Aziliz, "Women also have a 'biological clock' that goes off earlier than men's--if they are thirty five are they supposed to abort then when a later pregnancy might not happen or may be prone to difficulties?" Just in case there is mis-understanding, no part of my view includes forced abortions.

I don't like abortion but have come to the conclusion that their availability at the mothers choice is better than the alternative.

I don't see that man having a choice regarding opting into the childs life if the mother proceeds as invalidating the rest of what you propose. "If couples can just ‘get pregnant’ without going through the process of the ten sessions and the prenup and then 'have to' have a relationship because the man wants it then you undermine the whole process.".

I see it as a decision regarding parenting rather than about a relationship between the parents.

The act of marriage (with associated legal benefits and obligations) would still require the mediation.

Not perfect, kids are better off being raised in a stable and loving home by both parents. If that does not happen I consider having two loving parents involved in their lives is a better alternative than being raised by one parent even if the parents are not together.

"To have a really informed, well thought out and clear commitment before people partner is what I am pushing for. Your way just completely squashed that, may as well throw the whole thing out."

I don't agree, I think I'm just approaching some of the issues around parenting differently.

R0bert

The CSA has hidden behind "In the best interests of the Children", and "...according to our legislation" for way too many years. The system is a disastrous failure, and does nothing more than create dissent, anger, bitterness and hatred between parents - at a time when there is more than ample conflict.

Since Joe Hockey made that horrendous statement "I will hunt them to their grave" (meaning the non paying non-custodial parents), then I would hope that he will also hunt down the REAL father of the children that Liam Magill was duped into paying for.

The courts know his name, and where he lives, and knows about all the assets he funnelled into his wife's name - and that they skipped the state as soon as he realised he was going to be named. Where is Mr Hockey's zeal for justice now?

Plain and simple - the CSA took money that they weren't entitled to, and now want to wash their hands of the whole thing. They have not taken action against the woman who ADMITTED IN COURT she knew she was lying; they have the option to do so, but wont. WHY?

The fact that this has HAD to be taken to this level is abhorrent - and simply proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the CSA is now corrupt, and blatantly discriminatory. (Strange, here I was thinking that Discrimination of any kind was illegal in this country)

"Disgusted-With-Hockey" Danielle rhis_mummy@yahoo.com.au

I forgot to put this para in my last post. It was supposed to be the first paragraph and I'm afraid the rest didn't make much sense:

"I would rather marriages didn’t break up. I think it is hell. But it happens. The reason I suggested ten mediation sessions before marriage is because my sister and her husband went to a course before getting married that was so confronting eight out of ten of the couples decided not to marry. My sister by the way is still happily married 17 years down the track."

I was very impressed.

Thanks Kalin,

Robert you aren't even reading my posts.

The best chance the child has of getting a proper live in father is if the biological father gets off the scene. I have met many men out there who are perfectly happy to marry a women with either one or two children who are very young. But they want to be able to step in from early on and they would much prefer there were no other man around. You ignore that because you are so hung up on the biology.

You go on about children needing to have two loving parents. I agree--that is precisely why I suggest the man should have nothing to do with the child. Parents shouldn't just love the child while they rip each others eyes out--they should be two loving parents to each other and the child living under the one roof. My suggestions are to give this option for the child the best likelihood of happening.

You are forcing abortions on women. You said so yourself in an earlier post that if she didn't want a relationship with the father she could have an abortion. That is forcing her.

Even so not all children from sole parents are wrecks--some are great. In fact it shocks me how often many of the best husbands around came from broken homes. I think the stats need more analysis.

Chezzie, I think Liam Magill is a creep. What his wife did was despicable but what he did was a million times worse. The real victim isn't LG it is those poor innocent children. One incidentally is his bit of 'sperm', but all are real living human beings. That he held in his arms and cared for them for years and then screams he wants nothing to do with them and he wants $70,000 back ensuring they will have the most excruciatingly poverty stricken life. I feel so sorry for the kids.

If I had put years of money and time into a child and then found out they weren't biologically mine it would not make one jot of difference to me in how I felt about them. How it made me feel about my partner would depend on the circumstances. He doesn't pay any child support now. He has had his arrears cancelled. What more does he want? His children's blood? And what about that awful girlfriend of his. They are both heartless and soulless and incredibly self-centred.

Azliz - I strongly suggest you retract your statement and apologise.

You do not know anything about the case (other than what you have interpreted from the news), and you do not have the right to sit in judgement over anyone. Your comments regarding the Child Support situation are patently incorrect, and your character assassination based on that is the only 'evil' thing here.

Liam Magill DOES have a debt with the CSA - they have never cancelled it; in fact they have created a bigger debt because of the ONGOING deceipt of Meredith Magill.

Liam Magill DOES still pay Child Support, to this day.

Liam Magill was advised be a LAWYER to not have contact with the children who were not his. (It wasn't a decision that any father would have made lightly)

Meredith ORDERED the two children who weren't Liams to NOT call him "Dad" anymore - is that not evil?

Until you are aware of the facts, kindly have the common courtesy NOT to pass judgement or comment.

Aziliz, "You are forcing abortions on women. You said so yourself in an earlier post that if she didn't want a relationship with the father she could have an abortion. That is forcing her."

Not true.

"Robert you aren't even reading my posts."

Not true.

Disagreeing with aspects of what you are saying does not mean I'm not listening. it just means I have a different viewpoint. Have I misquoted you? Have I attributed comments to you that you have not made?

Please settle down and discuss this rather than attacking. I have a different perspective to you on the matter. Mostly I think the points you make have a lot of merrit but I don't think you give enough weight to some of the issues which are important. The biological thing does seem to be fairly important to men, it's not an issue women have to face, they have a bit more certainty regarding the question of the child being their offspring or not.

Agreed not all children from sole parents are wrecks just as not all children from traditional families are great. It's more about stacking the odds in the kids favour. Smoking does not always cause lung cancer and not smoking does not guarantee you won't get it. Same kind of issue.

"I think Liam Magill is a creep. What his wife did was despicable but what he did was a million times worse." - are you serious.

The main victim is the kids but Liam also appears to be a victim. I've only seen what's been published in the media on this, I'd hate to be faced with the choices he has had to make.

I suspect that I would have chosen differently because of the the potential to add to the harm done to those children. However the person who placed the kids in harms way appears to have been the mother, final responsibility for any harm done to them lies with her.

Placing another person in a no-win situation does not somehow pass the responsibility for the wrong across to them.

R0bert