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

A letter to Hon. Ruth Dyson

Filed under: Child Support — Tigerseye @ 12:56 pm Mon 28th July 2008

I’m the producer of a documentary currently being made about the Child Support Act (CSA). Hand in hand with that are the troubles with the Family Court (FC), which have driven a lot of families apart.

The documentary is called “The CSA Files” and you can visit for more information. This email serves as a formal written interview and your response or lack there of will be incorporated into the documentary

Information and statistics are in no short supply thanks to the power of the Internet. Even those that are computer illiterate have no problems finding this information. The people are learning and it’s time for the government to answer some questions…

The situation: The CSA and the FC are mutually exclusive. A NC parent MUST pay regardless of whether they have access or not.

The problem: Many men are paying far more to the ex spouse than needed. On average a child needs $70-100 a week for living expenses and on average NC parents are paying much more than that and some in excess of $250 a week. The CSA has neither ties nor interest regarding the FC and it’s judgments and the FC reciprocates.

The outcome: Many men are now so fed up with the system that a rebellion has established itself. Why are NC parents forced to pay for a child they have no access to? Moreover, if a child needs, on average, $70-100 a week shouldn’t the NC parent be paying no more than $50? In the cases where the payments exceed $250, what is the addition $200 being spent on? Where is the accountability?

The exodus: Given the FC can often rule very little to no access to the children is it any wonder that some men see fit to quit their employment and get out of the country before they are handed a letter from the IRD declaring them bankrupt?

  • 37.9% of fathers have no access/visitation rights
  • 40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the non-custodial father’s visitation on at least one occasion, to punish the ex-spouse
  • Overall, approximately 50% of mothers “see no value in the father’s continued contact with his children”
  • Only 11% of mothers value their husband’s input when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated 16%
  • The former spouse (mother) was the greatest obstacle to having more frequent contact with the children
  • A clear majority (70%) of fathers felt that they had too little time with their children
  • Very few of the children were satisfied with the amount of contact with their fathers, after divorce
  • Feelings of anger towards their former spouses hindered effective involvement on the part of fathers; angry mothers would sometimes sabotage father’s efforts to visit their children
  • Mothers may prevent visits to retaliate against fathers for problems in their marital or post-marital relationship
  • 77% of non-custodial fathers are NOT able to “visit” their children, as ordered by the court, as a result of “visitation interference” perpetuated by the custodial parent
  • Information from multiple sources show that only 10% of all non-custodial fathers fit the “deadbeat dad” category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of those with NO visitation rights still financially support their children
  • Additionally, of those not paying support, 66% are not doing so because they lack the financial resources to pay
  • 52% of fathers who owe child support earn less than minimum wage per year
  • 66% of single mothers work less than full time while only 10% of fathers fall into this category. In addition, almost 47% of non-custodial mothers default on support compared with the 27% of fathers who default
  • 66% of all support not paid by non-custodial fathers is due to inability to pay

From an outsiders point of view the non-paying NC parent is a disgrace to the nation and should not get away with not paying. They should be stopped at airports and hung from the nearest tree… well, that is the picture painted by our government. The truth is that those who are not directly involved with the FC or CSA have no idea what is going on and are lead by a number of policies to believe that men are bad. Just ask Air NZ.

Why are SOME men not paying child support? See the above statistics for the answer.

What is being done about it? The CSA is persecuting and punishing the non-paying NC parent by issuing fines and adding interest each month to an already unattractive amount.

It is increasingly apparent that a) The Human Rights Act is being ignored and b) This country no longer wants NC parents living on these shores.

Your comments would be greatly appreciated.


  1. Do you really think the “System” will allow a documentary of this nature seethe light of day?

    A point you may have missed, of the large CS debts most is owed to the government in Fees & Interest. The Child (Whom we are led to believe is being deprived, sees none, it goes straight to the Government.

    As an aside several years a magazine called grapevine published an informative article called “Dead Beat Dads” Like a copy?

    A previous thread entitled “Worm Man Dunne” may have some helpful gems

    Comment by Alastair — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 3:18 pm

  2. The “System” may try to stop it but that won’t stop me from doing it. That’s kind of defeatist…

    Comment by Tigerseye — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 3:32 pm

  3. Hi guys, i feel it is the father a child needs in their lives not the fathers money and as far as i am concerned the children dont see a cent of that money, it all goes on these scum woman or scum caregivers and these poor children dont even see their poor fathers and as for the scum prime minister and her silly little friends, we all know ho they spend their days

    Comment by Hadi Akbari — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 3:36 pm

  4. Why are you writing to Ruth Dyson?

    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 4:49 pm

  5. I understand her to be the minister of families and would like to hear what she has to say.

    Who should I be writing to? I’ll send the same letter to any or all of the PM’s if need be.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 4:52 pm

  6. Ruth Dyson is the Minister of Social Development, Peter Dunne is the Minister of Revenue, probably the most appropriate and don’t forget Judith Collins, National spokesman on child tax.

