Pro-female IRD
Mum tells IRD that children are in her care to avoid Child support payments. Father is on DPB after loosing business during recession. Children are actually in shared care.
IRD takes word of mum and deducts child support from dad’s DPB. Mum tells IRD that dad is a fraud and works under the table. IRD takes word of mum and accesses dad at last years income. IRD keeps the accessed income in its formular.
Dad sits on the computer for three months noting every minute children are with him to prove shared care.
Dad disputes that children were in mum’s care. IRD places order on dad’s bank account and robbs the money from his account.
Dad cannot pay the rent and applies to WINZ for a food voucher. Dad has WINZ investigator knocking at his door to investigate “work under the table”.
It’s time the IRD wake up to such fraud.
Typical.
If there is anyone that can verify the children have been in care on the dates that are in dispute, they could sign an affidavit of confirmation that the children are in your care on certain days.
Do you have a parenting order? If not then you could get a form together and get the Mother to sign and date it when you pick up & drop off the children. or depending on the age of the Children – get them to do it.
Some how you have to find a way to outsmart the Mother & her lies.
At the end of the day the Mother is committing fraud against the IRD and a formal complaint of suspected fraud to bith WINZ & The IRD would have to be investigated. Do you have a friend who would be willing to write a letter to IRD & Winz and report this suspected Fraud. A copy of the letter should also go to Peter Dunn & Peter Hughes, as they will request an out come of the investiagtion from the IRD regarding the complaint.
Good luck
Comment by Cazz — Tue 28th June 2011 @ 12:26 pm
IRD child and spousal support have the highest suicide rate of any occupational group in NZ, I am told.
I have experienced several years of similar (but not as bad) games.
It is survivable. It is barely tolerable, as it does impact on what you can do for your children and it also has a large impact onto establishing new adult intimate relationships.
So, with all of this advantage, my ex is still in a poor situation and complaining piteously.
Solutions?
Increase cs rates, to transfer even more money to custodial parents?
Give child and spousal support staff revolvers, with 5 bullets in the barrel, to speed up their demise?
Why not make cs reflect the same transfer as Government benefits allow per additional child (about $70 per week, reducing with number of children)? Then it would not be economically attractive to take custody, just for the easy cash. Then the people who enjoy caring for children, would do the job. This would generally ensure that children were cared for mainly by the more competent parent!!!!! WOW!
Cheers, MurrayBacon – axe murderer.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Tue 28th June 2011 @ 8:14 pm
God, MB. It seems so simple when you write it like that. Wait, that’s because it is so simple. Who’d of thought.
Comment by Darryl X — Wed 29th June 2011 @ 10:50 am
It would be simple alright if they were after child support, as in money to support children
But child TAX is about revenue gathering and ex-spousal support. Children are lucky to even come into the picture and that will be only if the IRD and the, predominantly mummy, have sated themselves first with “their entitlement”
MITS
Comment by Mits — Wed 29th June 2011 @ 7:27 pm
Yep, it’s all about collecting money all right. Why else would it be run by the IRD, the revenue collecting arm of the government? And why else would they structure it so half of the money they collect doesn’t go to towards the welfare of New Zealand children.
You would think with New Zealand having one of the worst records of child poverty in the developed world, that the government would actually put in place a system that would ensure that child support actually goes toward a child’s welfare, (easy enough to institute procedures where custodial parents have to show where the money paid to them in child support is going to ensure it is actually going towards a child’s upkeep, not just supporting the custodial parent’s lifestyle). But, they haven’t done anything like this, in essence not caring at all whether child support is actually going towards the upkeep of a child.
The fact that government show such interest in making sure that child support is paid, with ridiculous penalties associated with it, but show no interest in non-custodial parent’s rights to see their kids (which is a violation of basic human rights as defined by the United Nations) clearly shows where the priorities lie (actually what they are doing is illegal, but what can you do when your own government insists on instituting nation wide laws and policies that violate international laws and human rights conventions when the organisation responsible for ensuring those rights are upheld is itself guilty of actively promoting the same crime?).
Child support is definitely a tax, otherwise it wouldn’t be collected by the tax department and be a percentage of income like every other tax, seems to me it has nothing to do with supporting children, and is simply a way for the government to tax non-custodial parents (mostly men) for the crime of having a child.
Comment by Mr. Anonymous — Thu 30th June 2011 @ 6:55 pm
“…but what can you do when your own government insists on instituting nation wide laws and policies that violate international laws and human rights conventions when the organisation responsible for ensuring those rights are upheld is itself guilty of actively promoting the same crime?” – REVOLUTION!!
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 30th June 2011 @ 11:40 pm
@Mr A – I did not know that NZ has one of the worst records of child poverty in the developed world (is there a good reference or citation for this conclusion – I don’t doubt it but would like to report this conclusion and want to back it up with a reliable reference or citation). That being said, I’m not surprised because the mechanisms of custody and child support are CHILD TRAFFICKING and ABUSE and are common throughout the developed world and are not in the best interests of children but instead satisfy the malignant narcissism and psychopathy and addiction to power and control of women and their male enablers. Legislators make the laws, Executives enforce them, Judges adjudicate them and Central Banks fund all of it. All of our most powerful people are making money and living excessive lifestyles from trafficking and abusing children under the guise that it is in the best interests of children. Classic malignant narcissism and psychopathy. Very scary and most people do not even see that it is happening because they have been habituated and desensitized to it. For those of us who have not been habituated or desensitized (primarily children and their fathers), it’s a goddamned nightmare. But all that is needed for such evil to proliferate is for good men to do nothing. There is no legal or social or political or financial solution to this problem because, as you observed, our own government is complicit.
Comment by Darryl X — Fri 1st July 2011 @ 12:00 am
The fact that money was stolen from my account without warning or without me being able to dispute the care arrangements, left me stunned.
Unfortunatelly things got so bad with the X that I decided to leave NZ. The children were in a constant tug of war, which was detrimental to their wellbeing. Being on the DPB was also not an option to me.
I’m doing well now and visit the children as often as I can. The CAPS order preventing them from leaving NZ is being used to get more money. So, they will not be able to come and visit me during their holiday, instead they get to see me for a few days a year.
Where are the laws preventing this?
I had a great idea. People wanting to seperate/ get divorced, should have to do an exam on how to live in seperation, for the best interest of children. If these rules are broken heavy fines are imposed. (Similar to getting your drivers licence).
This would cut out the lawyers, courts and all the frustration dealing with angry x’s. The children would benefit as well. Anyone interested to take this to a political level?
Taking it to the NZ court is not an option because it may take years to get there.
Comment by Mikey — Fri 1st July 2011 @ 5:27 pm
Hi Darylx
Here are a few links from a quick search, hope this helps….
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4627954/UN-rebukes-New-Zealand-for-child-poverty
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1007/S00331/the-moral-crime-of-child-poverty.htm
And here is a short documentry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_x2L1edgME
What is interesting in this doco is that it is identified that those most at risk from child poverty are children who are from single parent families where a parent is on welfare. This is interesting because here in New Zealand, you cannot receive child support paid for a child when you are in this circumstance, the government takes it. So effectively when the child support from the non-custodial parent is needed the most, the New Zealand government becomes the most active in making sure that it is not available to help look after the child, and use it is extra revenue for their own coffers, remember that governments have none of their own money, “their” money is in truth owned by the taxpayers, so when it is paid for a purpose it is not utilised for and redirected like this it is effectively being embezzled, which makes governments who do this guilty of criminal activity.
The system is clearly backwards, when the money is needed the most it is taken and not available to help raise the child, but when the custodial parent is working full time and earning (and there is no cut off point set on the amount they can earn as there is in EVERY other form of assistance) they will get additional payments in the form of child support paid by the non-custodial parent. This is on top of other payments that are only available when the custodial parent is working such as the in work payment.
So when they are not working they have little available in the way of income available except their welfare payment (which will include accommodation supplement and family tax credit) but they don’t get the direct contributions of the other parent in the way of child support (at the very time they need it the most), but when they do start to work, not only do they receive this money but their welfare payment actually INCREASES!!!???
The message from this is very clear, child support has NOTHING to do with welfare of children, and because it doesn’t it becomes just another tax collecting scam run by a morally corrupt government, who will not hesitate to conduct criminal activites.
Comment by Mr. Anonymous — Sat 2nd July 2011 @ 1:44 am
In my experience the problem is IRD take custodial parents lies as gospel. I have a court parenting order and variation order giving me 150 plus nights. Do everything for my boys I can (live close) to help the boys and pay extras all the time for them. When IRD contacted the X I lost a year recorded nights above shared care and hers comments were what I was assessed on, now she has told them that this doesnt happen, I dont have them above 146 nights. My new partner applied for working for families for the boys as well. IRD had to contact the ex, that was declined for us too. We have objected twice but both times they contact the ex and they dont show us her communications on what is said about us. She does this to protect her income and lifestyle. I have had a lawyer and spent considerable time, effort and money getting court orders to get shared care and be significantly in the boys day to day lives. Yet I have given up on the system as have been told that is child support law, she must agree to them, until I found this site?? Any ideas
Comment by humulus — Sun 10th July 2011 @ 10:14 am
So true, it happens a lot. I know of a woman who was being support by her new bf but still continued taking money from the dad and DPB. DPB was informed but didnt seem to be doing much. It lasted years and she scammed so much money of DPB but noone seems to care because she mother and child and proving it is so much cost. The dad was paying money into account in the USA so.is it too much hustle toprove. maybe not worth it if we look at it as a seperate incident but there are hungry kids all over the world and in New Zealand a woman can use their children to take money from three different sources. And its not one off so prove it, make it public and save some money by preventing other greedy immoral mothers to make chidren their carrier
Comment by Arohana — Tue 12th July 2011 @ 3:05 am
The IRD reviews are the ultimate in discrimination – against men. You don’t get a personal interview like these women do, you get a phone call. The FEMALE review person had not even read my submissions, when I questioned this and asked how that was FAIR, I was told to speak now or not get another chance. Wow a really fair and impartial interview – NOT. All the case law references are heavily weighted in support of WOMEN – probably because most men have not stood up to the system, or did not get in early seeking a review – its the first review which sets the precedent – a very rare helpful person in IRD actually told me its very hard, to ever get the first review decision overturned = you will have to spend more money and time overturning it to the HIGH court. AHH hang on I just wasted what money I had left after property settlement defending my reputation against false allegations in the the court and getting court orders just to see my kids and now you say I have to again head to court to try and get a discriminatory totally biased and unfair process overturned….. CASE law is a crock, the state and the justice department are hiding behind a few decisions which favor women. I have psychological assessments independently ordered by the family court detailing alienation, the pursuit of lifestyle by the ex over looking after the child, the enormous stress on the child, because of the mothers actions – and yet nothing is done about it – if I want to take this further – its more costs = and the ex gets to undermine the independent family court examination – by bringing in her own psychologists – so we are back to this middle road bullshit – no one makes a decision – Mikey 8 above – you are right on the money – this MUST become a political issue = the family court and lawyers will not change things as its making them too much money – IF Parents had consequences ( usually the pissed off female ) around parenting issues – ie bad behavior will not be tolerated – the children would benefit no end and most of the conflict would END. The justice department puts out these lovely books on how NOT TO BEHAVE, yet the Family court system and NO LAWYER wants BAD BEHAVIOUR to end. I have been told many times by LAwyers = oh we cant do anything about that – we cant control that – hang on a minute – your more than happy to throw me in prison or fine me for dropping my kids off late, but its alright to psychologically harm the kids, provoke the father with BAD BEHAVIOUR which is the cause of most of the distress, stop him seeing his kids for more money, lie about him without consequence, – but hey thats all right folks…..so the government and all these family court lawyers are actively supporting child abuse……and lastly so you also know, as in my case ( and I have NEVER not paid Child support – my argument is on the amount – because I have assets, I am being forced to pay the maximum even though my income is not what it used to be since separation – so I am forced into a position by IRD to SELL Assets to pay maximums – isnt that extortion?? being forced now to support the very lifestyle the psychologist says is harming my daughter – so if I dont pay what has been demanded by this one sided biased, envious, discriminating dictator of a referee, I will become a criminal in my own country – It is now common knowledge in accounting and legal circles – IRD are using this tactic, because they know that by forcing people into this position, they will pay what is ordered to protect their name and reputation…………I am still being alienated from my daughter.. in fact now we have walked away altogether – I don’t need my own kid coming around here spying on my life, and reporting back, nor do I want to add to her distress any more…..nine years of trying to fight this system has been fruitless…….apparently we have to wait till the child gets older, rebels against the mother for being such a bitch and deal with the aftermath – a known process which no one in the family court wants to put an end to – my new wife is absolutely disgusted at how we men are being treated by this system…….wasting time and money in the family court is just that – pointless. Individually we all being hammered – this needs numbers behind it to have an effect. partners of good men like my wife and many other good people who hear about these cases are dismayed at whats going on – so yes it needs to change and it will only change if it becomes political. Discrimination is illegal ( apparently ) – yet the government and its officers are the worst for it. By NOT addressing bad behavioural concerns with consequences and making both parents have EQUAL access to their children is by default supporting child abuse – we have huge numbers of kids in this country without fathers = good men who their children need for guidance and support – the present system is destroying that, and actually forcing many men to walk away from their kids……..there must be consequences for bad behaviour, for lying about a person and for stopping any parent from seeing his children in pursuit of money…….the legal profession is not acting in the best interests of the children or the parents – they are acting for themselves….for money…….
Comment by time for law changes — Sun 24th July 2011 @ 3:42 pm
New decade.
Same old shit.
Comment by SKeptik — Mon 25th July 2011 @ 2:39 am
@Time for law changes – Nope. Not time for change of law concerning custody and child support, but elimination of laws concerning custody and child support. There should be no child support and only shared parenting. And if mothers cannot share parenting then they should be denied custody. Less government interference, not more. But I appreciate the sentiment of your position. Keep fighting the good fight, brother.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 25th July 2011 @ 3:31 am
The posting below is directly from the New Zealand Human Rights Commission Web Site.
http://www.hrc.co.nz/report/summary/summary03.html#leg
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
Article 2, Universal Declaration of Human Rights
What is discrimination ?
Direct discrimination involves treating a person differently because of one of the prohibited grounds such as those set out in Article 2 of the UDHR, above, in comparable circumstances.
Indirect discrimination is when an apparently neutral practice or condition has a disproportionate and negative effect on one of the groups against whom it is unlawful to discriminate, and the practice or condition cannot be objectively justified.
Discrimination is not just about the formal recognition of equal rights in law. It is also about substantive equality and ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to enjoy rights equally. Not all distinctions or different treatment are discrimination. Equality does not mean treating everybody the same. To ensure genuine equality, people may need to be treated differently in some situations.
A State’s obligation to respect, protect, promote and fulfill the right to freedom from discrimination is not limited to avoiding negative measures. It includes taking positive measures.
FAIRNESS. From the same Web Site.
Where New Zealand does well – NgÄ mahi pai e oti nei i Aotearoa
New Zealanders value fairness (and this is often expressed colloquially in terms of a ‘fair go’) and have a well developed tradition of tolerance and flexibility.
New Zealand generally meets the international standards for protection of the right to freedom from discrimination through the HRA and the BoRA, and the prohibited grounds of discrimination are reasonably comprehensive by international standards.
Low-cost and accessible processes for dealing with complaints of discrimination in the private sector have been available for many years. With the introduction of the amendments to the HRA in 2001, similar mechanisms are now available for complaints about discrimination by government agencies.
So tell me something = MEN ARE BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST< WE ARE BEING TREATED UNFAIRLY – SO WHY IS THERE NOT A COLLECTIVE MOVEMENT TO TAKE A CASE AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT FOR ALLOWING THIS TO CONTINUE?
As you have observed Sceptic = new Decade, Same old Shit. Perhaps thats because we have not collectively joined together and taken the government to task in allowing this discrimination to proceed with impunity. Unless a joint class action is presented, INDIVIDUALLY MEN will continue to be taken to the cleaners while lawyers get richer and children lose fathers and damaged beyond repair.
I also believe given the huge numbers of cases where the state is supporting this continual psychological distress and bad behavior towards children, and by actively NOT DOING anything about it, the government and the justice system are by default contributing to CHILD ABUSE – so again why are we not taking a collective action against them? – there is enough evidence to support all that everyone knows is happening.
Sites like this have email databases and so perhaps its time that they collaborated with the men and helped us all join forces.
Thats perhaps is the ONLY Option left – private prosecutions ………and make this one big public debate……..surely there are a couple of lawyers out there who can help mould this into a significant case??
While these web sites help us all vent our frustrations they are NOT stopping the problem – we are like talkback ZB , lots of talk and no action…..the only way to get some action is to throw this out into the public arena with lots of evidence and lots of witnesses and let the cards lie where they fall……..and watch a few politicians and family court lawyers run for cover!!!!!!!!!!! Oh shit they have exposed us for what we are ……..
Comment by hornet — Mon 25th July 2011 @ 11:32 am
hornet,
I agree.
Start a class action lawsuit.
It will sort a lot of pussy worshippers who think “it (family court/ domestic violence industry) will never happen to me because I’m a good guy” or are so woefully ignorant they don’t even know there’s a war against men going on from those who aren’t in such denial and ignorance.
Comment by SKeptik — Mon 25th July 2011 @ 11:41 am
Skeptic, out of interest where did you run to? My new wife of ten years and I have really had a guts full of this bullshit. I think if there was some way of having a go at the system, I would stay for that….otherwise like you.. we are seriously looking to head somewhere to live the rest of our days in peace……any suggestions?? Thanks
Comment by hornet — Mon 25th July 2011 @ 11:57 am
Hornet, looking closely through this website have you noticed there is no heading towards protecting the rights of parents, or of men? Apparently this is not a priority of the Human Rights Commission here in New Zealand.
Comment by Mr. Anonymous — Mon 25th July 2011 @ 5:53 pm
Hi hornet,
I spend time in Asia and Europe.
Given that this site is watched by feminists I’m not prepared to be more specific. Then the long arm of feminism cannot reach me.
I may in fact be in NZ, but as far as they’re concerned I’m off the grid.
In any case where you escape to depends on a lot of factors – lifestyle, language/s, national laws, employment, leisure activities,social connections, climate.
I think you need to research this thoroughly which will be well worth while.
I can well understand the urge to get away from misandric NZ.
Having such a conversation with some NZers in situ will prompt them to think about your reasons too, and may in turn bring some of them out of the current denial about NZ being a dreadfully misandric culture.
I did that before leaving NZ and it shook a few people up – not a bad thing.
Good luck.
Comment by SKeptik — Mon 25th July 2011 @ 7:33 pm
Yes it’s always the Dad’s in the wrong
I entered into a private child support agreement with my ex. I started paying her directly the month after I stopped paying her via the IRD. The IRD spent months chasing me for an outstanding debt. Even though I rang the IRD to explain the situation they could not do anything for me because (even though I was liable for the debt) it related to someone else’s account and they could not discuss it with me. The debt is now taken directly from my salary. The outcome – double child support payments for my ex one via a private agreement and one via the IRD. Government sanctioned theft
Comment by John — Tue 9th August 2011 @ 1:20 pm
I had a similar experience with IRD where in going through the machinations of a family break up the ex actually had left and returned a couple of occasions.
Each time her first port of call would be the local winz to ensure the DPB was set up and naturally I would be hit with the child tax as a consequence.
The first time she did this the going wasnt as easy as she thought and at her insistance we got back together.
I had a firm date that we got back she moved back into the family home I was still in. I payed all the bills as I was the only bread winner. She assured me that she had stopped receiving the DPB as we were back together so when I continued to get child tax against me I assumed it was simply an administrative error and rang IRD to explain the situation.
This didnt stop the child tax summons and the next month when I received another it now had penalties from the previous month. Checking with IRD and after hours on the phone getting fobbed off had it explained to me the the ex had continued to receive the DPB for over three months after we got back together.This I explained was patently fraud on her behalf and not mine as I had bills and invoices and my word to show we were living together at the time and I was supporting her and my child completely financially. ( I never saw anything of the money she was receiving and never saw any sign of it)
Oh contrare state IRD she got the DPB therefore Im liable for child tax.
But she has fiddled the system I cry to the IRD phone operators
Not our concern they reply take it up with winz
Privacy act say winz sorry none of your business.
Mean while 6 months have gone by with me obstinantly refusing to pay, penalties mounting monthly. No word from the ex as to why I have been so unfairly singled out, not her fault she would say.
Finally IRD lose patience with my protests of innocence and being wronged and just take the money from my bank account. With the penalties of course cleaned up the lot in one foul swoop, left me in no end of trouble with the ex who was most miffed when I said I had no money that week, probably aided in the second break up her being forced to dip into her own secret stash.
Was ages ago now but it still wrankles
Just more evidence of how IRD managed to make a bad situation worse.
Comment by Mits — Tue 9th August 2011 @ 6:26 pm
The IRD is difficult for all sexes to deal with.Not just men.
Comment by Bill — Tue 9th August 2011 @ 7:21 pm
John and Mits,
Sorry to hear of your horrible experiences.
I can empathize as I too had NZ feminist bureaucrats out for my blood at one point.
Try telling them you’re living on the garage floor at a buddy’s place because you got financially looted by the ‘family court’ and paying child tax leaves you bereft of enough money to pay market rentals.
Unless IRD has had a massive influx of male friendly energy (doubtful given the prevalence of feminist misandry in NZ) you’ll get the diplomatically worded but nonetheless callous “I’ve got mine, tough shit for you, it’s your problem, sort it out, I’ve got my (feminist) instructions to follow” type response I got.
All of this amounts to a massive transfer of hard earned wealth from men to women.
It’s pandemic throughout the west.
About the only words of comfort I can offer are to get out to somewhere more male friendly, where taxes are minimal.
There will be a cost to that (culturally and socially) too of course, if you can afford it (financially) in the first place that is.
But I’m afraid that for you staying in NZ under present terms means ongoing misandric misery.
The machinery of NZ government simply is listening to men’s issues, nor does it appear designed to.
What exactly do you expect in a country who’s National airline carrier routinely implements openly misandric policy (sorry sir you can’t sit next to that child because your a man, now if you were a woman that would be different) whilst the Human Rights Commission flagrantly looks the other way despite many appeals being made to them? where men dominate ALL social indices of distress and major disease categories yet lack government level advocacy?
Where some ‘academics’ still whore themselves to the alter of feminism by spreading misandric propaganda such as 1 in 4 women have been sexually assaulted in their lifetimes?
Where the ‘family courts’ operate under a cloak of secrecy? Where prisons (mostly populated by young defathered men) are being built faster than universities? Where drugs, gangs and violence are widespread, as is complacency and political apathy?
Where the once humane welfare state has become bloated to the point of statist control of virtually all aspects of one’s life from bedroom to boardroom, from cradle to grave, having intruded more deeply in private family life as time has gone by?
Sweden of the South Pacific you might say.
Helen Clarksi wasn’t joking when she referenced the two countries together.
Do yourself a favor. Get out. Breath again.
Comment by Skeptik — Tue 9th August 2011 @ 7:58 pm
Do you really breathe Skeptic?
Comment by Bill — Tue 9th August 2011 @ 8:27 pm
OK. I’ll play.
All the time Bill!
But I breath a lot more freely in environments not polluted by feminism aided by white knight chivalry.
Any more daft questions?
Comment by Skeptik — Tue 9th August 2011 @ 9:55 pm
No only your daft answer.
Comment by Bill — Wed 10th August 2011 @ 6:34 pm
That’s OK bill,
I don’t expect everyone to understand my men Rights viewpoint.
Comment by Skeptik — Wed 10th August 2011 @ 6:45 pm
I’m tired of writing emails to IRD Child support and Peter Dunne, I want action! I want to get together with like minded people and make enough noise about the misery and the corruptness of the Child Support/Admin Review processes and its people that we make headlines! I want to walk on Parliament while there is still fight in me!
Am I the parent, no I am the wife of a ncp and I am sickened by what I have witnessed over the past 3 years while my husbands child support has been administered by the IRD.
7 reviews in this time with 6 & 7 (so now 8 & 9) being reheard next Tuesday due to them admitting that they stuffed up by not following the “correct procedure”.
This time they have sicced one of their top henchmen onto my husband. His write up on the internet when his name is googled is shows him to base his determinations on his biased opinions as opposed to fact! The paperwork for the appeal or departure order is already being processed!
My husband too had his entire bank account drained of all money except for .87c! Debt created in March when his “assessed” income was inflated and backdated to the beginning of the financial year even though he had a record of paye deductions and a 2011 tax return come April!
The letter from the IRD advising of the deduction was dated 17th June, money was decucted 20th June and we received the letter 27th June in the post!
The IRD child support department are full of females who seem to have no idea of how badly mens lives are impacted and even worse the friction that it creates with the children in the end.
My husbands daughter won’t even speak to her dad so brainwashed is she by her mothers opinions.
I am fed up with having my income tax used to pay the contract fees of these Admin Review Officers who base their determinations on their own biased opinions instead of the facts that are put in front of them.
Comment by Toni — Thu 11th August 2011 @ 12:48 pm
Toni,
I understand and sympathize.
Your sentence (ironic word!) – My husband too had his entire bank account drained of all money except for .87c!
shows the callousness and disdain of IRD regards good fathers who they obviously see as no more than ATMs.
I too had my wages garnished based upon incredible ‘assessments’ to the point of personal poverty whilst not seeing my child due to parental alienation fostered by my ex wife and aided and abetted by the family court who treated her uncorroborated false accusations as gospel and sabotaging father-child contact with total impunity.
Talking to everyday people at the time it quickly became apparent that my situation as a father then was far from unique.
After some of the numbness and depression wore off it drove me further into the Men’s Movement. Even there I faced difficulties in the form of lurking white knights who had naively swallowed feminist shibboleths and who chivalrous attitudes were being used to advance the feminist agenda.
Chief amongst them were the likes of Peter Dunne and Head of ‘family courts’ Patrick Mahoney, who I met in person and found to be an amazing sycophants when it came to
It’s my observation that many people – women mostly, but many men also, have been duped into the misguided idea that women have been ‘oppressed’ for millenia by some mythical ‘patriarchy’ and such a ‘man bad – woman good view’ propels them to act out in ‘retributive’ ways which result in the kind of situation you and your your kind of situation.
It seems you are facing exactly that kind of situation vis a vis IRD.
It’s long been my view now that this would change only when women such as yourself were also personally painfully impacted.
Your husband is in a way a very lucky man to have a woman such as yourself prepared to network and fight to overcome institutionalized misandry which I think is still rife in NZ.
Such action proves your love for him courageously and is a welcome addition to the push for Men’s Rights.
I commend and wish you well in your quest and offer this link to a series of videos which includes a powerful analysis of father’s rights which may give further perspective.
Comment by Skeptik — Thu 11th August 2011 @ 2:34 pm
adendum:
the sentence – Chief amongst them were the likes of Peter Dunne and Head of ‘family courts’ Patrick Mahoney, who I met in person and found to be an amazing sycophants when it came to is incomplete.
it should read –
Chief amongst them were the likes of Peter Dunne and Head of ‘family courts’ Patrick Mahoney, who I met in person and found to be an amazing sycophants when it came to feminists and women in general.
Comment by Skeptik — Thu 11th August 2011 @ 2:37 pm
Hey Skeptic, that was nice to read what you said. Although I do love him to bits I hate to see a good man being treated like he is and I like to see fairness and justice prevail. It does not as far as the IRD Child Support Dept and its workers are concerned and I will continue to fight the cause for as long as I have the strength and fortitude to do it.
I have on 3 occasions emailed Peter Dunne but now realise that he is powerless to do anything. Even the new changes that he is proposing to bring before Parliament are the work of people underneath him. He has no idea how the system works, the Admin Review and C/S are a law unto themselves and answerable to no one it would appear.
It’s bad enough that the CS Depts are dominated by women, who in my eyes many are nothing short of viragoes, but the men that work or contract there seem to be either gay or have been emasculated themselves and want to see all other men they come in contact with end up the same.
We women are evil when we want to be. Most of us will show our claws when it suits and we revel in knowing that we have made you miserable. There is a fine line between love and hate and get it blurred and love turns to hate very quickly.
We the fairer sex are so lucky to have a country that enables us to shove it up you so easily. Call a Govt dept and any number of willing helpers will point you in the direction of someone that can get you a benefit or tell you how you can squeeze every last cent out of the old man so that he can never get on with life as he knew it, let alone have enough money or energy to put towards a new partner and life.
Oh yes we had a great leader in Alan. whoops I mean Helen, she did wonders for the girls of this country.
I have offered twice to get a group of non custodial parents together to meet with Pete one time when he is in Auckland so he can hear from them personally what is happening to them. So far no response to my offer.
What I would like to see is a group making enough noise (like with Kronic)so that the issue is brought to the publics attention. Let them know how outdated the laws are, how already broken family units are further torn apart, how some men have been driven to suicide, how many men have left the country and their kids, all because of an unfair, outdated and biased child support system and the toss pots that work in it.
I went out today and purchased a camcorder for my husband to take to the review next week, it will be interesting to see how that goes down. No doubt as the support person I run the risk of being asked to leave because I will have the audacity to speak and I should remain silent. After all, how fair is it that my husband who is a good honest hardworking tradey should not be allowed any form of intellectual support when he is going up against a review officer with a law degree?
Not only a lawyer but one that contracts to the IRD and whose fee is paid out of our taxes!
Comment by Toni — Thu 11th August 2011 @ 7:31 pm
@Toni – The “leaders” of this world are malignant narcissists. Any complaint about destruction of families will be interpreted by them as evidence of their success in making the lives of so many people miserable. It’s what they want. They already know what they are doing. They aren’t ignorant. They are doing it on purpose. Any complaint will only enable their malignant narcissism and encourage them to do more of the same. It’s how they transfer money and power from the poor to the rich so the rich get richer and the poor get poorer until they don’t exist anymore. It’s how they satisfy their addiction to power. If that means sacrificing as many children and fathers and families as possible, so be it. Women are a tool to achieve that goal. When that tool is no longer needed, they will discard it.
Comment by Darryl X — Fri 12th August 2011 @ 2:18 am
I’m going through a similar situation with my ex and my boys, My ex was spending all the money, not doing house work,(my boys deserved better instead of having to play on the floor where they spilt there meals.)we had arguments about all this, then she leaves taking the boys while I’m at work. so far the courts allowed her to challange a non removal order saying that they didn’t know if she was leaving the area perminatly or just on holiday.
I have felt that the Laws are always geared up for the women. All they need to do is cry rape or physical abuse and they are believed. My ex said I physically, psychologically and verbally abused her, the only thing I ever did was verbal abuse, but then we both verbally abused each other. SO I’m made to look the villien
Comment by Ragnor — Thu 18th August 2011 @ 2:35 pm
You know Ragnor the one way to get to the gorgeous ex is to pick yourself up, know that your boys are being looked after and loved by their mother and get on with your life.
The thing that peeves most women off is when they see or hear that the ex has been out there socialising and having a good time. When you have the boys make sure a female pops in, even if she’s just a work colleague or old friend and the ex will get to hear about it.
Much as all as we love our kids and they are our lives, it grits us to the max to know that you can have another life without us.
No matter how much you try to play fair and show respect for your childrens mother, she won’t care and will slag you off every chance she gets. It’s what we do!
If she cared about the boys and their welfare she would do what I did and stay in a marriage for 23 years for the sake of the kids. By leaving you and taking them with her it says to me without a doubt that she has put herself before their welfare.
Comment by Toni — Thu 18th August 2011 @ 10:16 pm
Toni –
I have to disagree that staying in a marriage for the sake of the children is the right thing to do. My parents were awful together and from the age of about 11-12 I used to dream of them splitting and I didn’t care who I lived most of the time with. To this day I wonder why they left it so long to divorce. As soon as they were apart life became so much better. So I don’t see why staying together and having your kids in a tense/hateful/abusive/frightening (this was how our lives were) “family” life is for the benefit of the children.
And yes my mother has and probably still does spin stories of my father (not alive anymore) and how horrible he was, and when I challenged her as to why she didn’t just leave, she said she stayed with him for us. Well all we got was ignored and no love as she had no idea how to show affection and consequently none of us wanted it from her. I know not every situation is the same, but sometimes people just should not be together end of story.
Comment by Fair treatment — Fri 19th August 2011 @ 10:03 pm
@Fair – No one says you have to stay in a relationship for the children. You can leave. As a husband, I do not want my wife to stick around and waste my time and abuse and harrass me and alienate me from my children and destroy my family’s finances. leave. Get the hell out. A husband does not want a woman like that around him or his children. A woman who is disrespectful and obstantantly refuses to support him as he works hard to support his family (that’s you). But when you leave, you just can’t lie about domestic violence and child abuse and collect child support and alimony and a property settlement and enjoy an excessive and parasitic lifestyle at the expense of your children and their father by denying the children access to their father and holding the children hostage for ransom. Child support is child trafficking and abuse and slavery for fathers and one-third of all adult women in the US are guilty of this crime. As far as “tense/hateful/abusive/frightening” relationships, women are responsible for most domestic violence and child abuse, as documented extensively throughout the scientific literature, case law, Dept of Justice, Dept of Corrections, etc… If a relationship is abusive, the woman is almost always responsible for it because even in almost all instances of reciprocal domestic violence, the woman initiates it. If the law were applied responsibly, you (the disrespectful and abusive and violent and irrational and criminal and adultering mother/wife) would be forced to share parenting when you leave (which means you will have to get a job and work – wahhhhhh). You will not collect child support or a property settlement or alimony. If you refuse to share parenting by interfering with the father’s relationship, you will be forced to see your children only during visitation and pay child support. If you refuse to pay child support and/or make false allegations of domestic violence or child abuse against the father of your children (which a recent scientific publication reports that women are responsible for 91% of all false allegations), then you will spend considerable time in prison to make you think long and hard about your disgusting and reprehensible behavior. When you get out, you will never see your children again because you have already attempted to alienate them from the father and committed so many other serious crimes that you are unfit to parent (let alone be out of prison as the nature of your pathology prevents you from being rehabilitated – there is no cure for psychopathy). By all means, leave. Any husband that would want a woman around like most of the women out there would have to be completely out of their minds. Yes, some people just should not be together. But that is not a justification for the egregious criminal behavior of more than one-third of all adult women against their own families. If women can’t behave civilly when separated from their husbands, then they should not be allowed to see their children. Seldom is it the other way around. Most men when separated from their wives do not behave as animals the way women do. Using their children as emotional crutches and prostituting them out to a senseless and malevolent welfare system. Doesn’t get any lower.
Comment by Darryl X — Sat 20th August 2011 @ 9:44 am
Fair treatment your situation may not be the same as was in Ragnors situation and that is certainly not what it was like in mine.
For the boys there was the odd bit of fisty cuff from their father, especially after a few drinks but when I left him the boys aged 18 and 20 decided to stay living with him.
The only reason as they told me then and still tell me now is that he had a better job than me, higher paying and he was alot more generous with his money than I was.
I have a girlfriend in the same situation now, her boys side with their father as he has the biggest bank account and more money to go around and to them.
Currently I believe that the children of separated parents are offered counselling and this is something that I wanted my boys to have, but being the age they were and male they wouldn’t enter into it.
Children do change the dynamics of a relationship and often when a woman hits her 40’s she does undergo a change in her thinking. For so many years you consider yourself last, children first, husband next and then something happens, it could be the way he talks or walks or speaks to you and the kids and you find you can’t stand living with this person. Neither of you are the people that married each other all those years ago.
Mine wasn’t all bad, for putting up with the emotional and verbal abuse I got to live in a beautiful home and had lovely material possessions around me. Our boys wanted for nothing and had our love and attention but we really lived separate lives apart from what we did together as a family.
Even though I reckon I marked time for about 10 years by remaining in the marriage, I’m glad I did it as the thought of being a solo parent and having the kids full time was not a choice I wanted to experience. That would make me more bitter and twisted than having to remain in a bad marriage.
It’s all very well having the kids full time while they are little but when they turn into obnoxious, outspoken, moody and sullen teenagers that’s when you must rethink whether it was such a good idea after all to venture out of the relationship.
Both my ex’s parents, mine, my husbands parents and his ex in laws have all celebrated 50 years of marriage. I thought it was because they had more stickability than my generation, but I believe now that our system encourages the breakdown of the family unit by enabling one parent financial assistance to leave. If they had no access to the financial resourses on offer by WINZ and the IRD Child support it would be a different story.
That’s what you get when you have someone like Helen Clark in charge of our country for so many years. No children of her own, a peculiar arrangement with her husband. How can she understand or have empathy for families when she has never experienced any of this for herself?
That’s also a reason why the changes to the child support legislation won’t go through anytime soon as Peter Dunne has promised. He has not walked in the shoes of the people that frequent this web page.
Comment by Toni — Sat 20th August 2011 @ 10:09 am
Darryl X you are correct there are alot of vicious women out there who do use the children as a pawn or bargaining chip to get what they want.
It never ceases to amaze me how easy it is to drop the other parent in it, because as I have said before the current system “enables” it.
There are also ones that have just got on with life and bought the kids up without any financial input from the father. These are usually the women that do not understand what their entitlements are within the child support system.
How do we change it? Not by writing blogs on here.
Do we start a petition, march on the Beehive?
The squeaky wheel always gets the grease.
Comment by Toni — Sat 20th August 2011 @ 10:58 am
Toni, unfortunately we live in New Zealand, a country that is known internationally for its incredible levels of apathy, lack of passion, and anti-intellectualism.
The simple reality is that most New Zealand “Men’s Rights Activists” are more accurately described as “Men’s Rights Whingers,” they have forgotton that in order to be an “Activist” you actually need to be active and doing something, eg. taking action.
The men in this country are gutless, and in general need to take a serious look at themselves, reclaim their masculinity, grow back some balls, and then take action. A nation full of men with “testicles the size of basketballs,” would not tolerate the way men are treated here (or in any other Western nation), but most of them are so emasculated (and pussy whipped) they haven’t got the mental fortitude to stand up and do something about it.
I totally agree with you, we need every man in New Zealand that has been beaten down, ripped off and abused by women taking advantage of the system to march on parliament and demand changes, but in all reality, this will never happen until men reclaim their masculinity. When they do, the action will be swift, decisive and produce results, because men (when they have balls and behave like men) don’t muck around.
Comment by Phoenix — Sat 20th August 2011 @ 11:29 am
Phoenix you have hit the nail on the head and I am glad you said it because I think it and it wouldn’t have the same effect coming from a female.
My mother in law refers to the ex daughter in law as a Virago, so I guess this would then apply to many other women whose partners write on here.
It might be hard to reclaim the masculinity when the boys of today are being reared by feminists or older mums who discourage competition and encourage fair play in school and on the sports field. Everyone gets a turn to be player of the day, whether you played well or played crap! Everyone passes NCEA so our darlings don’t get their feelings hurt.
Boys love competition, they like to get physical and loud and it should be encouraged. We women don’t want a man that is pussy whipped, once that happens all respect is gone.
Women are champions at emotional and verbal abuse and I found a quote that quite possibly explains my husbands 15 year old daughters treatment of him at the moment as she refuses to return his phone calls and texts.
“Sticks and stones are hard on bones aimed with angry art. Words can sting like anything but silence breaks the heart”
The girl has learnt well from her mother.
Comment by Toni — Sat 20th August 2011 @ 12:12 pm
@Toni – It’s interesting that you write “we women don’t want a man that is pussy whipped…” but that is exactly the case and what I observe and what data concerning divorce show. Women want men whom they can manipulate and who will acquiesce to their every whim. They want a man who is under absolute control of the government and herself. I’ve never seen an example otherwise. Never. By getting a man who is pussy whipped, a woman can satisfy her addiction to power and control. It feeds her false sense of control. When a woman who finds a man who is not pussy whipped, she uses the mechanisms of government to beat him down. More later.
Comment by Darryl X — Sun 21st August 2011 @ 1:57 am
Bingo Daryl X!
and since when did one woman (Toni) speak for all of womankind?
Such daft arrogant claptrap!
Comment by Skeptik — Sun 21st August 2011 @ 2:03 am
PHOENIX…+1
Comment by AL — Sun 21st August 2011 @ 8:29 pm
P H O E N I X…because…’If you always do what you always did-you’ll always get what you always got’.
or
‘A problem well-defined is half-solved’.
or
‘Your work is to discover your work and then with all your heart to give yourself to it’
Comment by MAX — Sun 21st August 2011 @ 8:51 pm
Darryl X you appear to be one bitter man, they say hell hath no fury like a woman scorned??
In my observation of friends who are currently celebrating their 30 plus years of married bliss, the bloke began the relationship full of testosterone and running the ship from the bridge. Somewhere along the line about the time the kids came along he went from the bridge to the boiler room.
I’m not sure what it is that bought about the change but now the women were the dominant ones, testosterone and estrogen seemed to be intermingling and the menfolk had developed an attitude of complacency about them.
About the same time the young men brimming with testosterone seem quite attractive to the now somewhat neglected and dominant wives.
Hey this is merely my story and my observations of friends and acquaintances around me, but the way I see it, men become very complacent as they age and in doing so become very easy to manipulate.
Phoenix said it all earlier.
You guys seem to me to just want to vent your anger and appear to lack the intelligence to actually “walk the walk” to try and make a difference.
I have tried to give you insight into the female psyche and all you can do is respond with that rubbish. What hope is there for you if you won’t try a different approach?
Comment by Toni — Sun 21st August 2011 @ 10:47 pm
Toni,
So lets see now.
In one short posting you call one man bitter, others complacent and easy to manipulate, the Menfolk of MNZ community as a whole you call lacking in intelligence, responding with ‘rubbish’
I think your view of menfolk at MENZ is plainly ridiculous, insulting and wrong.
If you actually took the time and effort dig the teeny weeniest bit deeper into this website instead of spouting off uninformed nonsense you’d discover there are lots of guys involved with MENZ taking action.
Hells Bells. Even the front page of the website tells me that – at a glance!
Instead of reacting, of being inflammatory and alienating yourself from the MENZ community of men with redundant and insulting hyperbole about them, why don’t YOU “walk the walk”?
By that I mean Why don’t you look at the obviousness of male action on this website, listen more effectively to men and then respond with thoughtful, respectful comments?
As for your observations of aging male friends and associates around you I’d prefer to hear those menfolk there explaining IF they’ve become complacent, not get it second hand from you. I think your view of men as displayed here in comment #45 much to jaded and bitter to be trusted.
back to those menfolk friends and associates you write about – I suspect they may have simply gotten tired of battling with womenfolk and just become more acquiescent for the sake of a bit of peace, quiet and sanity.
Besides which it can become a tiresome burden to be the one in charge all the time.
Maybe after years of steering the ship, they just want a well earned rest. Again I’d only trust their word on that matter.
If your kind of ridiculous hectoring of men as demonstrated here in #45 is any measure of what your aging male friends and associates have to put up with from their womenfolk on a regular basis, then I could well understand their keenness to disengage and disappear to ‘the boiler room’.
Comment by Skeptik — Sun 21st August 2011 @ 11:29 pm
@Toni – I am not bitter. You have made the mistake that almost all women (if not all) make: you have portrayed the practical dilemmas imposed upon myself and most men in a post feminist dystopian police state for which none of us are remotely responsible as an emotional problem of our own for which we are responsible (dismissing the practical implications of our circumstances for which we are not responsible). Our problems in these circumstances are not emotional. This strategy or tactic is solipsism. You have projected your feelings upon me and held me hostage with them instead of taking responsibility for the practical implications for me of your behavior as a woman. You write “the bloke began the relationship full of testosterone and running the ship from the bridge. Somewhere along the line about the time the kids came along he went from the bridge to the boiler room.” This interpretation is completely incorrect at so many levels I do not know where to begin. First because you blame the “bloke”. In every instance with which I am familiar, the mother condemns the “bloke” to the boiler room; he does not go there on his own. Mothers routinely manipulate the father out of the lives of their children; maternal gate-keeping and parental alienation and hostile parent veto. She uses the vast legal and political and social resources at her disposal in violation of the Constitution and laws to accomplish her alienation of the father. Almost all fathers I know are great men and certainly better fathers than the mothers or the government in the worst of circumstances (let alone the best). Mothers alienate fathers because they perceive them as threats financially, emotionally and practically (even though he isn’t). The mothers traffick their children for profit. The see their children as opportunities for themselves and extensions of themselves instead as independent people. They believe that the children’s thought about their fathers are the same as the mothers (and they never are). Another very important quality of malignant narcissism is paranoia. By acting on her paranoia, the mother creates the circumstances she fears and then acts on them. All these dynamics are easily understood and well documented in the scientific literature and many other objective sources. Baically, what I have written can be abridged as: you can ignore reality but not its consequences. Your interpretation of the world around you is not reality. Only the facts as they may be measured within certain tolerances and interpreted objectively is reality. Your obsession with your subjective and very easily manipulated and manipulative feelings are not reality. My circumstances imposed upon me by you that can be measured withing certain tolerances and interpreted objectively is everyone’s reality. And at some point in time, the consequences of that reality will impact all of us. Your feelings should be irrelevant when I comes to my life. Unfortunately, your feelings have become institutionalized in law but the reality of my circumstances as they have been imposed upon me by you have been ignored. These dynamics are just the opposite of what they should be for a civilization to advance and persist.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 12:39 am
@ Toni – As an example of my last post, I present a brief description of an experience I had during my divorce. My wife falsely accused me of abusing our son. Of course, I had never abused my son in any way, shape or form. And there was absolutely no evidence, concrete or otherwise, supporting such allegations – just her false testimony. Instead, my wife had/was/still is committing adultery. She had abused our son, both physically and emotionally and verbally. She had tried to kill me multiple times (the last with a pair of butcher knives to the back). She perjured herself in court. She falsified police reports. She was engaged in an aggressive campaign of extreme parental alienation to the point where my son who had loved me began to hate me to the point where he lied about me abusing him and told me he hated me and refused to see me again. For each of these egregious crimes by my wife against me and our son there is considerable concrete physical evidence. An investigator/case-worker for Child Protective Services (female of course) when presented evidence of my wife’s crimes and despite a complete lack of evidence for my alleged crime won a conviction against me for child abuse anyway. In response to my inquiry about how anybody could convict me of child abuse without any evidence at all but exonerate my wife for all her crimes of which there was considerable concrete physical evidence, the female case-worker replied, “It does not matter what the truth is. It only matters what your wife believes.” I hope you appreciate my experience and the experience of almost all men I know who have been unilaterally divorced by their wives (approximately one-third of the entire adult male population of the US (almost foryt-million fathers of more than fifty-two-million children) and the considerable impact of that experience upon civilization and our economy and families and the children and their fathers. You can ignore reality but not its consequences.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 12:57 am
@Toni – In the US, an average order for child support exceeds the cost for raising a child by a multiple of three or four, and the mother is not obliged to pay anything. That is, she is not ordered to pay anything and since the father pays between three and four times the cost of raising the child, cost to the mother is nothing. During the past forty years in the US, approximately half of all child support obligors (97% of whom are the fathers) have been in arrears (approximately one-sixth of the entire adult male population, and that percent has increased as our economy continues to decline). In the US, men are jailed for their inability to comply with such excessive orders for child support. Although estimate of number of men jailed during the past forty years for arrears varieds between two-million to nine-million (on any given day, approximately fifty-thousand fathers are in jail or prison), that the number is so great, number of millions becomes irrelevant. Approximately one-half of all fathers unilaterally divorced (approximately one-sixth of the entire adult male population or about eighteen-million fathers) never sees their children again (approximately one-half of all children or about twenty-six-million children) after the mother snatches them. These children grow up without their fathers (and step-fathers, the government and mothers are very poor substitute fathers at best). Cost for jailing men and for collecting child support and for suspending passports and for suspending driver licenses and for all these men unable to contribute their labor and all the other costs associated with the malignant narcissism of women and mothers is the single most important reason, which the mainstream media refuses to report, for rapid decline of our economy and economy of the developed world. Eventually, women will be unable to escape the consequences of this reality despite their solipsism. I suspect those consequences that they are unable to escape will happen sooner or later. I am not bitter, but whether or not I am bitter is irrelevant, as the consequences of this reality will define the life of myself and everyone else in a negative way far greater than any bitterness.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 1:23 am
@Toni – One last point. Approximately twenty-six-million children never see their fathers ever again after the mother snatches them and divorces the fathers and leave him for another man. But almost all the remaining twenty-six million children who do “see” their father (the other half of the approximately fifty-two-million children victimized by unilateral divorce) are only allowed to “see” their fathers two to four days a month at the complete discretion of the mother, who seldom cooperates. So, basically, even most of the fathers of those children are essentially ejected from the lives of their children. Two to four days a month is irrelevant. And contrary to propaganda and false flags and lies by feminists, almost none of these fathers is guilty of domestic violence and/or child abuse, and there is almost never any legitimate reason for the mother to divorce the father of their children. It is usually for profit or revenge or to facilitate adultery or two or all of the above. Concerning domestic violence and child abuse, there are myriad scientific publications documenting their incidence, and mothers are responsible for most domestic violence and child abuse. Mothers are responsible for all paternity fraud, and approximately 10% of all chidren in the US are victims of paternity fraud, which is child abuse too – in the US, not being the father of a child has no legal bearing on an order for him to pay child support, which means that approximately 10% of all fathers who pay child support are paying for children who are not even theirs). Divorcing the father of their children satisfies the mother’s addiction to power and control. That’s all. The behavior of the mother is nothing more than destruction for the sake of destruction with no rational basis.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 1:52 am
@Toni – I did not scorn my wife. She scorned me and then projected upon me her scorn. Evidence of her crimes is compelling and evidence of my innocence is more compelling. It’s called chronic victimhood. All women manipulate others and themselves with the public spectacle of their chronic victimhood. Their victimhood, despite no evidence for and usually evidence to the contrary, is enabled when others rush to their defense. Women have no sense of right and wrong and therefore rely upon the public to decide about their victimhood. Erring on the side of caution given the immediacy and severity of their allegations, the public almost always errs on the side of caution. Relying upon the public to be her conscience reflects a lack of internal locus. Opportunism, pathological lying, chronic victimhood, lack of internal locus, and projection are typical of psychopathy, a continuum on which the average woman occupies a higher place than an average man. For instance, you referred to me as bitter and evidenced by post even though there is absolutely no evidence of any bitterness in my post. Your response was automatic (a verbatim response of so many women who have posted on this site and others – as if “bitter” was some response advised in a handbook consulted by all women to elicit sympathy from others) without sense or reason because in your laziness, you have become used to falsely accusing others to elicit sympathy for yourself and manipulate others with the public spectacle of your chronic victimhood. You have no ability to evaluate your own behavior to see if it makes any sense or to understand how wrong it is and how much it hurts others. You don’t care. You’re a psychopath. Instead you rely upon others to do it for you. And if they don’t, you get angry like a little three year old child and throw a tantrum. Historically, psychopaths were rare because they could not take care of themselves and relied upon others to take care of them. Because of the criminal methods they used to manipulate others to take care of them, they were culled from the population quickly. Today, unfortunately, psychopaths are common because political expedience gives them a voice and protection in our very short-sighted culture. Also unfortunate is that as proportion of psychopaths in a population grows and their tax on civilization grows, civilization declines because it cannot support their laziness and lack of contributions. They are a tremendous liability to any form of social organizing.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 4:40 am
Toni,
you don’t seem to know just how passe you’re being.
Here’s a bit of manly feedback.
“You’re bitter” = typical feminist Code Red crap.
Charge of Invirility = Typical feminist Code Lavender crap.
http://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/shaming-tactics/
Comment by Skeptik — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 4:53 am
OMG, Skeptik. There really IS a handbook. Who knew? LOL
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 5:22 am
Darryl x I get the sense of where you are coming from but you write too much and your words lost their impact.
You quote alot of data from the US, are things as bad here?
You know I write on here and read your comments instead of my husband who is the one that is doing battle with the ex. Why? Because it’s not in his nature to fight and argue, it’s in his nature to comply with whatever he is told he should do.
I see the injustice of the system and I know what cows some women can be.
Many years ago I helped a very good friend of mine move his belongings out of the family home that the wife wanted sold. She told him that she was taking the kids and renting a house and he wasn’t coming with them. In fact we found out later that she had bought the house with the bloke she was having an affair with.
Right while he was down as far as he could get she told him that he may as well drive his car off the Takapuna boat ramp as the kids didn’t need him.
I am aware that these type of woman exist in our society and that the child support and family law allow this type of behaviour to carry on.
But how do you stop it? How do you bring about the changes?
Yes you are correct my male friends have probaly retired to the boiler room for some peace and quiet, and no doubt are quite happy to let my girlfriends work the bridge.
My married friends are completely unaware of what happens in these circumstances and are completely ignorant of what services would be available to them should they find themselves on their own with the kids. They don’t even know what working for families tax credits are.
But how do you promote the awareness because unless it affects you personally or a member of your family this whole debacle goes unaware?
Comment by Toni — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 11:11 am
@Toni – things are different in the US than in NZ. I wouldn’t describe them as worse or better. A feminist regime took over the US between forty and forty-five years ago and has held the population in its oppressive and tyrannical grip ever since. There has been considerable opposition to this regime and it has been growing. Legal, political and social solutions have been prescribed and tried many times but without success. But feminism continues to tax the economy and culture more and more and opposition to it continues to grow more and more as more and more people become are condemned to more and more desparate circumstances and more and more children grow up believing their adultering stealing lying step-dads are an appropriate model for manhood (they aren’t). A feminist regime took over NZ approximately twenty years ago. NZ neither jails fathers in arrears for child support nor does it suspend or revoke passports like the US does. Although the feminist regime has not held NZ in its iron grip as long as it has the US, NZ is a much smaller and more isolated population and the feminist regime grew much more quickly and took over all the functions of society much faster than in the US. Unlike in the US, NZ does not appear to have much opposition to the feminists. Perhaps that is because they took over much more quickly and because the population was much smaller and more isolated. Also, perhaps it is because extreme punishments like prison for civil violations, including arrears (although there is prison for false allegations of domestic violence and child abuse and other nonsense), and suspension of passports do not exist (yet). So, there may be more apathy to the take-over by feminists in NZ than in the US. That is not to suggest that the consequences of feminism in NZ are not as bad as in the US, just more insidious. There is no political, legal or social solution to the problem of feminsm, as those have already been tried to exremes in the US (but actually might work better in a smaller and more isolatee country like NZ – but I do not think so). My concern is that in NZ, punishments like prison for arrears and suspension of passports will happen eventually. At least that is what has happened throughout history with similar oppressive regimes. I like to bring to the attention of people in other countries the circumstances of such a large population of men in the US as an example of what can happen if a country like NZ is not careful. Our economies are very fragile right now. Further imposition by feminists in the US and NZ will result in accelerated economic collapse, famine, plague, violence and war. It may already be to late. The solution? Women simply have to behave like civilized human beings. There is no other solution. they need to have the rule of law imposed upon them to teach them a lesson that there are consequences to their actions. If the rule of law does not do that, then they will be taught that lesson when the economy collapses and famine and plague and violence and war teach them that lesson. With the rule of law, for which only men are demonstrated to administer with any responsibility and compassion, women will continue to enjoy the highest standard of living but they will not be allowed to continue living like pigs at a trough. When men can no longer administer the rule of law because they have been encumbered by famine and plage and violence and war, women (feminists or not) will suffer much more unpleasant fates from which men will not (and likely cannot) rescue them. The circumstance imposed upon men today by feminists (women and their male enablers) are the stuff of revolutions throughout history. Truth is the final arbiter of our fate. The Truth always wins. Women may either abrogate the power back to the men from whom they have usurped it or they can suffer at the hands of their own malignant narcissism and its consequences. As a man, I really don’t care what women do. It is their decision. I put my faith in God and The Truth and let Him guide me. In the US, I have advised various fathers rights organizations, who seem to believe that they need to have the support of women for their efforts, to abandon women and leave them to the devices (The Nat’l Organization for Women, for instance) and invite any women to help us as men. But I make it clear that these fathers rights organizations are not supposed to be helping women hurt by feminists. They are for helping men and if women want to help and support men, that is a great gesture on the part of women. But the women need to go seek support from The Nat’l Organization for Women. They should not be taxing fathers rights groups. They are simply too much of a liability. And they are on their own. More and more I find men willing to go their own way and abandon women to their own devices. The fact is that men can survive without women, but women can’t survive without men. And the future of women will be shaped by that fact. Although I am a strong proponent of revolution (as time is of the essence for many children forcibly separated from their fathers) but I am also a realist and believe that it may never happen and know that even without a revolution to put feminists in their place, they will be condemned there anyway by their own hand.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 1:51 pm
In my middle daughters last year at school 7th form a complaint was made to IRD which was upheld and back dated with mere male me owing my ex $24000.I cant even get this years tax return for my partner and four year old daughter.THIS WOMEN HAS NEVER WORKED A DAY IN HER LIFE. AND HAS CONVIENTLY forgotten the time money and effort I put into bringing up our two awesome daughters whom may I say are doing really well in life .We are now indebited to this women and her new family for the rest of our lives as well as being hasseled by the IRD twitts who only go to work because its a job.Its all a big farce and my dealings with IRD have been nothing buta nightmare.My daughters are now 23 and 20.I say its time to take action because writing letters to Peter Dunne is a waste of time. Brent
Comment by Brent Cole — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 4:12 pm
I know that feeling! That’s what continues to happen to my husband. They inflate his income even though he furnishes a tax return, attends admin reviews and shows proof that he has no assets or additional income.
In the commercial sector if someone owes you money you have to supply a proof of that debt. The IRD are unable to when the income is assessed. Why should they operate any differently to the commercial sector?
They are a law unto themselves. Peter Dunne told me that my husband could do a “square up” or reconcilation at the end of the year on his income. The review officer told me no, not on assessed income only estimated income? When I was last at school 35 years ago estimate and assess meant the same. Actual and estimate/assess are not the same. One is fact one is fiction!
As with most law it’s all down to interpretation. The IRD child support staff interpret the legislation for the benefit of the custodial parent and don’t give a rats about the ncp or the children.
Comment by Toni — Mon 22nd August 2011 @ 4:51 pm
Toni, not sure if your still willing to fight the fight, but it would appear the ONLY way to get action on many of the issues we are all effected by here, is to take a joint action against those who are currently bullying, and persecuting good families, fathers and parents in general.
Everyones here seems to experience problems with a common theme.
1. The family court system allows harm to be caused to children, by allowing bad behavior to flourish unabated, and allows, every other tactic which will cause distress to the effected parent, and to ensure that the effected parent, usually the father, has little or no quality time with his child.
2. “Conflict” between parents as routinely presented by the family court, is actually not conflict at all, it is a deliberate act by one parent to stop the other from seeing the child, or from ever having quality time with the child – One parent deliberately getting away with bad behavior which goes unpunished in the family court, which is deliberately harming the effected parent ( usually the father ) and the children. And no one in the family court want to see the “CONFLICT” stop because this “BUSINESS” would end overnight.
3. The representatives of the family court are more concerned with ensuring Court “PROCESS” is performed correctly, that in actually dealing with the issues directly effecting parents. Protect court process at all cost, but allow children to be harmed, and many parents to be deliberately destroyed. Care of children Act, seems to have been replaced by the legal profession as the “Protect DUE PROCESS and my great business ACT”
4. As a father, this system demands, that you must pay – a lot of money to see your own kid – that is the bottom line – pay dearly with your health and your wage packet if you want to see what should be rightfully yours – time with your own child.
5. To add insult to you, after you finally get a Parenting Order – usually after going through every delay tactic the family court can come up with to ensure they suck every last $$ out of you, you will be horrified to learn, that it is NOT ENFORCEABLE. Thats right folks, if your child is withheld from you, against your courted ordered rights to see the child, try getting help to enforce the court order in your favor. CYFS will not help, you, the Police will not ( they want to help but are told by the family court they cannot). NO the system expects you to accept that forever lost time with your child, and head back to court to get the Family court to enforce its own court order – seek a warrant for time which has now been lost to history – thats of course if they will grant you one at all. And you have to PAY – in time and money, filing more paper work. Its interesting that normal court orders in the criminal court, if breached are actioned by the justice department or the police – not in the family court if a mother breaches one. Thats acceptable and hard luck if our a father who has again missed time with your child.
6. And to add further insult – IRD managing child support payments is the most oppressive, discriminatory process I have ever been involved with, and I see we all have a story to tell about this. Interestingly, complaints to our very own Human Rights department – and I am told they get many, are rejected time and time again. So the very institution set up to look into discrimination and our obligations under the HUman rights act conventions, will not do anything to help us. This is so very wrong, and it needs to change. BY refusing the take complaints are they themselves also guilty of human rights breaches? I think so.
I can only suggest that everyone here, and anyone else reading this blog, because I know there are many more in these circumstances, good parents, ,good families, who as INDIVIDUALS are being bullied,, and oppressed, and treated so very unfairly, because ALONE you will notice we are all easy targets. This has to become a collective challenge to the Govt and to the system in order that this is brought to a halt.
Speaking to a minion like DUNN, who got the horrible Portfolio, because no ruling govt minister wants it, is not the man to rock the boat and help make change – hes lucky just to be in govt.
Taking our voices to parliament in marches and other forms of protest are NOT GOING TO CHANGE THIS SYSTEM.
Complaining to Ombudsmen, or any other govt department is not going to change the current system.
NO the only way we are going to make our feelings heard is to band together, with a common objective, and that is to file a formal action against the government and its relevant departments, filing on the basis, that there are breaches of Human Rights at the most basic level, discrimination and oppression of fathers (and I am sure some mothers) and, non custodial parents as is the case with my wife and new family, in the family court level and in child support collection methods, and many are suffering because of this horrible system.
The most basic of human rights are being breached in parents not being allowed peaceful quality time with there very own children. Being forced to pay huge sums of money in the family court circus, just to see your very own kids is intolerable in anyones language
If our very own Human Rights commission refuses to take the collective complaint, then I believe its possible to file directly with the high court and table this matter. Include the Human rights office as a party to the discrimination by there direct refusal to acknowledge the many complaints which they seemingly reject out of hand, protecting the very system which is causing the problem.
There is also I believe an opportunity to take the government to task as an accessory – a party to child abuse, by allowing this current system to flourish. In my own case, my child has been psychologically harmed because of the years of bad behavior which the system knew about, but allowed to continue, by the mother, and the Family court system and its officers did NOTHING about it. And still do nothing to help prevent it.
So we have child abuse, which would not have happened had the system acted -Care of children act – is its very heading, and yet it is not looking after the kids as a priority.
I am sure there are many other cases like mine which need to be collectively tabled. The degree of discrimination and currently accepted abuse of children will be I believe – alarming once tabled before a court willing to hear about it. And there must be a cost, that is the only way people change – it must cost them.
That is the ONLY way we are going to get change – if there is a cost and a claim made, only then will governments and departments change for the better. Only then will we see legislation change for the better.
Only then will you see IRD policy and procedure change – people are not currently accountable in IRD, they are directly discriminatory, they will never respond in writing to any issues you ask direct questions of – because they know, by writing a response will make them complicit in the offending they are a party to. There can be no disputing the fact that there is DISCRIMINATION by this department of good parents and families.
So HOW do we all band together and collate these stories as evidence? Perhaps A new web site needs to be created, where we can load our collective stories summarizing your own person issues – focused on the DISCRIMINATION and PREVENTABLE CHILD ABUSE, you have all experienced, which is currently tolerated and accepted by the family court system and the Child Support collection regime?
Collated in sufficient volume to show there IS A BIG PROBLEM here and it needs fixing.
There are far too many stories, on here, amongst friends and families and presented in so many other blogs that this has to be dealt with together.
INdividually we are all treated very poorly and we seem to be categorized as some loony fringe who with a lot of anger and resentment. Only once you have been through this horrible system do realize just how bad it really is, how unfair, discriminatory, biased, one sided, bullying it really is. And in a little country like New Zealand – we surely must be able to change things for the better – especially for the children.
Comment by hornet — Sat 10th March 2012 @ 3:43 pm
@hornet.
So which justice system do you think ‘we’ have a chance of actually beating the NZ government and it’s failed justice system?
The NZ one? Do you really believe that the courts in NZ would actually rules against the government? There is no privy council to appeal to now so no true independence in out court syste. There is no such thing as justice in NZ.
So, do you take it up with the UN? The most feminist of organizations? I doubt they’d be interested.
I agree with all of your points but I’ve accepted that there is no justice in NZ especially for fathers.
Comment by JS — Sun 11th March 2012 @ 9:47 pm