Gawd. I go away for a week and return to find the bitter and twisted men's contingent still banging on in this thread about these awful conspiratorial feminists.

While I was away I happened to have dinner with my daughter and her fiance, and the topic of surnames came up. They're getting married in May, and it transpired that he just assumed that she and her child would take his name, and she had just assumed that she'd be retaining hers. After a slightly uncomfortable moment, we discussed various options - with hyphenation coming last in terms of preferences.

They're still talking about it, but leaning towards taking an entirely new surname for all of them, including the kids that they each already have. Of course they should do whatever they think's best for themselves and their kids, but it was interesting to me to observe the evident implications of some unspoken assumptions they apparently each harbour.

Finally, might I suggest a short vacation to our embittered usual suspects? You're really starting to look bogged down.

Antiseptic,

http://www.csa.gov.au/ChildSupportCalculator/Calculator.aspx

Your calculations don't seem to add up.

As a parent, even if I never got to see the children, I would consider paying to raise them the minimin duty that I would WANT to fulfil irrespective of the level of income of the other parent.

I've always worked and been the main financial support since the children were tots. Having paid for raising three, I know for a fact that it costs a lot more than $70.00 a week per child.

It must be a great source of pain for your children to be aware of what an awful burden you consider them to be.

If your ex really is so dreadful, perhaps you just deserved each other... but your poor kids :(

Antiseptic: “To put it all in perspective, in 2001 I had a gross taxable income of about $43k, while her gross taxable income was under $15k. After tax and the CSA, I had less than $25k left, while she had an after tax income of over $32k.”

Grossly unjust under equal shared parenting. Punitive even.

It is not difficult to see how high effective marginal tax rates further skewed by child support can discourage single mothers and lower paid men from working. As James mentions, men are also discouraged from forming new relationships as CS discriminates against any children of subsequent relationships. Heck, in my experience, it even discriminated against our own children - but only if one believes that all child support is destined for children.

For many years I paid my 18% of gross income for one child while providing full care for the other two children of the same marriage. According to the “18%, 27%, 32%, 34% and 36%” rule, the 2 children in my care were entitled to 27% of someone’s gross income. Being their father, guess it was mine.

One possible explanation for this curious situation is that the state actively sponsors the view that women are less capable than men. What else could one conclude, when it systematically attributes less responsibility to one gender? This is probably also why we have nonsensical debates about surnames, and why related decisions are billed as the more political.

Most would agree there has to be some income redistribution in a caring society. Marginal tax rates and social security attest to this. However, when it comes to gender, there are whole new layers of social mechanics designed for redistribution. The danger of this redistribution mania is that we inadvertently reallocate too much responsibility away from those who need it most in their daily quest for gender equality.

CJ Morgan: “They're still talking about it, but leaning towards taking an entirely new surname for all of them, including the kids that they each already have.”

How very progressive. Seems like a great way to integrate children into the new family unit, and at the same time, acknowledge the impact on a man’s identity. More of us should change our surnames to mark each such event.

Pynchme:"It must be a great source of pain for your children to be aware of what an awful burden you consider them to be."

LOL. I fought for 5 years through the courts to get some time with them and you think I consider them a burden? Dimwit.

Pynchme:"Your calculations don't seem to add up."

As I said, the CSA deemed I had a higher "capacity to earn" and assessed me on that, not on the formula. Do try to keep up.

Pynchme:"Having paid for raising three, I know for a fact that it costs a lot more than $70.00 a week per child. "

I agree. Your point? Doesn't Mum have some responsibility to contribute?

Gday CJ and congratz on the lovely events that are pending for you and your family. It's a great thing isn't it that these things can be discussed, negotiated and creative ideas considered.

Yes the bitterness. Oy mate. If it weren't for being aware of millenium men like yourself, Flood and his cohorts; many men in my life and being aware of the statistics that tell us that the majority of men are good fellas; I would lose faith - and that would be in humanity as a whole, since we're talking half the human race.

Antiseptic; I saw someone; maybe you; post a way back that the man who is paying had to pay two rents etc. That isn't correct. Each parent pays for their own rent. There is the same basic living amount allocated to each adult. Wherever you lived you'd pay rent. People who have their spouse and kiddies with them would generally pay higher rent than a single living alone, who can do fine with smaller accommodation. As for your five years battling; it could just as well be thought that it was a way to harrass your ex and to reduce your financial burden. Did you fight just as hard to care for and spend time with your children while you were still married to their mother? Maybe that would have made a difference in the outcome.

I note the blatant devaluing of caring for children as worthwhile activity and of mothers/parents who prioritize that. Yet many men such as some posters here have the audacity to blame their woes on feminists and to puzzle over why so many women want to dump their sorry asses and stay as far away from them as possible.