Divorce Dr,

First of all the link does not go to my site, it goes to On Second Though TV in California, whom came to Michigan to interview me.

Second, you could have never herd about my case or my posting until 2006 when the case was profiled by the media, NOT YOUR ANNOUNCED 1997.

Third,If these issues are limited to each individual country, why is it that Lea Anna Cooper from your country published my story in her book, the Liam Magill story.(Days of tempest)

respectfully,As a pronounced Divorce Dr, you should really learn to listen twice as much as you talk.

last, and least, I have not posted in this forum, or any in months. I came back to this forum because I received and email asking me to come back, that they had noticed I have not posted.

So Dorothy, you get a life.

fractelle said:

"My concern is that the welfare of children is still neglected by warring parents and we still have a predominate belief of women as the primary care-givers. Hence all the conflict."

yes, but this [the OP article] is about CSA and not Fam Law ruminations. AND it is about a matter [maintainance] which 19 years ago morphed from a PRIVATE matter to one called Child Support where a humungous govt dept employing several thousand blood sucking lawyers totally ABUSES your privacy

but even more it is about, on the Eve [no pun intended] of the new formula, Buttercups doing an Oliver and asking for MORE.

the question is as to the fairness of the situation

to that end I provided expert evidence to show that EXACT situation [eg B/cup can get up to THREE TIMES her needs, and all that is BEFORE her LOP which is her "little Ozzie Pension"]

It would be good IMHO if the posts answered those concerns and not drift into Gender War and MotherHood statements

we got enough of that from Howard/Parkinson

all it does is to Help those asking for an Oliver

and we saw that at the Cash for Comment site once I did the same thing and blew the whistle, they immediately Zapped the whole thread and reverted to Rice & Asplund cra*

I am not saying the OP was doing the same as CfC site, so why not just stick to the question, or start another thread on boo hoo

fractelle please don't misunderstand my position. I'm not blaming all women or only women for the mess. I responded to SJF's post which tried to portray single mums as having prime care thrust on them. Whilst that is true in many individual cases it's also true that the groups which claim to represent them have been at the forefront of opposition to shared care.

I think that a number of issues are involved.
- A view of women as victims.
- The winner gets it all aspects of child residency
- The ongoing income from C$A where a former partner has sufficent income
- Sometimes revenge
- Sexist attitudes over gender differences in parenting
- Negative views of men and fathers by some especially those dealing with violence against women

We have a lot of work to do to undo this mess. We need to ensure that mothers have legitimate career opportunities. We need to ensure that fathers have appropriate access to parenting.

We need to find viable ways to break the ties between child residency and property settlements whilst still meeting legitimate child care needs.

We need to break the finacial ties between parents where they are not in agreement about the level of financial support needed by the children - perhaps people who can't work it out for themselves could pay into or be paid out of a pool rather than have their support or financial responsibilities determined by the other parents choices.

Whilst money is so closely tied to child residency conflist will continue, people of both genders will make decisions that harm their children because the harm to children is not as obvious at the time as the other issues.

R0bert

Robert, I agree with you that to separate parents from the money issue would be a great start to bringing the focus back to where it should be. On the needs and reasonable expectations of a child.

Not only for children from separated parents by the way. All children.

Money that is compulsorily paid for children, both by the taxpayers and by parents should be kept separate.

To my mind it is fairer if the schools directly get 'uniform' money, 'resources' money, the GP and dentist are directly paid etc. I even think that if school canteens provided school lunches at least it would be assured that all children get one decent meal a day. Both 'poor' and 'rich' kids by the way.

I am convinced that when children are separated from a source of income and it is ONLY about the job of child rearing the majority of 'custody' battles will disappear as snow in the sun.

Usual Suspect, my personal belief is that a woman only 'owns' her child when it is in her womb. When that umbilical cord is cut a child is an autonomous human being.

Too many parents keep on talking about 'their rights'. Parental rights are no more important or valid than children's rights. Parents have responsibilities. These do not diminish on separation from a partner.

These responsibilities do not diminish either when you meet somebody new and you contemplate having children with this person.

CSA new system is so unfair. We have to pay $120 more per month under the so called fair system, now totalling $600 per month, because the mother has a private business and claims zero income. She owns her home, claims sole parent pension, meanwhile we have alarge mortgage a new baby and I have to go to work so we can survive and pay the ex wife child support.
It absolutely infuriates me. My partner has always paid child support and has no problem doing so, but his amount is just so extreme. COnsidering the 5 nights fortnight she is in our care we provide food, clothes entertainment, hockey fees take her to games even when she is at her mothers because her mother wont take her, we pay private health insurance. This child is expensive and I have a 13 year old myself and know full well that they do not cost this much money, it is absolutely riduculous. We have had no luck with CSA they have e very negative attitude towards men who want to decrease payments. Its about time they investiagted some of the mothers.
Edna

edna,

I sympathise. Maybe if this system starts to affect more women there might be hope for change.