only dirty when fathers do it?

Seing that children are such an imposition on mothers, they should be grateful to those men who have fought so hard to care for then half of the time.

"And you have described exactly how our child protection system operates through the FLC. Not a skerit of the child's best interests being paramount in sight."

Will proof still be trivial when you are accused of child abuse? Will expecting others to provide evidence still be proof that family courts operate with "not a skerit of the child's best interests being paramount in sight"?