What is a fair child support agency?

nuckinfobhead

my ex refuses to let me see my son, threatens to move, and has done, if i try to find him.

now, i dont want my son dragged around moving home every time his dad wants to see him. so i have not pursued it, she isnt the kind of respectable mother that would obey a court order anyway, regardless of the consequences. Everytime she got in the !!!!!! in the past she changed her name and ran away not to be found, she also has another son before mine, which she did the same thing to his father also. (i was naive at the time and it never occurred to me she would do it a second time, to me!) so now she has 2 sons in the same situation, with no contact with their real dads. all because she likes to run away and hide playing silly 'im in control' games.

so why the hell should i give the twisted cow thats unfortunatley the mother one single cent...... yes fair enough it takes 2 to bring a child into the world but when one parent decides that path, they surely have to expect to get a big fat sweet fook all.

I WILL NEVER PART WITH A PENNY THAT I KNOW WOULD GO TO HER, IN 8 YEARS I HAVENT AND FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE I WONT.

chase me fer it...... like thats really gonna make me pay lol

sorry crap attitude perhaps but thats just tough, my son will always be welcome with me, provided for and cared for. i can only make it up to him when the time comes, saying that tho she is the kind of person to make her sons believe their real fathers are dead or were violent abusive etc etc, so if i am very lucky my son wont believe all from her poison tongue. she even emailed me 2wks before his birthday one year telling me that HE was dead.

sure is a loving mother that, and i'm supposed to want to pay...... nah i think not.

any risk of my cash lining the ex's pockets? not a chance, i'd 100% burn every penny of it without thinking twice if it means she gets naff all. why the fook should i pay her to keep my son from me?

all that aside, if child support and access were equal and fair, like a straight 50/50 care order, then it surely means no more child support anyway. that has surely got to be the better way to go. its only the most selfish vindictive pwc's that would disagree i'm sure. if a nrp is forced to pay then the pwc should be forced to 'share' the child imo (bit different in cases of violence abuse etc...) why didnt i pursue it through the courts? well, being the kind of person she is, if its not all her own way then it would be my son who suffered because she would run. also causing as much trouble for me as she can on the way.

sorry for the rant but being the nrp to a pwc who is like that, well it does kinda make you boil inside.

Zara33

nuckinfobhead wrote: »

my ex refuses to let me see my son, threatens to move, and has done, if i try to find him.

now, i dont want my son dragged around moving home every time his dad wants to see him. so i have not pursued it, she isnt the kind of respectable mother that would obey a court order anyway, regardless of the consequences. Everytime she got in the !!!!!! in the past she changed her name and ran away not to be found, she also has another son before mine, which she did the same thing to his father also. (i was naive at the time and it never occurred to me she would do it a second time, to me!) so now she has 2 sons in the same situation, with no contact with their real dads. all because she likes to run away and hide playing silly 'im in control' games.

so why the hell should i give the twisted cow thats unfortunatley the mother one single cent...... yes fair enough it takes 2 to bring a child into the world but when one parent decides that path, they surely have to expect to get a big fat sweet fook all.

I WILL NEVER PART WITH A PENNY THAT I KNOW WOULD GO TO HER, IN 8 YEARS I HAVENT AND FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE I WONT.

chase me fer it...... like thats really gonna make me pay lol

sorry crap attitude perhaps but thats just tough, my son will always be welcome with me, provided for and cared for. i can only make it up to him when the time comes, saying that tho she is the kind of person to make her sons believe their real fathers are dead or were violent abusive etc etc, so if i am very lucky my son wont believe all from her poison tongue. she even emailed me 2wks before his birthday one year telling me that HE was dead.

sure is a loving mother that, and i'm supposed to want to pay...... nah i think not.

any risk of my cash lining the ex's pockets? not a chance, i'd 100% burn every penny of it without thinking twice if it means she gets naff all. why the fook should i pay her to keep my son from me?

all that aside, if child support and access were equal and fair, like a straight 50/50 care order, then it surely means no more child support anyway. that has surely got to be the better way to go. its only the most selfish vindictive pwc's that would disagree i'm sure. if a nrp is forced to pay then the pwc should be forced to 'share' the child imo (bit different in cases of violence abuse etc...) why didnt i pursue it through the courts? well, being the kind of person she is, if its not all her own way then it would be my son who suffered because she would run. also causing as much trouble for me as she can on the way.

sorry for the rant but being the nrp to a pwc who is like that, well it does kinda make you boil inside.

Gosh what a loving caring parent you are :rolleyes:

tamsin1982

nuckinfobhead wrote: »

my ex refuses to let me see my son, threatens to move, and has done, if i try to find him.

now, i dont want my son dragged around moving home every time his dad wants to see him. so i have not pursued it, she isnt the kind of respectable mother that would obey a court order anyway, regardless of the consequences. Everytime she got in the !!!!!! in the past she changed her name and ran away not to be found, she also has another son before mine, which she did the same thing to his father also. (i was naive at the time and it never occurred to me she would do it a second time, to me!) so now she has 2 sons in the same situation, with no contact with their real dads. all because she likes to run away and hide playing silly 'im in control' games.

so why the hell should i give the twisted cow thats unfortunatley the mother one single cent...... yes fair enough it takes 2 to bring a child into the world but when one parent decides that path, they surely have to expect to get a big fat sweet fook all.

I WILL NEVER PART WITH A PENNY THAT I KNOW WOULD GO TO HER, IN 8 YEARS I HAVENT AND FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE I WONT.

chase me fer it...... like thats really gonna make me pay lol

sorry crap attitude perhaps but thats just tough, my son will always be welcome with me, provided for and cared for. i can only make it up to him when the time comes, saying that tho she is the kind of person to make her sons believe their real fathers are dead or were violent abusive etc etc, so if i am very lucky my son wont believe all from her poison tongue. she even emailed me 2wks before his birthday one year telling me that HE was dead.

sure is a loving mother that, and i'm supposed to want to pay...... nah i think not.

any risk of my cash lining the ex's pockets? not a chance, i'd 100% burn every penny of it without thinking twice if it means she gets naff all. why the fook should i pay her to keep my son from me?

all that aside, if child support and access were equal and fair, like a straight 50/50 care order, then it surely means no more child support anyway. that has surely got to be the better way to go. its only the most selfish vindictive pwc's that would disagree i'm sure. if a nrp is forced to pay then the pwc should be forced to 'share' the child imo (bit different in cases of violence abuse etc...) why didnt i pursue it through the courts? well, being the kind of person she is, if its not all her own way then it would be my son who suffered because she would run. also causing as much trouble for me as she can on the way.

sorry for the rant but being the nrp to a pwc who is like that, well it does kinda make you boil inside.

And what would you suggest for my nrp that doesnt have time to see our child? If there was a way to force him to share the care of our son then I would be more than happy for him to be involved.
I could work more, earn myself the extra money we need, and maybe i could even have a night out with my mates once in a while!!

these changes to me would be great, for my ex they would be torture, he'd have to work less hours, take home less money than if he paid maintainence and his social life would be halved,:rotfl:

Mr_Green_Genes

Zara33 wrote: »

Gosh what a loving caring parent you are :rolleyes:

As someone who had an ex who banned me from seeing my children for a while while she was the PWC, I have to say that I have a fair degree of sympathy. I trust you are not suggesting that the kind of behaviour on the part of the PWC, expressed in that post, is acceptable? And, in case your thinking it, no, when the roles were reversed and I was the PWC, I didn't behave like that.

It's that kind of attitude that leads me to believe that, other than in circumstances of proven (not alleged) abuse, there should be a cast iron linkage between maintenance and access. Access denied, maintenance removed. That would make the vindictive PWCs think twice. Of course, if access is offered and refused, that's a totally different matter.

Merry_Gentry

nuckinfobhead wrote: »

all that aside, if child support and access were equal and fair, like a straight 50/50 care order, then it surely means no more child support anyway. that has surely got to be the better way to go. its only the most selfish vindictive pwc's that would disagree i'm sure. if a nrp is forced to pay then the pwc should be forced to 'share' the child imo (bit different in cases of violence abuse etc...)

Unless you have 100% 50-50 i.e. collecting from school every 50% of the time, etc this isn't going to be particularly fair. As a generalisation, the mother 'loses' time from her career whilst having the child. Generally, she is the lower earner. Generally she is the one who does the school runs, handles the sickness, etc. Please note I said generally.

If there was 50/50 care, the mother would still have to run a household for the child and her, but with lower earning potential. Given that the man (generally) has been able to continue working building up his career, etc, I would expect that there would be some support given, even in the case of 50/50. But I guess that would come under spousal support?

nuckinfobhead

Zara33 wrote: »

Gosh what a loving caring parent you are :rolleyes:

if only i had that opportunity......... how can you show you love and care for someone you cant find, and if you did vanished again.......
my 2nd family would probably agree with you :beer:

Soubrette

Mr_Green_Genes wrote: »

As someone who had an ex who banned me from seeing my children for a while while she was the PWC, I have to say that I have a fair degree of sympathy. I trust you are not suggesting that the kind of behaviour on the part of the PWC, expressed in that post, is acceptable? And, in case your thinking it, no, when the roles were reversed and I was the PWC, I didn't behave like that.

It's that kind of attitude that leads me to believe that, other than in circumstances of proven (not alleged) abuse, there should be a cast iron linkage between maintenance and access. Access denied, maintenance removed. That would make the vindictive PWCs think twice. Of course, if access is offered and refused, that's a totally different matter.

What about the other way round - no maintenance then no access?

Sou

nuckinfobhead

Mr_Green_Genes wrote: »

As someone who had an ex who banned me from seeing my children for a while while she was the PWC, I have to say that I have a fair degree of sympathy. I trust you are not suggesting that the kind of behaviour on the part of the PWC, expressed in that post, is acceptable? And, in case your thinking it, no, when the roles were reversed and I was the PWC, I didn't behave like that.

It's that kind of attitude that leads me to believe that, other than in circumstances of proven (not alleged) abuse, there should be a cast iron linkage between maintenance and access. Access denied, maintenance removed. That would make the vindictive PWCs think twice. Of course, if access is offered and refused, that's a totally different matter.

totally agree

and thankyou.

how would a mother like to never to be able to see her own children?
(our relationship just ended. no violence, abuse etc etc i got slapped or hit once or twice but hey im a man and thats not classed as violence or abuse...... lol)

nuckinfobhead

Soubrette wrote: »

What about the other way round - no maintenance then no access?

Sou

whichever way round you put it, it is equal to the same thing really

NRP - PAY MAINTENANCE = ACCESS

PWC - REFUSE ACCESS = ZERO MAINTENANCE

now if that was the case i would def go for it.

Soubrette

nuckinfobhead wrote: »

whichever way round you put it, it is equal to the same thing really

NRP - PAY MAINTENANCE = ACCESS

PWC - REFUSE ACCESS = ZERO MAINTENANCE

now if that was the case i would def go for it.

I think it is equal to the same thing too but some people on here are only able to see their own point of view - if that makes sense

So we have people who are outraged that PWC want maintenance for their children yet are equally outraged by the idea that access should be denied.

Personally I can't do it though - my ex is a pain in the neck but at least one of his children loves him very much and so she sees him as much as he is willing to give up in his busy schedule :rolleyes:

Sou