    Comment by Alastair — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 5:55 pm

  7. I can’t understand why you have sent this to Ruth Dyson – However I honour your enthusiasm and the content – If you care to Emale me a fax number I will send you a copy of Ruths latest answer to me received last week as a result of the letter I sent to her which was widely distributed – Copy is on the Ration Shed Egroup if you have not seen it – It may help you understand what to expect – Keep going – I have been conmunicating with her for many years to NO avail

    Ration Shed – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 6:30 pm

  8. Sorry Tigerseye, she is a bitch and is f-cking the families in this country along with Helen, Ruth went out with a old friend and he told me some stories, very interesting actually

    Comment by Hadi Akbari — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 7:02 pm

  9. Thanks guys. Peter Dunne and Judith Collins have now got a copy of the letter.

    I don’t have a fax Jim, could you email it to me?

    The point of the letter is to get the MP’s to listen. I may not get a reply and shame on them if they decide to ignore. As it states in the letter their reply – or lack thereof – will be incorporated in the Doco. I think it illbehooves any politition to publically decline to comment on a real issue. As far as the audience understand they have been asked a question and are scared to answer. Failure to answer a question or comment on an issue is an automatic admission of guilt in my book.

    If however, they answer – good or bad – I respect them as a politition.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 7:17 pm

  10. Nice to see your wisdon on this one Jim. I posted on Pauls News and Both the CYFS sites. this deserves to be distributed beside your poster

    Comment by Alastair — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 7:28 pm

  11. Jim, I have just gone onto your site to look at your letter and then figured it would be easier if you could, please, give me the link to the exact page so I can go right to it 🙂

    It’s a great site, trouble is I could spend all day on it…

    Comment by Tigerseye — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 7:37 pm

  12. That sounds great, very effective. But this is an international issue, NZ will be the last country in the Western world to give men rights. But what a great powerful programme, it sounds

    Comment by Perseus — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 8:05 pm

  13. Politically speaking I completely agree with you Perseus. It would be great, though, to think that NZ can once more lead the world.

    There was once a time where all Americans just sat back and accepted the lack of health care. Those that didn’t need it or were in countries far away had no idea it was so bad. That was, of course, until Michael Moore came along and gave the world “Sicko”. It may not change the minds of the US government but it made the whole world sit up and take notice.

    Therein lies my hope.

    Powerful is what I was going for so thank you for your comment 🙂

    Comment by Tigerseye — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 8:16 pm

  14. I have a very complex fax-scanner-printer but I am no tech as no doubt many will confirm and thus can’t scan the letter from Ruth-D – Emale me your mailing address and i will post a copy – Thanks for noticing the effort on Ration Shed – I will Emale you my letter for which she eventually replied


    Ration Shed – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Mon 28th July 2008 @ 9:55 pm

  15. Here’s a thought – some ponder food if you like…

    The government has actually made an unofficial admission that the cost of a child per week is $79.61

    That figure has been under our noses for a very long time! It has been laid down by the government so how can we or they dispute the fact? Check this out…

    The Dole – excuse me – the unemployment benefit
    after tax $184.17 per week
    The DPB after tax $263.78 per week

    You do the math.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 29th July 2008 @ 3:26 pm

  16. Tigereye,
    Careful that you are comparing like for like

    The DPB is made up of many things – Women alone be the baseline – then so much per Kid – and many other add-ons – I am not sure but I think you will find the $263 is before any Kids or any of the many add ons – Onward – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Tue 29th July 2008 @ 3:39 pm

  17. I know what you are saying, I believe the figure I quoted was for mother and 1 child. The add ons you are speaking about include one of purchases and health care allowances etc. I’m still getting all the fact and figures but it’s still very interesting don’t you think?

    It’s frustrating, however, when I worked in a retail store selling TV’s and Stereos when women would come in with their child/ren to get a quote on a large plasma TV and then return a couple of days later with an approval from Income Support. It still happens, my partner works in the same type of store and she says it happens at least once a month… believe it or not.

    I can’t afford a plasma or LCD – mind you, I’m paying child support.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 29th July 2008 @ 4:13 pm

  18. TV will kill their thought processes and creativity.Leave them to it.As for letting kids watch it don’t start me…………
    As for people who take the unemployment benefit etc.long term.They should look carefully at themselves.Should have to at least work for it.Even if it is work from home.
    Country will go backwards if everyone jumps up and down with their hands out

    Comment by Whanga — Wed 30th July 2008 @ 1:59 am

  19. The latest news from England is that Labour party are bringing in laws to reduce the sentence of women in case of killing their spouses when there is a “long history of domestic violence”. It would be no longer be classed as “murder”.
    No doubt the definitions of “domestic violence” will be broadened as time goes on, now where have i seen that before ?
    This sounds like the start of a death sentence TO MEN, a sort of 007 law for females. NZ will introduce such laws next, Labour government is equally as mad

    Comment by Perseus — Wed 30th July 2008 @ 3:13 am

  20. Hey I am happy to help in whatever way I can to make this Doco a reality, I dont claim any special acting skills but am keen to help.

