However I think that 150 dollars a week is a little low. Not that I am suggesting I would be after 150 dollars I actually suggested 50 dollars as my childs father does have to travel to see us.

I say that 150 dollars is a little low as I pay 165 dollars a week in child care bills. But this is part of the problem I am a middle income earnier ( with student loan which escalated when on the DPB yes more bitterness opps I choose food but found out what interest rates means). So without clothes or bills added in my son costs me 315 dollars a week to run, sorry made him out to sound like a car. Again this is all so personal and each situation is different. But at the end of the week yes I still have 80 dollars in my hand. ( But at the same time this also means doctors and dentists are to be avoided at all costs and I think staff members here think I am trying to look grungy and cool with my attire.) SO after a very long rant I suppose and I have been on this soap box before without family I am extremely reliant on child care…which is a huge cost. There is also a rumour going round my child care that after care costs the same at school…so I might be looking at changing that 5am start to a 4am start…in the morning…but it could work out fine.

The current child support system is dishonest because if liable parents work hard and earn more, they soon pay amounts that exceed any reasonable costs for children. How many children would cost $400 plus per week to run? Such amounts can only be meant as spousal support, or more usually as compensation to the government for its spousal support costs. The current system also imposes ridiculous compounding penalties that soon create an impossible hurdle for those liable parents who fall behind in their payments for any reason.

Surely, the average cost of specifically child expenses - food, clothing, health, education, would not amount to more than, say, $150 per week per child. If liable parents were required to pay a half share of such a realistic amount, and their direct contributions towards those expenses were taken into account, few would complain or default. (In an ongoing welfare state, a sliding scale up to such realistic amounts could still be employed for liable parents who are beneficiaries or low income earners, with the shortfall provided as a means-tested benefit to the primary caregiver parent.)

Also, as long as a no-fault separation policy is in place it will be difficult to avoid massive injustice. Personally, I believe that if the main economic provider chooses to leave the main child-carer with ongoing primary responsibility for looking after the children, then spousal support is appropriate, a half share of an average basic lifestyle cost. If in these cases the parents share the care of the children equally, such support should be considerably lower.

I don’t think it’s useful to compare one’s lifestyle, holidays etc with that of one’s ex-partner. If one’s ex partner does well, this will also benefit the children. As independent adults we have to leave each other to their own fate.

Have you thought of asking your child’s father for a reasonable amount actually related to your son’s costs, or to pay a half share of those costs directly? Many men are frightened of becoming involved with the machine-like child-support bureaucracy, receiving constant threatening correspondence and so forth, and would jump at the opportunity for a private arrangement that was reasonable towards them. I respect the priority you place on our child’s relationship with his father. However, if he is not prepared to contribute at all financially one wonders whether his commitment to the child will be reliable anyway. I don’t think it’s a good idea to bow down to threats to abandon the child; if he carries that out he is responsible for his own choice and you are not. Your responsibility is to facilitate his contact with your child and for managing your own life. It has to be reasonable to ask for a realistic financial contribution towards his child. Anyway, these are my opinions.

Yes I could go for child support and I would be 140 dollars better off a week sorry it just sounds so attractive and would make a huge difference to child care bills, food bills, clothing bills…but then my ex argues we can say good bye to seeing him ever again….
YEP and there are more out there as silly as me no doubt….

Sorry this is …this is just written by someone who just once more tried to go well I would like you to pay child support followed by a big angry burst including me…..but am still reluctant to subject what ever we have to the system…but then isnt it my son that loses out because I am tryign to be nice….just keep going through this in my head…

I apologise for my Woosh phone being sporadic.
Your reservations about your legal advocate and his disclosure give you the right to terminate his services at this time, Advise the Court that you are to be a self litigant and as it being far advanced in proceedings you wish an adjournment of at least 90 days.
I would advise you make this option, obtain the adjournment citing matters of parliamentary disclosure and your witness summonsing needing to be considered being favourable to this challenge of Child Support enforcement of a retrospective nature

You are to summon to Court both Judith Collins and Peter Dunne, further you should also have application within this Court an Application for Publication.
Take digital photographs of the players (barren lesbians) perhaps, I misquoted.
Anyway, take digital photographs of the opposition, ask them to smile, as it will look more aesthetic in the final publication when granted by the Court.

Kindest Regards
Paul