PALEIF, I agree with the first part of your post.

Discussion of the issue of parents moving away from the area appears to be deeply distressing to your friend Taryn and yourself so why do you continue to push the issue? How much do you want to hurt her? You have posted similar remarks in other threads but past experience would suggest that you both find the contrary view offensive.

I've avoided rebutting your point out of a wish not to provoke further outbursts on your part and a desire not to contribute to further hurt to Taryn. Do you really want the issue discussed or would you prefer it to be left alone?

R0bert

Well it appears that we are going off track so best we take stock on what has come out of all this. Firstly, thanks for all your input as I feel from your comments it is quite clear that more needs to be done to make it a level playing field. Just remember kid are kids and what they really need more in life than anything else is a safe home to go to and a loving family, whether it be their maternal parents or not. I feel that most wayword kids today are products of a non caring and loving family. Lets face it, if the money issue was resolved whereby all children were supported with a comon value dependent on their age, the non-custodial parent would then have the oppotunity to provide love and effection to the children of his/her newfound partners children in the knowledge that they would not be screwed by the system simply because they have a new lease on life and are attempting to better themselves.

Well it appears that we are going off track so best we take stock on what has come out of all this. Firstly, thanks for all your input as I feel from your comments it is quite clear that more needs to be done to make it a level playing field. Just remember kid are kids and what they really need more in life than anything else is a safe home to go to and a loving family, whether it be their maternal parents or not. Lets face it, if the money issue was resolved whereby all children were supported with a comon value dependent on their age, the non-custodial parent would then have the oppotunity to provide love and effection to the children of his/her newfound partners children in the knowledge that they would not be screwed by the system.
rehctub

Having been involved in Family Court cases for decades, assisting in many cases, it would be absurd to take the maintenance issue separate from the non-custodian other financial obligations.
It should be understood that while financial support for children to have an appropriate lifestyle is important you cannot ignore the mental and emotional support the children need from having contact with the non-custodian parent and any half siblings that may exist.
I am too well aware that many woman upon separation move away, preferable interstate as to make any contact between the non-custodian parent and the children about sheer impossible. Hence, those women are themselves acting against the interest of the children in their custody.
While I accept that upon separation one of the parent may prefer wanting to move away from a town to another town, it is however another issue that the custodian parent moved interstate or even to another country.
I was assisting a woman who successfully obtained custody and she gave me the understanding that she could not care less how difficult it was for the father having to travel interstate to see his girls as she was free to move, as she did, where she wanted to live. Later the custody was reversed and then this same woman argued that as she had set up a new life in Victoria then the father should be forced to move where she was living so she could have access to the children! As such, she had contradictive views pending how it did suit her.
I came often across simular cases, so to say, where whom ever had the power of custody dictated whatever suited them and so to say the hell with what was really in the best interest of the children.
A non-custodian parent forced by this to spend huge amount of moneys to fund travelling, overnight accommodation, etc, then would be limited in what this non-custodian parent could financially contribute toward the children. Hence, both parents must act with common-sense! When I was myself a custodian parent, this is the rule I successfully followed

To add further, when I had court cases with my second wife, I would travel down from the country and stay over in a spare room for the court hearing the next day. We would travel together to the Court. During the hearing I would cross-examine her also. During lunchtime we would have our meals together, I paid for it, and after the Court hearing we would travel back together to her place. Sure, her lawyers were telling her this was not acceptable but this was disregarded as while we had a legal issue it was not necessarily for this to erupt in further personal conflicts otherwise.
Sure, in the past she had attacked me with a knife and had pleaded guilty to assault upon me, but I wasn’t going to hammer on this time and again as it would not resolve anything. Now, many years after I divorced her, she still calls me up on my birthday (to annoyance of my current wife) to wish me a happy birthday. She commenced to do so after I divorced her. She also phones in to remind me about any upcoming birthday of the children.
From the nasty and violent wife she was during the marriage, the children have given me the understanding that after I gained custody of them and did not retaliate against her in a power play she changed dramatically in her attitude.
Many woman claim (rightly-or-not) they were abused during the marriage but so was I and I got over it and, so to say, the prove is in the pudding that my former wife no longer display the streaks of violence and aggressiveness as she displayed previously.
Regretfully, I came across many woman who could not get over it and continue to hammer on about past problems. They put their own kind of feeling for revenge or whatever it might be before the interest of the children. Then deliberately move away to try to limit contact with the children and then scream blue-murder, so to say, for a so called “dead-beat-father”. Well, there are also “dead-beat-mothers”!

Rehctub
Yes we are getting off track your correct. I just get rather annoyed at these professional unmarried mothers who plan a free ride and expect others to pay their way in life.

Did you see the lady on a current affair planning to have eleven woith eleven different Dads.
I get so angry the government dont go out and arrest her or something.
Mr Gerritt we know through experience is a wonderful person who sits up until 3am at times replying to others with free advise.

Of course this is well away from Live exports however as we often help others as well as animals its a thread that does interest me.

Rehctub I hope you wont mind if I stray off track just this once to ask mr Gerritts advise on a family court matter

The lady has been waiting three years for property settlement. The x is in comtempt of court orders to go to auction.

Nobody cares as she pays daily interest.

A new lawyer suggested she go for more than the one thirds as originally agreed because her costs out weigh her share.

He told her to report a life of abuse by this man who was not only the x husband but step father.

He is a paedophile. Both State and federal say its one of the worste cases they have handled.

BUT they cant charge him because they have no proof- no other complaints- no witness.
I told her lawyer to pull the police statement out and not to ask more feeling the judge will not appreciate being put in such as position.

As it stands `hopefully` the courts will favour her given the three years delay and make him pay her legal costs.

However if she pushes the abuse without evidence I feel she may go down.
Would appreciate your thoughts if you dont mind Mr Gerritt.?

It has nothing to do with this office- except we support her and shes a wonderful person and mother.