The CSA....again?

keithkeith

MissMotivation wrote:

So are you saying that he shouldn't have to pay anything? He chose to have kids, therefore, he should have to contribute. £128 per child per month is more than reasonable, i don't know what the problem is!

We men in the whole have no problem with contributing to our children's upbringing. The problem is that this system is geared up to benefit women at the expense of, and to the detriment of men. Surely it would have been fair for the proceeds from selling the home to have been split between the two parties, but then fairness doesn't normally come into the equation.

Rebekka_2

keithkeith wrote:

We men in the whole have no problem with contributing to our children's upbringing. The problem is that this system is geared up to benefit women at the expense of, and to the detriment of men. Surely it would have been fair for the proceeds from selling the home to have been split between the two parties, but then fairness doesn't normally come into the equation.

In the whole most women have no problem with sharing everything, including sharing 24 hour care, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year but then i suppose the system is geared up to men at the expense of and to the detriment of the children, surely it would be fair that when two parents consent to having children then both parents should be putting in equal amounts to their children whether part of a realtionship or not

krashovr10ad

++

In the whole most women have no problem with sharing everything, including sharing 24 hour care, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year

Lets not go there shall we..?

I think the point was that the CSA shouldn't just view NRPs as cash cows with no thought to the consequences...

I worked out using the entitledto.com website (or whatever it's called) that my ex-partner would be on the equilavent of £17k if she worked 16 hours through benefits, WTC and other contributions (or £10k if she doesnt work)...

My partner and I work 56 hours between the two of us, get no WTC and after paying the household bills and other expenses are left with £7 a week for luxuries such as magazines, going out, clothes, holidays etc. The CSA takes £342 from me and my ex-partner doesn't see a penny of it...

How does that help anyone..??? - The CSA is broken and I've (personally) never met anyone with anything good to say about it...

++

Rebekka_2

I notice you didnt quote the one above mine:rolleyes: Yes for every good parent theirs a bad one and yes my post was one of sarcasm to the post above mine, the one you obviously missed, or is this women versus man, man versus women, shame that you see that your maintenance payments are a waste but you dont see the state keeping them a waste

MissMotivation

keithkeith wrote:

We men in the whole have no problem with contributing to our children's upbringing. The problem is that this system is geared up to benefit women at the expense of, and to the detriment of men. Surely it would have been fair for the proceeds from selling the home to have been split between the two parties, but then fairness doesn't normally come into the equation.

What??

How is the system geared up to benefit women? For every "poor me poor me" post on here from Men who feel that they shouldn't have to contribute a fair amount to their child's upbringing there are double the amount from women who only want a fair contribution, many who are living in poverty to provide a roof over their child/childrens head.

The OP was complaing that her brother was hard done by because he has to pay £128 per month per child!! I wish it only cost me £128 per month to feed/clothe/entertain/keep a roof over my Daughters head....trust me it costs a lot more than that!

megnbills_mum

The CSA its done it again. Surely the issue here is supporting the children. The CSA does nobody any favours. It pits Mothers against Fathers and vice versa. Shouldnt both parents contribute 50/50 for their children. CSA do not treat people equally. For instance, how can they ignore child tax credit for the parent with care but take it into account for the non resident parent? Why do they need to know income details for the non residents parents new partner but completly ignore the parent with care's new partners income? They now have 2 systems the staff cannot deal with. I know it has been scrapped but from when? When are they going to bring something fair for all in.

krashovr10ad

++

CSA do not treat people equally. For instance, how can they ignore child tax credit for the parent with care but take it into account for the non resident parent? Why do they need to know income details for the non residents parents new partner but completly ignore the parent with care's new partners income?

I couldn't agree more...

As I've said before - my ex-partner had a child with me & 2 with another man... He's assessed on the new system & I'm assessed on the old - how can that be fair..? Surely we should be contributing the same - I'm paying double his contributions (according to the calculator)..?

Plus my ex-partner is on benefits - so she doesn't see the money that I pay anyway (I wouldn't mind quite so much if she did)...

++

Rebekka_2

krashovr10ad wrote:

Plus my ex-partner is on benefits - so she doesn't see the money that I pay anyway (I wouldn't mind quite so much if she did)...

May i ask who you think benefits from your money then? And who you think should provide for your child?

MissMotivation

Rebekka wrote:

May i ask who you think benefits from your money then? And who you think should provide for your child?

Generally I imagine fathers assume that the anyone but them should provide for their child IMHO

sured

Rebekka wrote:

May i ask who you think benefits from your money then? And who you think should provide for your child?

couldnt agree more.