Rehctub Here.Well I am pleased to see there is some feedback from both sides of the fence so as to speak. I further wish to claify that the $10.00 I mentioned was merely a number, not an accurate amount. However I seriously doubt that a six month old baby costs the same per week to maintain as a 15 year old child. The system doesn't see it this way though as they continue to take a pecentage of the wage.
Lets say a couple seperate where the father is the bread winner and earns say 45,000 per year and there are three children under the age of 13. If he continues with his current job the current system takes about 30% or $13,500 of his gross wage. That's before taxes. If he increases his income to say $60,000 per year this then becomes $20,000 per year, however, if the mother meets a partner who happens to earn $120,000 per year, and it happens at times, the family all of a sudden enjoys a huge increase in their living standards. While I am the first to say this would be great for the kids, why then does the father have to continue to shell out 30% of his income. However, if the payments were a set amount then he would have the oppotunity to kick start his life again while the kids would continue to be supported knowing that that set amount is comming on a regular basis while at the same time enjoy the extras from the wealthy partner. It is quite simply impossible for a man, even if his partner has cheated on him and taken the kids as well, to start again as he is crippled by the current system that takes a percentage of his gross income. I just feel that the current system is unfair, causes people to either under declair their income, or in some cases cease work all together just to avoid the payments. And, while all of this is going on the innocent ones, the children are the ones that are missing out.

rehctub, no simple answers but men who want to avoid that fate need to stack the odds differently.

- Make sure that they share the care of the children from day one as much as humanely possible.
- Remember time with their kids is far more important than a plasma TV, bigger house, private school etc. Kids need quantity of time far more than they need things. If a custody battle happens working hard to provide for your kids does not ensure better access to them.
- Argue for provisions in workplace agreements/EBA's etc that don't discriminate according to gender. A couple should be able to decide according to their circumstances who stays at home and who continues a career (or both reduce work hours to share) not have it decided by gender.
- Oppose the stereotyping of males as abusers and poor parents.
- If a seperation happens continue to be the best parent they can be regardless of what the other parent does.

We still have a system that struggles with the idea of shared care or males as prime carers but it seems a lot better in some places than it was a few years ago. I've not had anything to do with Relationships Australia for a couple of uears but other services seem to have moved on a lot recently. (excluding C$A)

That does not solve all the problems but it's a start.

R0bert

Thanks for your comments rObert
In a perfect world I would suggest that your theory is all well and good but the reality is that very few relationships end up this way as most problems are created from outside influences, i.e, a sister from hell or a general man hater freind.

As for your comment on equality in the work place, well this is a brand new subject. There is quite simply no way that all workers can be treated equally unless they perform the same task and achieve the same output. Notwithstanding the fact that work place agreements have made some ground, the current pay system rewards workers for the time it takes them to perform a task rather than the productivity achieved by an individual. In many cases the work pace in a workplace is set by the slowest worker which does little to enspire good workers.

With further regard for the equality argument, take away the womens tees at the golf courses, make them play 5 sets of tennis instead of 3 and make the maximin lifting limit in the workplace the same as a male and we may make some progress. In the mean time we should reffer to a famous book that I relcall was something like, 'Women from Venus and Men are from Mars.
Cheers

rehctub, the equality part depends on how far you push it. We have EBA preperations under way now and the draft included gender specific provisions which are unnecessary so I've asked for a rewrite on those items. Nothing in the original or the revised versions about the output of individual workers etc.

My comments were about fathers making sure that they are actually in a position to be fathers. Whilst the idea that arrangements which worked when a couple were together are the bast when apart does not sit well fathers who accept/choose little involvement in their kids lives prior to seperation are not exactly on the high ground after seperation in regard to time with their kids.

Doing so will not necessarily make a difference when dealing with the family breakup industry but the times are changing.

R0bert

R0bert

As for differences in sport I have no problem with them but I don't feel compelled to get to bothered when I hear complaints that women

Ah RObert, you’re a true cyber genie!
You’ve made some really good points; so has Cakers.
I like your idea of a pool or similar financial arrangement.

On the ‘MD Law’ website it says,
“In practical terms, parents often make their own financial arrangements… It is very common for parties not to rely on the administrative assessment and to enter into a Child Support Agreement.”
http://www.mdlaw.com.au/family/fam_faq.html#finSupport

Doesn’t that mean that parents can lawfully make their own arrangements and only have to resort to the official assessment when they can’t agree? I realise that I sound ignorant but Child support sounds quite complicated to me.

RObert, good point also about the involvement/position of fathers; some things are still being thought of as ‘the mother’s job’, such as fighting for more child care at work places etc. When men and women cooperate, goals will be reached quicker.

Rehctub, RObert,
children who need to accept changes (e.g. sea or school change, dropping a hobby) when part of a stable, loving family, I imagine would cope better with those changes than children who are caught between fighting parents and have to deal with extra stress and need to adjust to constantly move back and fro between two parents’ homes as well. It’s a lot to cope with for young children.
So I do think that if it’s possible, parents should try to let them keep their music lessons or at school they love rather than taking this away from them, too.

As for equality, we can strive for as much fairness in the law, workplaces and sport as possible but sometimes there cannot be 100% equality solely because of biological or physical differences. It wouldn’t be wise for women to play rugby against men, for example.

Dear RObert
If you ask me the whole walfare system is full of faults. One thing I remember when I commenced my trade back in the late 70's was "son, if you work hard now you will benifit in the long run". Well how far from the truth is this now. You see the way the current system is, is that they reward the ones that don't contribute while at the same time penalise the ones that conribute the most. What I mean by this is that the harder you work the more tax you pay, the less benifits you receive to provide for your children and of cause you find yourself with less time to spend with your family. On the other hand if you choose not to work, or at least work as little as possible you get max benifits, max spare time, little need for travel expenses i.e.fuel and parking expenses associated with your work, while at the same time enjoying quailty time with your family. Of cause we all know that the majority of children caught up in these circumstances don't regard their time as 'quality time' due to the amount of welfare payments that are spent on alcohole and cigerets. I don't know about you but when I go to the chemist and they ask "do you have a healthcare card"? I simply say no, I am too busy at work to have one of those. It quite simply sucks! And just to add insult the government now pays them to have children knowing full well that the money does not go to the children. In my opinion every child should be supported regarless of their social status and zero dollars should go to the parents as it should be pooled and a card issued for child born expenses only.
I do have some positive ideas here but this is another topic.
Cheers
Rehctub