CSA assessment

The only honest explanation is that the system has nothing to do with supporting children. It is instead a tax-collecting ploy designed to cover the cost to the state of the growing number of single mothers. The idea was that it would take money from irresponsible absent fathers and hand it to abandoned and betrayed single mothers, while at the same time taking a cut to make it ‘Treasury neutral’.

---

Forseti- apologies for the name thing but as that was just a typo. As for your comments re single mothers as quoted above... you are implying that single mothers do nothing but rely on the state for benefits.. hence the need to get absent fathers to pay their share...

Would you all not think that the nrp income is assessed as the PWC is by the nature of the children living with her or him as the case may be providing all the necessary day to day items for the children involved... I am doing it all on my own despite there being no contact issues with my ex and despite him being a very high earner.. but he has not been honest with the courts, me or the CSA.

I agree that parenting is much more than just a pay cheque but if we were still together he would never have turned around to me and said no you get that you pay for all of that... we both financially provided for our much longed for child then and post separation/divorce that should stil be the case. I as a parent should not have to go to the courts or the csa to make him accept his financial responsibility. If I was the nrp I would have stepped up immediately regardless of how I felt about my stbx partner... that is the type of person I am.

On the other hand I agree that parents evenings etc are important and I would give all the money in the world if I could depend on my ex to be more involved in our child's life and to support me more practically with her... hence my assertion that all cases are individual and hence generalisations being so unfair and unkind.

I agree that the system is very flawed indeed and my belief is that the statement of arrangements for children should include a very binding financial element that kicks in immediately and hence no one would have to go through the incompetent CSA and hence save everyone involved be they male or female a lot of stress and extra workload... the CSA are not an easy lot to deal with... statistically money issues factors among the top thing that separting couples argue about particularly in relation to children concerned.

Don't know what the alternative should be as I think it is sad that any agency had to be created to make people step up to their responsibilities.... again regardless of gender....

I implied no such thing. The CSA was introduced by a Conservative government concerned by the rising number of single mothers (about 800,000 at the time) who were becoming an increasing drain on public funds. They considered that the best way to cover the cost was to take the money from 'absent' fathers. It didn't work because most of the presumptions they made were wrong. These were their prejudices, not mine!

The reality is that more single mothers work than don't, that the majority of NRPs actually pay the full amount, and that of those who don't pay, mothers are slightly worse than fathers. The little research that has been done shows that of those who don't pay, most can't afford to; of those who can afford to most are being denied contact. The number of parents determined to take no responsibility at all for their own chldren is very small.

Almost every assumption surrounding child support isn't supported by evidence. The politicians like to simplify the problems and gloss over them: they reduce it all to 'responsibility', but there is a great deal more to it than that.

I'd advise a browse through the Child Support Analysis site, because although it is not up-to-date it does show some of the reasons why the system is so unjust and ineffective, and why it is so difficult to devise a fairer system. It also makes its own proposals for greater fairness, such as assessing both parents' incomes.

I agree that both parents should take responsibility for their children and that if one is absent they should make a financial contribution to the other. I also believe that the best way to be a parent is not to be absent, and that if parenting is shared equally there should be no need for money to change hands.

Phew..

I just posted for advice on CSA crap...

See what you think about what we are being put through!!!

I agree completely with Forseti..

"If parenting is equally shared then there should be no need for money to change hands"

The benefits that are paid out in this country including WTC is appaling & give no incentitive for people to get off their asses!

My fiance`s ex has delibratley kept her wage at £200 per week for 5 years in order to keep her WTC (she owns her own business)

& now CSA aaaaaaaaaa:angry:

Angel 1

CSA not fair! Life not fair! What about the NRPs who deliberately give up their jobs or move abroad so they don't have to pay.

I am probably one of the many mothers who have never received a penny of maintenance from their child's father. It's his loss in the end and I am proud of her and the way I have worked to bring her up.

Yes there are plenty who pay too much and plenty who pay too little. Think of the children first and maybe it won't be so hard.

Deedum
Yours is a case in point as to exactly why the CSA (or any gov agency) should pursue fathers who delibrately make themselves unemployed or move away. You have my sympathy. He has my pity. But, as you say, it will be his loss in the years to come when he looks back and realises what he has given up. Bringing up children is never easy regardless of how much or little money is available...and as Ange1 states there are those, on both sides, who delibrately and fraudulently evade their responsibility but because its in the too difficult box they go after the easy target with disproportionate assessments.
Good luck

Benefits per say are not the problem it is the long term abuse of them. They were put in place to help those in most need. They were never intended to replace working like they appear to have done.

When there is shared care there should be no exchange of monies?????????? does that mean that when it comes to shopping for school uniforms, books etc that both parents get separate and equal lists and pay the same for all items? Does the same apply to extra curricular activities and school trips? Sounds ideal but does this actually happen in reality??? Certainly has not been the case for me.

I wonder how many parents when they leave the marital home put financial support in place immediately?? Leaving is hard for anyone in that situation but it is never a spur of the moment thing and provisions could be made. Again this is regarldess of gender.

I am in the same boat as Deedum- no financial support since July 2007 when he left us on holiday. I provide everything for our daughter to the best of my limited resources, including when he has our daughter for staying contact.

Holidays and extras like that are way down on my list of priorities as food, nappies, toiletries and heating etc are all I can manage.

I think there is something inherently wrong with any society that can allow a parent to simply walk away from their responsibilities to a life they have created. Again I say this regardless of gender of the PWC. It is deplorable that anyone should have to depend on state benefits when there are resources at the disposal of the parents involved.

I am not asking for the earth- only what is fair and reasonable for the benefit of our daughter. The irony is that even though he is paying nothing the CSA have already told him that he would be eligible for a discount rate due to the number of staying contact nights.

To me the system is working is in his favour as he has provided all false documentation to the CSA and has got away with it.

Like Deedum I think it his loss and he will regret it but in the real world here and now that does not help me with the bills and providing for our daughter.