    Comment by Viv Roberts — Fri 1st August 2008 @ 4:36 pm

  21. Hi Viv,

    I would be happy and honoured to have you on board!

    Comment by Tigerseye — Fri 1st August 2008 @ 5:09 pm

  22. The statistics you list above would probably be more effective if they were NZ stats.

    In fact I found the statistics mirrored in excerpts from an article written by Don Hubin,
    Professor and chairman, Department of Philosophy Ohio State University, Columbus
    Link >>

    Don’t get me wrong – you may well be right in principle, but probably will get more support if you gather NZ facts, rather than rely upon foreign studies.

    Comment by Rachel — Sat 2nd August 2008 @ 12:35 pm

  23. Hi Rachel, as a researcher and a reporter for this documentary I could not agree with you more. That’s what it’s all about, getting the facts and reporting them which is why this letter was sent.

    I would like all readers to understand that the documentary is still in the planning stages. Rachel has a very good point and is in fact the reason I sent the letter with the understanding of whether or not they respond is entirely their perogitive – it’s still going to be a part of the documentary even if it was to say “The MP would not comment”. Now those statistics don’t look good which I’m sure everyone will agree with. I would expect the MP’s who have received this letter would be onto me like white on rice to show the nation the correct figures. Unless these figures look better than the figues of this country.

    Surely they would be smart enough to understand this, otherwise what are we paying them for?

    Comment by Tigerseye — Sat 2nd August 2008 @ 2:35 pm

  24. Hi Tigerseye, these people you call mp’s are too busy singing, dancing, yelling, swearing and sleeping to even know what is going on in their own country but good luck anyways, i am with you

    Comment by Hadi Akbari — Sat 2nd August 2008 @ 4:59 pm

  25. I love the given stats, but I will say this:-

    I am currently in the FC process. I have for 4 years had Shared Care, caring for my son almost 50% of the time. I paid Child support to the tune of average $441 a month. In this period I have managed to provide my boy with a new bike, a cellphone and Playstation as well as clothing and the usual gifts and rewards, as well as banking $25 a week on his behalf. It has been difficult, especially when after seperation i was forced to buy an older home which needed repairs.

    The repairs included immediate insulation for health reasons. It was very costly.

    Today,my son wants to spend more time with me….it equates to 60% with me, 40% with his mum. I can do this. My offer is to additionally take over ALL of my sons clothing costs including his school uniform and ALL other costs including health care, school trips and so on.

    The BIGGY is that I will also put $200 a month into a dedicated account for his continued Education. His UNI education.

    All I asked is that Child support is CANCEllED in lieu of this generous offer which does nothing for me financially but DOES guarantee my son a decent start in life.

    My ex agrees with the offer. But insists I continue to pay her $480 a month. The stats say she has to feed my son 3 days a week indicating she needs $40 a day to feed my son while he is in her care. This means a family of five needs $200 a day on a food only basis. Or $1400 a week on a food only basis.

    This is just a perfect example of how a so called loving mother will use the letter of the law to punish her former partner at the direct long term expense of the child. My son stands to lose a funded Uni education while his mother buys new cars, smokes, has Sky TV and has a new partner who earns more money than I do.

    Last word is…Who cares (apart from Dad). Is it his mum? No…she has a lifestyle and not concerned about our sons future. Is it Judith Collins? No, she is more concerned about collecting Debt by fathers who have forced to flee rather than sleep in the Park.

    Is it Lesley Soper (MP) who wrote on my behalf to Peter Dunne about my concerns but Peter never replied. Repeat….Peter never replied.

    If I dont win this FC battle, then my son is crushed. He has been constantly abused by his mothers partner, he is afraid and wants to spend as much time as possibly with me. I comply, but I cant afford it. I am ashamed. The lawyers bills are crippling me. I persist. But i am running out of money now that I find my sons Court Appointed Lawyer is charging me for all interviews.

    I could use some help here. N0…I dont mean financial help. But I would like some advice.

    Lastly, I can understand why some men are forced to flee. Indeed I have considered that. But then my son dotes on me and I could just imagine him crying his eyes out for weeks on end knowing that his dad had left him. As for me, I could not bear the guilt and shame and the loss of seeing my son grow up.

    My son leans on me and I will continue to support and love him to bits and if it means I am eventually declared bankrupt and destitute I will go there too.

    Thing is Im 54. He is only 11. Ýeah, I am staring down the barrel. And there is no help from the Govt or the IRD in this peculiar situation.

    It comes down to this…its me or him. I choose him, my son.

    Thx for listening.


    Comment by Morris — Sat 2nd August 2008 @ 7:30 pm

  26. Morris I don’t know where you’re finding the money to cover your expenses because the same formula doesn’t work for me with 3 children. At a 27% deduction off the difference on an IRD (as set by the GOVT) estimated living cost of $13,000pa taken off my salary. I’m one to say the assessment was invented by the patent owners of the Mickey Mouse club. That means they want me to pay $700 per month. I’m 14 days short of shared care, calculated from the two years we’ve separated. That hasn’t been taken into account. Only recently through an extended paper workout and reassessment have they dropped temporarily to $450 per month.

    This story goes on as do many others in this forum. All the arguments I’ve read have valid claims of unfair and unjustified solutions that do not pend an ear of change from policy legislators and political suits. Why are we continuing to vent and not support it through an organised protest.

    Why hasn’t anyone staged a sit in protest, camped right outside IRD doors??? I’ll be the first there with my tent and sleeping bag. Why can’t we get ourselves organised NOW for election year. Reading through all these remarks it appears that we’re all experiencing individual issues relating to the same problem and approaching the IRD and MPs in the same individual manner. Reading about a documentary in progress sounds good to me, why the pessimistic comments? If you’re going run a documentary include an organised sit-in protest out front the IRD doors please. Invite the media, organise example cases and people ahead of time, prepare for the attention and understand the legal implications from media to IRD prosecution. Let’s say I’ll lead it if no-one wants to put their hand up. Don’t begin with a negative reprisal (if your thinking it) just act, think critically and logically place your name forward for the next step in changing this social destroying political agenda. IRONY is parents have separated but as the comment was made earlier, human rights have been ignored here, because like the US our policy drives the non custodial parent into conditions below the poverty line whom otherwise could afford to provide their child(ren) with emotive and paternal/maternal nourishment with equal input into their lives and upbringing as best as they can. Punishment by financially crippling the non custodial parent(s) in the eyes of a childless PM seems to be the expected logic. Answers to our problems are here amongst the discussions just table the issues and agree to the outcomes.

    So when can we get organised and who can give me a location and time so I can get myself there.

    Comment by Joe — Mon 4th August 2008 @ 10:41 pm

  27. Another letter to Minister Ruth Dyson
    Minister in charge of MSD – CYFS – WINZ

    The Minister has rerplied making a huge issue of my thumping a dest once and minimising WINZ 8 years of ABUSE of me and my Son

    I don’t have the tec-no-how to scane it and are hoping that someone can so you can all see what to expect from Ruth should you attempt to get Justice for your Family thru her – Helen has chosen her well

    Ration Shed – Jim

    MP — Minister Ruth Dyson

    CC, Case worker — Colleen Sears
    CC, Lawyer — Rod Hooker
    CC, NZHerald — Simon Collins
    CC, Pauls News — MENZ and other Support Groups

    Today, Friday 6June08 at 1200 I had an appointment with my caseworker Colleen Sears.

    Within minutes of our pleasantries she began to take away what dollars she could from me.

    I began to challenge what she was up to as to take anything away from me will drive me further into debt, make it more difficult to Father my Son, more dependant on FoodBanks and threaten the small amount of healing I have had. Colleen Sears is well aware of my predicament having administered my dealings with WINZ for many years and never once given me any help with Fathering my Son Javan yet being well aware of my health troubles.

    I wish to make it clear that this is not a personal attack on Colleen who I believe has done her best within the legislation as she knows it.

    However I will draw to your attention another case worker who has made My Sons and my life difficult many times — Her name is Grace Erwin

    Grace while hiding behind a junior caseworker conveniently forgot that there was legislation to separate me from my Taxi business so that I could get the healing necessary in year 2000 and be supported by WINZ — I could of let the 2 men driving for me continue the business with a little admin input from myself. The business was not at the point where it could support me without me working in it — Those 2 men went jobless for some time and my business was destroyed because of her ignorance or was it her hate of men? — Her latest attempt was to reduce my benefit without any reference to me or consideration for our circumstances and thus I was forced to go job hunting last year as the bank refused to increase my overdraft to cover me as I sort ways to recover from WINZ further ABUSE.

    I complained to Colleen today that WINZ had forced me back to work for which Colleen replied that she had never done that — How convenient for her — The fact is she had steadily taken away as much of my benefit as she could making it neigh impossible for me to Father my Son and live with what was left — I hold her fully personally responsible if my small gain in health reduces — She also lied to me that should I begin work I would not be penalised for the first $100-0 — Thus stuffing up my very carefully monitored budget.

    I clearly explained for the 100th time in the last 8 years, that the main problem is caused thru WINZ refusing to recognise that I **Week about Equal Parent** my 12 year old Son and have done so since 1997 and thumped the table several times to highlight that I had had enough — This drew the attention of others and I was confronted with a rather large young male who proceeded to give me a lecture on how to complain — I asked him if he was a Dad and he said he was — I then asked him if he would accept 8 years of ABUSE of his children and only respond by thumping a desk — My case worker asked me to leave and thus I did — Not wishing to give WINZ a situation to hide behind yet again as we proceed to expose their 8 years of ABUSE.

    WINZ refuse to reflect my **Week about Equal Parenting** in my benefit now some 8 years, has caused much debt and loss of FATHERING — My Son has not been taken to even the pictures nor had any new cloths, nor decent birthdays, nor lots of quality food, nor visits to other paternal family and on it goes, for many years.

    Ms Dyson – Can you step in here and advocate a benefit whereby I can recover from this 8 years of abuse and Father my Son while working when I can and relieve me from needing to beg from good locals — friends and family.

    We are seriously in debt, no way of repaying, yet moving into the most costly time to raise our Son.

    Yours Sincerely

    Jim Bailey
    6 Lancaster Rd
    Beach Haven
    North Shore City
    [email protected]
    Skype — HandsOnEqualParent

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 8:00 am

  28. Viv, could you please contact me and give me your contact details…
    [email protected]

    Thanks for your comments Joe. I’m strugling with finding people who live in or near Wellington to participate in the “sit in”.

    I’d like to think that we could get 3 or 4 leaders together to organise something like that with some big numbers. We seem to be on a hair trigger right now, more and more in the news there have been some nasty figures uncovered from here and around the world about the abomination we call the CSA and FC.

    I can see this: At the same time on the same day, the IRD office in each major city is inundated with protestors and reporters – for a whole day.

    What city are you from Joe?

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 9:45 am

  29. Guys, while their is a lot of passion here & things appear unfair, the IRD are adminitrators of the CSA act NOT policy makers, The MP’s in govt make the call, the IRD are the messengers. A sit in may satisfy yourselves to state you have released some vent in a protest, though I dont believe it would achieve your goals

    Comment by Sean — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 10:57 am

  30. Hi Sean, I know what your saying but lets face it… not everybody can make it so Parliament (probably because of Child Support payments).

    A nationwide protest involving everybody outside the IRD and or the FC in the major centres may make a bigger impact than 20 people outside the Beehive.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 11:40 am

  31. Sean,

    ALL MP’s have been approached by many a Man and some Women who have experienced the Anti-Family brigade that we are forced to deal with wnhen things get difficult with those who have Kids.

    We should not have to berate the so called noble bureaucrats and their contractors as you say – However I believe they MUST take responcibilty for thgeir actions as much as the MP’s that have caused Anti-Family NZLaw and NZSocial Policy.

    Dutiful bureaucrats blindly destroying our Families is NOT acceptable

    Ration Shed – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 11:57 am

  32. Sean valid comment. Even so the way I see it is IRD are the co-enforcers of this particular legisalation. Orgainsed protesting in some form will draw reactive response. Choosing what kind of response is working a two edge sword. The interesting thing about changing legislation is working out who has the loudest voice and greatest influence in moving change. IRD are in this case a good conductor of a pain point that doesn’t it’s head above those immediately impacted. Let’s face it not all of us are in dire prdicaments as each situation varies with priovate arrangements and the likes. Those who are affected are sorely tested beyond their means. The Child(ren) lose out. My opinion is begin the rally.


    Comment by Joe — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 3:02 pm

  33. Guys, while their is a lot of passion here & things appear unfair, the IRD are adminitrators of the CSA act NOT policy makers,

    All policy for changes to the Act have been driven through the IRD “policy wheel” so they are policy makers.

    The MP’s in govt make the call, the IRD are the messengers.

    IRD are the officials who advise the politicians who make the law so they are not merely a messenger

    A sit in may satisfy yourselves to state you have released some vent in a protest, though I dont believe it would achieve your goals

    Sadly you are wrong, direct action is the only option left.The “democratic Process” is controlled by officals who advise Politicians and no ammount of reasoned lobbying moves them.

    What they do fear and what is comming is direct action.



    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 4:51 pm

  34. Joe, Sean and many others seem to still have faith in the very system that has destroyed our FAMILIES


    Ration Shed – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 5:37 pm

  35. Jim, my argument is against the current system. I’ll acknowledge Seans view because I’d expect such replies from those least affected by the current assessment. Which highlights the point, comment if you’re actually affected by the CSA assessment or not. Let’s see what you’re circumstances are…

    Scrap – I agree with your comments so lets begin with the sitin out front the IRD doors.

    So if we’re serious about ‘Starting the ball rolling’ you can contact me via temp email [email protected] I’m sure there are fathers who have contacts to move the appropriate people, and work through an organised rally as I persist in saying. In addition to this, rallying isn’t the only active response, Tigerseye, I’d continue on with the Doco as it appears to be one of the few practical steps towards generating awareness. Alternative venues?? please tell.

    Comment by Joe — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 6:45 pm

  36. Joe,

    You honour me BUT?

    You want me to explain 13 years of warring with CSA – FC – WINZ (see letter above)- MP’s – Bureaucrats — Local Bodies — the X, her Family and religious mates – and anybody else for that matter that stand against Equal Parenting in order for you to assess my so called wisdom?

    Sorry Joe put Jim Bailey – and/or – JimBWarrior – and/or – HandsOnEqualParent – into the MENZ search engine and have a wonder thru my websites might give you a clue

    You Joe may be struggling to understand these terrible issues that are truly mind boggling – Button holing complex situations and the people in them will achieve little other than despair.

    Ration Shed – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 7:13 pm

  37. Jim, you didn’t understand my last comment or perhaps I was unclear in articulating it. The comment was directed towards Sean.

    Now besides the emotive reaction, I’ll guess you’re in a similar or close to the same predicament as many here.

    Comment by Joe — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 7:35 pm

  38. UPDATE:

    I got an email back from the office of Ruth Dyson. It has been passed on to the Hon Rick Barker, who is minister of courts.

    As Jim would say “Onward”!

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 5th August 2008 @ 7:54 pm

  39. I have to agree with Scrap. Direct action seems to be the only way.

    Question: Why is it there is not ONE MP in this fine Country of ours who is not prepared to stand up and fight for us men? It is like we are lepers in Society.
    It is like the very subject is strictly off limits, Taboo to Parliamentarians.

    Why? Is it that a fair CS system would cripple the NZ economy? I believe so and that is the crux of the matter. NZ cannot possibly afford to adopt a fair CS system, especially now.

    Just imagine the economic stress if Dad only had to pay for his Childrens direct basic needs….how many mums would plead poverty and race to WINZ for a benefit.

    Then again, how many could be Income Tested? That would be intersting. How many would have to give up smoking…drinking..gambling…overseas trips….dining out…drugs?

    How many mums would actually have to work while the kids were at school? Could they get a job…maybe not. WINZ is the answer!!!! So who funds WINZ? Every taxpayer…so bang go the taxcuts and hatred is directed back at us.

    I will just say this…there IS a need for Child Support from us Dads. But let us make absolutely sure that such funding goes directly toward the children. That is really the issue is it not?

    Personally I would be happy to continue paying crrent levels of Child Support provided that:-

    A…my son was well fed and well clothed and was happy and content.

    B…that any excess monies paid by me went into his bank account.

    C…that his mum could not withdraw monies from our sons bank account for her own use unless there was a dire situation which might affect my sons health or safety.

    D…that such excessive funding would not in any way delibitate the father/son relationship or activities together or send Dad into poverty.

    That is my wish list. I dont think I ask too much here, but like every person on this site I cant seem to make it happen.


    Comment by Morris — Fri 8th August 2008 @ 2:14 am

  40. Can someone please answer this question…its probably off the topic.

    Changes to a Shared Care Agreement mean I will pick up a minimum of 48 extra nights with my son. With holidays it means I do roughly say 203 nights a year.

    Clearly my expenses are higher. And a change in schools means much higher petrol costs.

    Has anyone been thru an IRD admin review and if so is it likely they might reduce the amount I have to pay my ex? I mean my costs have gone up, hers have reduced but does it make any difference to the IRD?

    Also my ex has just increased her working hours quite dramatically. In fact her pay increase is more than I currently pay her. In theory she could afford to stop my payments and accept some financial responsibility for the upbringing of our son instead of leaving it all to me….but of course she wont.

    My feeling is that she now has enough to uphold her end of the financial responsibility and merely puts my Child Support into her bank account.

    Thx in anticipation of a response..


    Comment by Morris — Mon 11th August 2008 @ 10:53 pm

  41. If you can swing an extra 17 nights everything changes. Shared care no longer in place and your child suport ceases.
    Write to me at [email protected] and we can discuss reviews in private. It’s not a topic for here.

    Comment by allan Harvey — Tue 12th August 2008 @ 11:11 am

  42. Glad I found this site,, I was slowly going insane over the injustices of the CS system. I am particularly grated by the fact that the large amount I pay per week goes straight to the government and my kids don’t see a cent from it. For every dollar they take out of my pocket, there is another dollar that I can’t spend on my kids to actually enrich their lives. (which their ******** mother won’t do.(sorry I’m a little bitter)) Sometimes it feels like IRD will happily watch you bankrupt, just for entertainment
    As a father I feel like I have no rights at all, no say on the raising of my own children and then told to pay up by IRD because I’m not doing my share of the parenting.
    Anything I can do to help, please let me know. It’s time for things to change.

    Comment by Dion — Fri 22nd August 2008 @ 11:25 am

  43. Hi All,

    I did not know until a “Admistrative Review” (brought about by my ex, who thought that I was not paying enough), that the IRD can make your “income” whatever it wants. No matter that you are trying to start a business to help not only your “live in” family, but your “other” kids that you feel no less love for. My “taxable” income is somewhat less than my “Salaried” income, but as this is my “choice” (according to Child support) to go down this path, I have to pay on what my employer gives me every month. This surely goes against Natural Law, where everyone has the right to a life of fulfillment without prejudice? Can anyone tell me where it says a calculation will be made on your salaried wage, not on your taxable income?
    By the way, I will participate fully in any doco or protest that is going to help bring this to the public/government/international attention.

    Come on guys, if we don’t make a stand, who will?


    Comment by Dave — Thu 28th August 2008 @ 9:08 pm

  44. Hi Morris

    we had an admin review too because we gained shared care. Our expenses went up, hers went down, (from day 1 of separation she has never sent clothes with the children when at our home (even though she was collecting approx $1250 in c/s.) Our c/s went down a little when we obtained shared care so we went for an admin review because we now said she could work more hrs due to not having the children as much. We were told its her choice how many hrs she works(funny because youd think they also want to reduce how much she got in Working for Families) but no.( My husband and I dont have a choice to work 20 hrs a week!!!) When we explained our costs had gone up eg we now paid c/s of $800 a month PLUS more clothing, school fees, sports fees IRD told us that these are normal costs we should have as a parent. Thats fine we said – then stop us having to pay the other parent any money due to us now having the children 50/50. This way the expenses are ours when in our care and hers when they are in her care!!! SIMPLE RIGHT???? Oh but sir that would not be fair to your ex wife – how would she survive without your income!!!! So guys be warned when you separate from your wife – your only separating your location not your income because your paying her until your children reach 19 – your not paying to support your children!!

    Comment by About time — Fri 29th August 2008 @ 12:11 pm

  45. Anyone else find it funny how we have to address these people as honourable?

    Comment by Scott — Fri 29th August 2008 @ 2:36 pm


    Thank you for your email of 28 July 2008 regarding your concerns about New Zealand’s child support scheme, which has also been forwarded to me, as Minister of Revenue, by Hon Ruth Dyson.

    I am aware that a number of liable parents consider the assessment of child support under the scheme to be unfair, which makes the administration of the scheme more difficult and can add to the tension between liable and custodial parents. Although it is impossible to develope child support rules that will satisfy all separated parents, I am interested in exploring changes to the scheme that would meet the concerns of a greater number of separated parents than the current rules do.

    Our main focus in reviewing the scheme is on the formula used to calculate the liability for child support, so that it better reflects today’s parental responsibilities and arrangements – in particular, the cost of children and any sharing of care. I have asked officials to look at a number of options in this regard. My press release of 8 April 2008 noted the independent research undertaken by the Families Commission into the patterns of post-separation care and the costs of raising children as part of it’s survey work. The results of that work should help in developing options for ensuring a more flexibl approach to recognising separated parents’ contributions to the care of their children. I expect to be updated by officials on those results in the near future.

    I hope that by next year the government will be in a position to present for consideration a range of proposals for improving the child support system.

    Thank you for writing. I trust that my letter will be of assistance to you

    Yours sincerely
    Hon Peter Dunne
    Minister of Revenue

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 2nd September 2008 @ 11:16 am

  47. Read this to say,
    My officials were interested in the Aussie changes.
    I put the brakes on it till next year and pandered to my baby the Families Commision with a job they could get extremely well paid for doing.
    I want to be the fount of all knoweledge regarding revenue so next year under whatever goverment I get to keep my revenue job and in my dreams I get several other MP’s back in with me. I hope that worm turns for me again and hey then I will want the Treasurers job just like Winston got a few years back for being a good lap doggy.

    Comment by allan Harvey — Tue 2nd September 2008 @ 12:46 pm

  48. Allan,

    Tich – Tich – Your declared Labour support and Margaret Wilson admirer is showing – Onward – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Tue 2nd September 2008 @ 5:06 pm

  49. Excellent interpretation Allan. It is good to learn to understand Politicspeak

    Comment by Alastair — Tue 2nd September 2008 @ 5:11 pm

  50. Hi Jim,
    My red underwear often shows. When Republicans get over the 5% I might help with the negotiations. Opening gambit might be Scrap for Minister of Revenue, Jim Bagnall for Courts and Justice, Yourself for MSD (including WINZ) and Hans for Minister of Health. Not a bad set up I would have thought.

    Comment by allan Harvey — Tue 2nd September 2008 @ 6:23 pm

  51. Allan,
    I wish – Onward – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Tue 2nd September 2008 @ 6:32 pm

  52. “When Republicans get over the 5%”

    Not if but when!

    A man of vision who can see beyond his red undies! LOL



    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Tue 2nd September 2008 @ 8:51 pm

  53. Sorry to change the subject, but in America, men have an excellent opportunity to make a mark. Barak Obama has chosen Senator Biden, the man who created VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) and the subsequent witch hunting against men that followed. This anti male philosophy has spread around the industrial world eventually to NZ. It is a great chance for all this to be turned back, the number of abused men deprived of their families by these scandalaous wrecking laws must be reaching a critical mass in the USA by now. I have been turned from socialist to conservative by my injust treatment by the law in NZ, and i am sure that i am not the only one. The experiences that many of us have had overshadow our traditional political choices.
    If this can be achieved there will be a future impact for NZ Dads too, NZ is a small “follower” nation,

    Anyone who has a vote in the upcoming US elections should be told about what Senator Biden has done to us ! I would even vote George W in again, simply because of the terrible way men are treated

    Comment by martin swash — Tue 2nd September 2008 @ 11:17 pm

  54. The lads and lassies from the states guard their right to vote very jealously. Tax paying, permanent residency are not good enough to be in the position of vote casting it’s citizenship alone.
    More accurate to say that the states and all the America’s have learnt from us about DV (VAWA) stuff. We even imported (and gave the vote to) one Ruth Busch from North America to generate our DVA for us and she made dam sure it recognised testicles as angry agressive perpetrators of violence and created PO’s as a legislative form of emasculation. It didn’t get eventually here we have exported the disease of DV paranoia to other places. Earlier this year I was asked to speak to a visiting US law school who had especially come to study NZ’s unique (and I’m sure they would say progressive) approach to DV.

    Comment by more accurately — Wed 3rd September 2008 @ 12:54 am

  55. YO! – Somebody who sees the truth – Post 54 is on-to-it

    New Zealand has played a major roll for many years in exporting much that has been disastrous to Mum-Dad-and-the-Kids

    The UN loves NZ for its exports and influence

    Glad to see you monitoring the states Martin but you have missed the truth here

    The Ration Shed communiqué (Use Google) will go a long way to keeping one informed should you want a reality check outside the perimeter of influence of the heavily Spin Doctored media influences we NZ’ers endure

    There are several in the so called NZ Mens and Fathers Movement who are either plants or just plain naive who feed the Spin Doctors and thus damage the work of the sincere

    Onward – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Wed 3rd September 2008 @ 1:31 am

  56. It may be that NZ has/had a major effect on the UN but don’t forget that feminists had a country hold world office for a length of time and then moved to another country. At the moment I see a lot of our following and the female leaders are coming from Canada. Nor sure if others are seeing this also?

    Comment by julie — Thu 4th September 2008 @ 1:15 am

  57. Julie,

    Good points Julie – I shall keep closer watch

    Onward – Jim

    Comment by Jim Bailey — Thu 4th September 2008 @ 1:35 am

  58. HI!
    I was so over joyed to find this site!

    I want to share with you my exsperience of how CSA wrecked my family,

    My storie is some wat complicated and may leave the reader flabagasted,some may even say im a stupid man to let that happen..

    At the birth of my 1st child i am naturally elated and anticipate my duties as a proud but ‘green’ dad,two months down the track i receive a letter from inland revenue saying i am paying child support for my new born,obviously i am enraged at my partner and confront her with the issue,only to get a arrogant stare followed buy no answer,she is on the DPB without saying anything and i dont understand why because there has been no physical abuse,no mental abuse no abuse wat so eva.
    Naturally the relationship becomes stale and i am left wondering wat to do because she has made our relationship illegal,i loose respect for her and we dont talk much.
    At this point you may be asking yourself ‘why didnt you object to her application for child support’ simply because i didnt receive the objection letter(im assuming she intercepted it) and she tells me she will leave and i will never see my kids again.
    I love my kid so i dont push the issue and i stay in the situation form my kids sake.
    we go on to have another child and my child support payments increase, i continue paying child support for five years and after much coaching and koaxing and at the end of my tether,i manage to get her to go work (yes i have been in full time work up to this point)and i think to myself “YAY! ive done it”
    But alas! ive created a monster she spends like an american banker and floods us in debt wich i am left to pick up the tab which pushes me to breaking point.
    But i dont break i leave the relationship after 14 years,i want to take my kids but my work dosent allow me to be there to send them off to school and to be there when they get i reluctantly left them,
    Not even a month goes by when i receive THE LETTER frm IRD and this time i object on the grounds stated above..IRD replies “there are no special circumstaces or grounds that do not make you liable to contribute to my childrens care giver”
    im at the end of the road,i miss my kids,ive lost the will to go on,but coming across this web site gives me hope my head has lifted!

    any advice out there? ive been to all the relevant agencies for help but nothing.

    Comment by jay sad — Tue 21st April 2009 @ 8:14 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar