Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

CSA and Family Court - Not often in politics

I want better prospects for my kids than where this is all heading.

Since I've been dragged in to this new world of CSA and Family Law I've been astounded that these 2 social cancers do not get more attention from politicians.

I figure as the socialist welfare philosophy continues to grow it Australia will bring the country to collapse or foreign ownership in the next generation of so.

There just are not enough people working.
It is just so easy to walk away from commitments and challenges and send some one else the bill.

I've already been on (my local member) Wayne Swan's  case once and it seemed to wake Legal Aid up - maybe coincidence.
I intend to give him another update.

Maybe it is time we all started to make these issues something that politicians "care"  about (see votes in)

If there is already an organization agitating I like to know so I can add my voice.
I want better prospects for my kids than where this is all heading.
The only group I know that seems to cause a stir is the mens rights group. As I am a women, I'm not sure if my voice will be heard in that group. Anyway it is not a gender issue or a feminist issue. I would say it is firmly a welfare reform issue. The government can't afford to keep unskilled, underemployed people above the poverty line anymore. They can't cut them off, so they screw the people who can pay. The following scenario - which I have read over and over again illustrates this - relationship (1) ends. The female in relationship has been a stay at home mother and expects to be compensated financially for the rest of the kids childhood. The male repartners and has another child, the female in relationship (2) has no choice but to continue working to pay compensation to the female from the first relationship. The female from relationship (1) is able to go on an repartner have more kids, remain unskilled and unemployed.  The family unit can only afford to carry one person who is not earning an income.  It is a matter of first in first served and there is usually nothing left for anyone else.
The female in relationship has been a stay at home mother and expects to be compensated financially for the rest of the kids childhood. The male repartners and has another child, the female in relationship (2) has no choice but to continue working to pay compensation to the female from the first relationship. The female from relationship (1) is able to go on an repartner have more kids, remain unskilled and unemployed.
Yep that is the most common senerio. However in my OH's case when they split, the mother worked away in the mines, only saw the kids 1 week a month. My OH stayed home for 10 months raising them, as when he was working as well they were being raised by a nanny, he didn't believe that was good for them. The ex because she is the 'mother' took the kids when they separated and moved 2000k's away. Even though she worked and my OH was their primary carer (total role reverse), she believed and still does that having a uterus gives her superior rights to raising children and that because my other half, is male he must pay her for it. The kids are now again being raised by a nanny that the CSA makes my OH pay extra for.

When my OH visits the kids he spends on average 3k on air fares, buying clothes, taking the kids to the dentist on so on, as she apparently can't afford it on her 140k a year income. She has no trouble affording over seas holidays and 10k a year on cosmetic procedures for her self though.

We don't have any kids together, couldn't afford it if we wanted to. I work over time to help pay his legal & CS bills to her, even though I raised 2 kids on my own, choose not to to get child support for them and I worked full time.

I don't know what can be done about it, but it sure is not fair. The system only creates animosity and certainly doesn't support children which it claims are it's objectives.
drhuge said
The only group I know that seems to cause a stir is the mens rights group. As I am a women, I'm not sure if my voice will be heard in that group. Anyway it is not a gender issue or a feminist issue. I would say it is firmly a welfare reform issue. The government can't afford to keep unskilled, underemployed people above the poverty line anymore.

I follow this blog http://www.f4e.com.au/
I believe that about 30% of most "mens" groups are women, grandmothers and grandfathers.

There does seem to be a gender bias but that is just a carry-over from society.
The real problem that the system is easily accessed and abused.
Unfortunately Children are seen as income streams.
If only the system had the wisdom that was shown in story of the "Judgment of Solomon" (google will give more details)

What is need is a united umbrella that can bring the fact to public knowledge.
Unfortunately the only people really aware of the way the system is are the victims paying and the collectors and all the organizations assisting the collectors.

Every taxpayer should be made aware of the damage they are fostering to Australia Society.
My parents never knew of how this all works until I fell victim.
They still deny that their decisions and voting choices have contributed to the way the world is now.

Society has to believe that it/we have what it/we asked for.
Just because you claim ignorance of what you asked for it does not change the outcome.

eg. the fact that the new apple thing would not work on Aust 4G was published weeks before it was sold. Why do people expect compensation after buying a device that was known to be not fit for purpose.



1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets