The new law is this
If you can prove to the courts that you have been excluded from raising your child in any way or form by the custodial parent, then that custodial parent has no rights to funding from the non custodial parent.
A little bit about my history.
Not only was I excluded from having a parental say when my one daughter got a tongue piercing at fourteen, having shaved her head on the one side and pink on the other with stretchers in both ears and my other daughter with purple, then bleach white hair, with facial piercings, I had no say when they quit school at sixteen after having failed at school the year before either.
You can image how I was fuming! This would have been quite a normal reaction.
Fathers who do not get a say in bringing up their children should not be expected to pay.. It’s about honouring both parents. Period.
they have that in england
Comment by Aaron Bell — Mon 3rd February 2014 @ 4:19 pm
The suggestion has some merit.
I am horrified by the short account given above
Comment by andreas — Mon 3rd February 2014 @ 8:05 pm
Could you pleaswe contact me to explain more detail regarding the points of law used. My situation makes yours pale in comparison. I would like to take some affirmative action. [email protected]
Comment by Andrew Mackintosh — Fri 7th February 2014 @ 10:06 am
No law is used…this is what the law should be. When your child quits school at sixteen and the mother allows the child to have an eight month unemployed vacation, why should you pay child support? No say, no pay.
Comment by Mikey — Fri 7th February 2014 @ 1:03 pm
4. Yes that is how it should be. Plus there should be consequences for those not letting the other parent have a say. But no, we live in a country that says oh well, too bad if you don’t get a say, we’re not going to do anything about it and we’re going to bring in new laws soon that mean the less of a say you get, the more we’ll steal from you, oops er um… the more you’ll pay.
Comment by Scott B — Fri 7th February 2014 @ 2:49 pm
some very interetsting reading about child support laws in US..
dont think NZ will adopt..
i.e cover accountability etc
http://www.childsupportguidelines.com/articles/art200004.html
Comment by kiranjiharr — Wed 19th February 2014 @ 5:44 pm
Child Support Act – Accountability Between Parents
This post covers the reasons why it is important for the child’s welfare, that there is accountability by the “custodial” parent, to the “non-custodial” parent. Although it is important for the child’s welfare, that there be accountability to the non-custodial parent, this is carefully not done in practice, by familycaught$ or ird-cs.
(Although I have used the words custodial and non-custodial, it is important to remember that the Care of Children Act 2004 replaced those notions with a legal concept that both parents are responsible for making decisions about the care of the children. Unfortunately, Parliament passed the Care of Children Act 2004, but allowed the familycaught$ to ignore the legislation. This has caused a lot of harm for children.)
Child Support and Shared Care
This post gives a large amount of background material.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Wed 19th February 2014 @ 7:55 pm
Murray, you are correct there. Children are harmed because some custodial parents are not accountable. They are on a mission to raise “their” kids.
My twin girls are turning 18 soon, so they are free to do as they please, yet it is too late. They will have nothing to do with me.
How many examples like mine are there?
Comment by Mikey — Thu 20th February 2014 @ 9:45 pm
Mikey, way over 100,00 is my guess. Silent problem, as far as profit media goes, but nonetheless, in the long term hugely costly socially, educationally, intimate relationship wise, personal happiness and to the taxpayer too. Then count in another generation and you can guess at the cost. Leaky buildings is small potatoes by comparison.
We are our own worst enemies!
Comment by Murray Bacon — Fri 21st February 2014 @ 10:12 am