The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > The Child Support Scheme for Non-Residential Parents

The Child Support Scheme for Non-Residential Parents

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All
CSA is a euphemstic organisation.

It has no interest in the children.

The kids are being used as pawns. So are the parents.

The vultures exploit family breakdown for their own cynical ideologically driven desire to re-engineer 'society' (whatever that is).

No fault divorce is a joke. A contract that has no remedy, nor sanction in the casue of a defaulting party is not worth the paper its written on. Marriage contract has been reduced to a mere postcript to romantic pretension. It not really a contract if one isn't held to the terms or accountable for breach thereof.

Kids are used as pawns. In the name of their best interest. Most kids, l believe, when asked, would prefer their parent to stay together, even if they dont get along. Look at who claims divorce is better for the kids. Look who is pushing agenda behind the kids. Its the one holding the baby and yes men do it too.

'Child support' as a percentage of income, is, beyond a certain point, alimony/spousal maintenance by stealth. There's no accountability for use of the funds. Yes, there are men who manipulate the system too.

l think that this whole area of family breakdown is the frontline of the gender war. Both men and women are being used as pawns in that war. Family is considered the backbone of the social structure which is held accountable for gender based imbalance. It has long been known that by destroying the family, the imbalance can be redressed. True enuff. Its just that this rhetoric is driven be a deeper agenda, which is to ultimately rob the individual of any personal soverignty and autonomy and bring him/her under the whip of the state. For the sake of 'society' you understand.

We have been turned into useful idiots.
Posted by trade215, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 5:06:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Belly unfortunately true. I guess I'm not optimistic of substantial change anytime soon (at least change that brings improvement).

The Libs have made some moves to improve the system but still the main claims coming out of C$A in the light of the "fairer" system is the extra money they are getting out of payers. We will probably have a labor government late in the year, labor set up this mess in the first place and if my understanding is correct have opposed reforms which would have made a fairer system.

We need to advocate for change but recognise that it is unlikely that dads and kids kept apart by the existing system will see a fix in a meaningfull time. Even a change in law would take a massive time to follow up with a review of existing situations to identify those that are genuinely about childrens safety.

I wish I could see the hope of a real solution.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Thursday, 21 June 2007 7:23:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Actually, I think it's MORE Mother Support than Child Support. I know I may lose a lot of women here but it's the truth. I don't have children but I have relatives, as well as friends that are paying support and some of these women are ridiculous! If their checks get garnished, their mortagage or rent increases, they have more children, they feel the non-custodial parent should pay more money. Let me say this, MOST of them have remarried or have a lover, rather he/she lives in the same household. When a person meet and start a relationship with someone that has kids, they're a package, so don't feel you and your NEW lover should be able to live off the ex, come on, tell him what your kids need! I know I'll get bad comments but I would like to hear from the people that agree with me, it's Mother Support, NOT Child Support. Where's the men support group? At least those that pay!:)
Posted by darkeyes, Thursday, 9 August 2007 7:46:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Darkeyes - you will hear no argument from ME! I'm a "subsequent spouse"... I married a man who had children to his ex, and we have paid through the nose every single day. Thank goodness there are other women out there who actually can see the truth through all the "single mothers' rhetoric".

And do you know that, even though there are refuges for women all over this country, there are only ONE OR TWO for men? Does that strike you at all as discriminatory? Do you also know that there is NO funding for male groups, however the govt. pays hand over fist to the womens'?

There is no gender equality - and until more people like you stand up and 'state the obvious', there will be no change.

Thank you DarkEyes, from all the "subsequent spouses".
Posted by Scrapnmafia, Thursday, 9 August 2007 4:05:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Scrapnmafia,
Thanks! I wish others out there that feel the same and is on this forum or searching find this topic, maybe we can get something started and HELP these men. My heart goes out to your husband as well as my family and friends. No,I wasn't aware of the slim support men have and you are right, they(gov't) pay for the single Mom's, they need to help the ex's as well. It's ashame to sit and listen to these women take over, it's like men are being punished because the women chose to be intimate with them, without protection. Married or not, we ALL know what can happen when you have unprotected relations, pregnancy, and or diseases.These women were NOT raped! It's NOT ethical at all. The men go to court, have the right to speak but it's like the judges ignore them and grant the woman what she wants, which is TOTALLY unfair! I know this one guy, recently went to court and the judge, which was a female, is making him pay her more than the guidelines because she chose to move to a community where the expenses are extremely high and he has to suffer. Check this out, after that amount they're giving her, his taxes, etc. He will bring home a little over $100 a week, how is this man supposed to live. I told him, go and appeal it, DON'T allow them to do that to you. Why is it that the men MUST show up to court but the women don't have to and still get what they're asking for? If the man doesn't show up, she's still granted what she wants, that's why it SHOULD be mandatory for the female to show up or there's no modification!! We NEED to do something about this. Let's try to think of something. Good Day!:)
Posted by darkeyes, Thursday, 9 August 2007 10:28:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Scrapnmafia, I've not been involved with a mens group for a while but I had the impression based on a discussion with the leader of one that some money may be available but that the strings which came attached made it unusable. The ability to speak out would be compromised. Someone who puts ethics ahead of money - yeah.

Certainly no well funded government departments to do most of the heavy work. I did notice recently that the federal government has a links for men section referenced off the same page as the links for women section. http://www.australia.gov.au/front/info-for and http://www.australia.gov.au/411 for the main mens section.

I'm not sure how long they have had that up. The Queensland Government still lists resources for Women but not as far as I can tell specifically for Men http://www.qld.gov.au/services_for_queenslanders/health_and_communities/community_services.html but I might have missed it elsewhere.

The shelter situation is largely explained by the snow job that has been run on the DV issue and the idea of protecting women and children. Whilst there is plenty of quality research that shows that most levels of DV are not genderised the pollies and their minders stick to the advocacy research.

I do think that there is a significant shift underway in regard to mens needs and community acceptance of single fathers. I am concerned that if the federal government changes some of that will be undone. My impression is that Labor is too strongly tied to gender politics to provide any hope of working towards a fairer system (although I don't know Rudd's stance on that).

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Thursday, 9 August 2007 11:04:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy