MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Meanwhile in th UK an offshoot of Fathers for Justice or F4J as many know it by (You know, the Batman on Buckingham palace guys) is set to make a big racket in London.

Operation 2008 has announced that it will begin reminding in Wellington shortly.

The time has come when Operation 2008 are to begin reminding Peter Dunne of his responsibility for the current mess that is child “support” and family law.

For some time discussions have been taking place on what can be done to achieve equal parental rights and responsibilities. The point has been reached where engagement with the political process is not delivering and the situation gets worse, not better , Officials and Politicians do not listen.

Re branding and tinkering with the Matrix of Family law has failed to protect a child’s right to be parented by both mum and dad and mum and dad’s right to parent their children!

We have for years followed the political process for change and still the One parent is the Custodial Parent (has “day to day care” in the new speak) and the other parent is the visitor parent taxed for the privilege (“parenting time” in the new speak) is the norm. The Care of Children Act is just a re branding.

Tinkering with the Child Support Act 1991 cannot remove the fundamental flaws of this approach to supporting children. Politicians know the causes of the problem, but they lack the political courage to Act. They seek political appeasement and produce nothing.

Reasoned and well researched pleas have fallen on deaf ears and Officials and Politicians continue to hide behind a veneer of democracy while all they are doing is ticking the box on the process check-sheet that says “consulted”.

When reasoned and reasonable pleas to address the root cause are ignored, as punitive and discriminatory policy is driven to law, your ability to be an active parent in your Child’s life is further diminished. The only option left to effect change is to exercise the democratic right to non-violent protest, designed to influence the hearts and minds of those who make the law and the officials who advise and administer it.

Those who are responsible for the mess that is the current law are those who enacted it and the officials who advise them.

Peter Dunne,Leader United Future New Zealand and Minister responsible for Child Support
is member for Ohariu-Belmont. Peter Dunne needs reminding.We will be reminding Peter Dunne on the streets of his electorate. That reminding is starting very shortly.

If you would like to join the reminding Join Operation 2008

Media Release

Parents for Children

26 April 2007

For Immediate Release

Collins Fails Parents And Children Again

“By describing parents who have unpaid child support as neglectful parents Judith Collins has yet again failed to address the underlying cause of the alleged debt: Fundamental flaws exist in the Child Support Act 1991. Real neglect rests with politicians and their failure to admit that the Child Support Act 1991 is in need of significant reform.” Commented Mark Shipman of Parents for Children, responding to Collin’s comments.

Ms Collins National Party created this mess when they passed the Child Support Act, but it’s easier for her to demonise parents and have tax police arrest parents at an airport than to address the cause. Parents and children have been failed by politicians like Collins who never address underlying causes, focus on symptoms and use selective interpretation to demonise parents”. Observed Mark when asked what was National’s contribution to the solving the problem.

“Parents feel highly offended when Judith Collins states it is her opinion that if you owe money to child support then you are a neglectful parent. It’s just another example of her fixation with punishing parents by presenting selective figures that support her inflexible vendetta. Surely it’s obvious to ask the question: Why are so many parents put into debt by the child support act in the first place? The challenge for Collins and her ilk is to look for the causes, not the symptoms” Concluded Mark.

Ends
For further information contact
Mark Shipman 021982222
Jim Nicolle 021800586

Parents for Children is a national organisation seeking legislative change to enable parents who have separated to continue parenting and supporting their children.
This requires:
1. Presumptive shared parenting
2. A fair and reasonable child support system
Parents for Children advocates that best outcomes for children of separated parents is ongoing equal sharing of parental responsibility by both parents.

I’m Nigel Costley, a Nelson-based journalist, writing a story on blokes in teaching, specifically Nelson College headmaster Gary O’Shea’s idea of training teachers at his college. It could be an answer to getting more men into teaching. ‘Per’aps?
Researching this, I’m interested to talk to any bloke who has been through teacher training in recent years. Or has some hands’ on experience in this field. If said bloke would be up for half hour conversation on their experiences. I’m trying to keep clear of the highly-polarized gender politics. If possible. Probably not.
Please contact at: costleymarr@xtra.co.nz

Fathers made to pay in child support blitz

By Patricia Karvelas

April 23, 2007 12:00am

A crack team of investigators will spy on divorced dads

who cry poor , using photographic and video evidence to expose them driving around in expensive cars and living in affluent suburbs.

About 120 people will be employed to undertake the intensive investigation work to force money from divorced parents who are using elaborate ways of covering up their real incomes

The shape of things to come here!!

Regards

Scrap

This was a list of issues with the child support tabled with David Cunlifee, the Minister Responsible for child Support in 2004 on the steps of Parliament.

I would like to seek suggestions for further issues to pass onto Peter Dunne.

Please keep them concise.

MEN’S CONVOY 2004
Men on the Move for
Child Support Reform

1. A “one size fits all” formula assessment.

2. The objects of the Child Support Act 1991 focus on “benefit recovery” and not the best interest of children.

3. The formula assessment is based on gross (before tax) income.

4. Voluntary agreements can be replaced by a formula assessment at any time.

5. No account is taken of Student Loan commitments when calculating the formula.

6. The living allowance of the formula assessment takes no account of the cost of access for liable parents.

7. The departure order process is fundamentally flawed, with Administrative Review Officers and Judges trapped in a system that is locked in a set of precedents from the early 1990’s.

8. There is no accountability that the money collected actually goes to support children.

9. Administration and application of the Child Support Act by Inland Revenue favours the custodial parent at the expense of the paying parent and child.

10. The living allowance takes no account of any extra necessary payments made by the paying parent.

11. Ability of the Commissioner to create a Child Support income that defies Standard Accounting Principles to inflate paying parents income to unrealistically high levels that do not reflect the real income of the parent.

12. A reciprocal agreement with Australia that subjects New Zealand Parents to Australian Legal process and Law.

13. A ballooning debt crises that points to a fundamental failure if the “simple formula” ” approach of the Child Support Act 1991

Regards

Scrap

Judge Judy is at it again and shes more determined than ever to make IRD the judge, jury and executioner who can arrest you at the border.

Like a pit-bull in need of a muzzle, Judge Judy has maintained the same position for years. Its not something new to see a National MP wanting legislation that further removes your rights a a separated parent. Look at their pathetic track record – what have they done to seek to achieve real reform of the matrix of Family Law. Lets list a couple for those with short memories
The Child Support Act 1991, The Domestic Violence Act ….. Yeah they are a really pro shared parenting party , Yeah right!

Collins wants to draw up a discussion paper including the idea of making avoiding child support an arrestable offence. “People can be arrested for non-payment of fines and this is something clearly far more serious. They issue arrest warrants for fine defaulters but if someone pays nothing for their child we seem totally incapable (of stopping them skipping the country)”.

see here

Surface analysis of this debt produces calls for IRD, a government department, to be granted draconian powers to resolve the problem. The overseas experience of similar “percentage of gross income methods” shows huge debt problems and draconian measures have failed to significantly increase recovery.

I can understand people’s anger at kiwi parents who they perceive owe huge amounts of money and run off overseas ,but before you condemn them to arrest at the airport on the word of an IRD staffer ,please understand that the root cause of the debt is the structure of the child support act. Worldwide there is a child support debt problem in New Zealand over of half of the assessed liable parents are in debt.

When a system produces an output that places over half of those assessed to pay into debt the problem is systemic.

Despite numerous attempts at tinkering with the legislation to fix it never working, has any politician sought to address the root cause of the debt crises?

No, they would rather paint parents as deadbeats and give IRD draconian power so they can look good in the media. Then they wonder why parents turn up in protest outside their doors!

Non violent direct action starting small and building up, lets force a real debate onto the election agenda.

Quite a few of these politicians and officials need reminding of what they have allowed to happen. Looks like its time for some serious reminding to begin.

Regards

Scrap

P.S. IRD can already apply to the court for an arrest warrant for non payment and have had them granted, but that has to come before a FC Judge. What they want is detention by tax offical!

Abortion pictures you need to see (you may not want to)

no ma’am

To all the five percenters – the rest of us have had enough! Get Over It!

Whats a Five percenter?

It’s that five percent of men who act like absolute wankers when a separation occurs.

The men, who behave as selfish, arrogant bastards

The men whom the Politicians and Officials use to justify the failing matrix of Family law
And as reason for beating up on the rest of us.

Hung up as examples why shared parenting and fair and reasonable child support is not possible

Let me give you an example of a Five percenter.

When a separation occurs its usually something that has been coming for a while. The relationship is failing, on the rocks. It’s a time of real pain, deep anguish and hurt we have all been there, we know what its like to have our dreams shattered. But we are men and we also know how to be men. We know what’s just and fair and contrary to a lot of opinion on this site a hell of a lot of women do to.

There is no dispute that the best outcomes for our kids occur when both mum and dad parent the children. The five percenters are a not interested in what’s best for the kids and I am sick of the rest of us being labeled the same.

This week has shown me a classic example of a five percenter. Mum and Dad have separated and MUM wants to share the care of the kids, Mum wants to avoid Courts and Child Support so how does the dad respond?

He wants to split the kids up, eldest with him and the younger three with mum. Then he’s going to move away to another part of the country. Of course slaging off mum and poisoning the eldest against her was the first part of the plan. Let’s not forget the ex-parte application for “interim custody” for the eldest child and not seeing the other three! Lets not forget his abusive text messages and a long list if other stupid behaviors.

Why is he doing this, starting a conflict when he could avoid it? What drives this behaviour that sentences the rest of separated parents and children to the matrix of family law?

It is simple really, at the end of the day these five percenters don’t want to share parenting they want to punish the other parent. The system loves these guys, they feed it.

They can’t cope with the reality of a failed relationship and they are not coping. They don’t understand the impact on the kids of parental alienation. They have lost sight of the kids, they make stupid decisions and do and say stupid things. They don’t engage their thinking brain; they engage their arrogant victim-hood.

Jo Blow above has the chance to share parenting, avoid child support and actually parent the children. That’s a pretty good space to be in and shows genuine effort on the part of mum. One would think that common sense could prevail but it wont.

We decry women who carry out such actions like Jo Blow is doing. The same must surely apply to men. So if you’re five percenter start thinking about how you are going to remain an equal parent in your children’s life’s because the rest of us have had enough. of you screwing it up for the rest of us.

You’re a man, act like one!

How do we change all this mess, we change the law! We put this mess on the election agenda by a plan of non violent direct action.

What we don’t do is encourage five percenters.

Regards

Scrap

Please check out this cause for our children’s sake