Mum jailed for three months after refusing to let ex see their daughter

Blob

So the pendulum is starting to swing as it was always going to. Let us hope it wont travel too far the other way, and the vioce of reason is heard on both sides.

It will at the very least make those who take the law into their own hands sit up and take note, I hope!!!

DUTR

kelloggs36 wrote: »

I wish it could be that any person who refuses to have contact could also be sent to jail - for neglect!

If they pay csa though then they should be exempt , but then if they were locked away they are not avaialable for work hence nil assesment, :rolleyes: I can see why that idea may not work :cool:

kelloggs36

I would wager that those who don't have contact through choice, also don't pay either!! The law could be written so that any assessment remains in place for a child support issue, ie they have an assessment and don't pay, AND they don't try to maintain contact means that whilst in jail, their assessment still stands. when they get out they will have arrears to pay. It might make them think twice.

DUTR

kelloggs36 wrote: »

I would wager that those who don't have contact through choice, also don't pay either!! The law could be written so that any assessment remains in place for a child support issue, ie they have an assessment and don't pay, AND they don't try to maintain contact means that whilst in jail, their assessment still stands. when they get out they will have arrears to pay. It might make them think twice.

Seems like you want all NRPs to pay twice then?
Or that you want a nation of everybody claiming benefits than working for a living, and those that do work, are in great fear of having children in case the split occurs .

I think we will have to agree to differ on your logic in this instance :A

Zara33

Personally i see no benefit to the child if either a PWC or a NRP is put in jail.

Blonde_Bint

kelloggs36 wrote: »

I would wager that those who don't have contact through choice, also don't pay either!! The law could be written so that any assessment remains in place for a child support issue, ie they have an assessment and don't pay, AND they don't try to maintain contact means that whilst in jail, their assessment still stands. when they get out they will have arrears to pay. It might make them think twice.

Good one Kelloggs:D you are still racking it up in jail so there is no point doing a stint of 'bird' as a way of wiping your cs slate clean this would probably work as deterrent for most NRPs.

lets stick to the title pwc hampering access for the nrp. I dont think there is much to be done really. Anyone can make a mistake with times now and again for one its not a crime, stuck in traffic yawn, and my personal favourite good old just not at home and mobile switched off, if a pwc is a hamperer theres not much one can do, even with all the court orders n bits of paper at the end of the day I know in my specific case they mean nothing to a sh*tty pwc its a power thing she does it because she can. I think it would be very difficult to prove she was doing it purposefully (a long process) and if an nrp is going to get tough and go to the police with this then I think the child just suffers more, child then has to listen to more and more rows between the parents. I think i'm for this, in agreement with this action. start actually giving jail sentances for pwc who are real hamperers, not suspended sentances real sentances

stokefan

Zara33 wrote: »

Personally i see no benefit to the child if either a PWC or a NRP is put in jail.

no but, if the pwc is stoping the nrp from seeing the kid for no good reason they deserve it.

it took two to make the child it should also take two to bring the baba up

if the nrp snatched THEIR child im sure the police could bring charges (not 100% sure)

so whats the diffence with the pwc stopping the nrp from seeing there baby???

Blonde_Bint

Zara33 wrote: »

Personally i see no benefit to the child if either a PWC or a NRP is put in jail.

I get where your coming from Zara there is no benefit for a child if a parent is in jail, though if a pwc is deliberatly sabotaging contact, if the threat of jail was enough to make her think its not worth the jolly that she gets from messing the NRP about with contact, that I think benefits the child greatly. The child will now benefit from straight forward access to NRP with the added bonus of no shouting rows between the parents:D

do you get what I mean. Sometimes I am as clear as mud:o

Blonde_Bint

stokefan wrote: »

if the nrp snatched THEIR child im sure the police could bring charges (not 100% sure)
???

Does anyone have an answer for this one. I am almost certain that it is not possible for a parent, by that I mean mother or father (not a step parent even if married to a parent) to snatch their child. by definition that child is theirs there is no snatching about it. this course of action has crossed my mind once or twice, just a nice little day dream you understand I wouldnt do it, even if you think its for the best and in some circumstances it could be imagine how the child would feel its NRP legging it and taking it away from its pwc very damaging to the child I would imagine. these poor children.

stokefan

Blonde_Bint wrote: »

Does anyone have an answer for this one. I am almost certain that it is not possible for a parent, by that I mean mother or father (not a step parent even if married to a parent) to snatch their child. by definition that child is theirs there is no snatching about it. this course of action has crossed my mind once or twice, just a nice little day dream you understand I wouldnt do it, even if you think its for the best and in some circumstances it could be imagine how the child would feel its NRP legging it and taking it away from its pwc very damaging to the child I would imagine. these poor children.

i have been close to doing it... but only from my ex's mother. then i dont think there is anything they can do. but whats the point in rocking the boat, the pwc would always win in the end:rolleyes: