State discrimination against fathers

Gloomtastic!

As primary carer to our three children, I have just tried to register for Child Benefit for our latest addition only to be told that, due to legislation in place for decades, payments can only be paid to the mother.

What possible defense would the State have for keeping this legislation on the books? Would this legislation be tied to the 'woman in the home' part of the Constitution? If so, would you need a Referendum to change it?

If it is not tied to the Constitution, how would I go about changing it? Where would I find a legal firm willing, and able, to join me in my action and would they do it on a no win, no fee basis?

screamer

Yes I've heard of this before. Someone I know their current GF had to apply for it for the kids that they had with previous partner.
I think it's pretty old and archaic and I've heard people say it was paid that way so that women would have some money of their own in case they were married to a man who spent all his money on himself drinking or gambling and have her nothing. The thinking being shed have money for food for the children. Now I know it's just what I've heard perhaps not true and for sure there are women out there who spend it all on themselves too. Give the citizens information a call.

Dravokivich

I'm going to be submitting for it pretty soon myself. I won't take such feedback so lightly. If you are the legal custodian with Primary Care and Control, there "should" be no reason for them to deny you payment of it.

haveringchick

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

As primary carer to our three children, I have just tried to register for Child Benefit for our latest addition only to be told that, due to legislation in place for decades, payments can only be paid to the mother.

What possible defense would the State have for keeping this legislation on the books? Would this legislation be tied to the 'woman in the home' part of the Constitution? If so, would you need a Referendum to change it?

If it is not tied to the Constitution, how would I go about changing it? Where would I find a legal firm willing, and able, to join me in my action and would they do it on a no win, no fee basis?

This is not true. You have either misunderstood what you have been told by the department or you are deliberately misconstruing the information for some reason
CB is paid to the father of the children if the mother of the children is not living with the family, for whatever reason.
You complete an application form and submit it. A letter explaining the circumstances of the absence of the mother is helpful but not necessary
If the mother of the children is alive and her whereabouts are known to the applicant, then her address should be supplied so that in the interests of natural justice the Dept can contact her to give her the opportunity to contest the allegation that she is not living with her children
In any case, CB will forward the application to a local SW inspector who will make a home visit to establish the facts
Of course if the mother has died, a death certificate would eliminate the need for the inspector.
By all means engage a solicitor to do this for you if you feel it is too complicated

haveringchick

Dravokivich wrote: »

I'm going to be submitting for it pretty soon myself. I won't take such feedback so lightly. If you are the legal custodian with Primary Care and Control, there "should" be no reason for them to deny you payment of it.

If you read my post above you will see it is entirely possible for a father to secure CB. Many do, everyday

Carawaystick

haveringchick wrote: »

This is not true. You have either misunderstood what you have been told by the department or you are deliberately misconstruing the information for some reason

Or was deliberately misled by the department
Or the Dept person he spoke to told him incorrect information.

haveringchick

Carawaystick wrote: »

Or was deliberately misled by the department
Or the Dept person he spoke to told him incorrect information.

Not possible, calls are recorded now for just this very kind of allegation.

One eyed Jack

haveringchick wrote: »

This is not true. You have either misunderstood what you have been told by the department or you are deliberately misconstruing the information for some reason
CB is paid to the father of the children if the mother of the children is not living with the family, for whatever reason.
You complete an application form and submit it. A letter explaining the circumstances of the absence of the mother is helpful but not necessary
If the mother of the children is alive and her whereabouts are known to the applicant, then her address should be supplied so that in the interests of natural justice the Dept can contact her to give her the opportunity to contest the allegation that she is not living with her children
In any case, CB will forward the application to a local SW inspector who will make a home visit to establish the facts
Of course if the mother has died, a death certificate would eliminate the need for the inspector.
By all means engage a solicitor to do this for you if you feel it is too complicated

As I read their post, it appears that the OP is a stay-at-home father, and the children's mother is present in the family home. If the mother of the children is living in the family home, can the father apply for CB in those circumstances?

Gatling

His partner is getting the payment either way so it's hardly the case he's been denied it at all

haveringchick

One eyed Jack wrote: »

As I read their post, it appears that the OP is a stay-at-home father, and the children's mother is present in the family home. If the mother of the children is living in the family home, can the father apply for CB in those circumstances?

No. Why should the mother give up her payment? If relations are cordial between them and they are coparenting the children peacefully, then she can just give him the CB every month, if that is the arrangement that suits both of them
If she doesn't agree then he shouldn't be able to just remove it from her against her will, do you not agree?

Gloomtastic!

haveringchick wrote: »

This is not true. You have either misunderstood what you have been told by the department or you are deliberately misconstruing the information for some reason
CB is paid to the father of the children if the mother of the children is not living with the family, for whatever reason.
You complete an application form and submit it. A letter explaining the circumstances of the absence of the mother is helpful but not necessary
If the mother of the children is alive and her whereabouts are known to the applicant, then her address should be supplied so that in the interests of natural justice the Dept can contact her to give her the opportunity to contest the allegation that she is not living with her children
In any case, CB will forward the application to a local SW inspector who will make a home visit to establish the facts
Of course if the mother has died, a death certificate would eliminate the need for the inspector.
By all means engage a solicitor to do this for you if you feel it is too complicated

As others have said, I live with the chuildrens' mother, my wife, and she currently receives CB for our first two. For No. 3 as I have been a stay-at-home dad for 12+ years, I thought I'd try to apply for the benefit but was told, no it can't be paid to me.

So, I want to go about changing the legislation so that other fathers don't have this issue. How do I do it?

techdiver

haveringchick wrote: »

No

So there is discrimination then?

GerardKeating

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

As others have said, I live with the chuildrens' mother, my wife, and she currently receives CB for our first two. For No. 3 as I have been a stay-at-home dad for 12+ years, I thought I'd try to apply for the benefit but was told, no it can't be paid to me.

So, I want to go about changing the legislation so that other fathers don't have this issue. How do I do it?

You would need to get two things changed, firstly getting it paid to the Father, while the mother is living with them.

And getting the claim split in two, since all siblings are normally paid together, Is the still a lower rate for the 3rd child?

Gloomtastic!

GerardKeating wrote: »

You would need to get two things changed, firstly getting it paid to the Father, while the mother is living with them.

And getting the claim split in two, since all siblings are normally paid together, Is the still a lower rate for the 3rd child?

But how do I go about changing legislation through discrimination grounds?

Stealthfins

Actually I was only talking to a single dad lately about the way fine Gael decided to take away the tax free allowance from single father's.

Nothing to do with this discussion,but I think it's also discriminatory...

gizmo555

haveringchick wrote: »

No. Why should the mother give up her payment?

It's not "her" payment - the clue is in the name, you know, "Child Benefit". Not "Mothers Benefit" . . .

Sunny Dayz

If your wife is getting child benefit for the other two children paid directly into the bank, then can't you just get her to change the bank details to your bank account?

Gloomtastic!

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

If your wife is getting child benefit for the other two children paid directly into the bank, then can't you just get her to change the bank details to your bank account?

I think it would be easier to change legislation.....:rolleyes:

gizmo555

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

So, I want to go about changing the legislation so that other fathers don't have this issue. How do I do it?

You could consider taking a complaint to one or more of:

• The Ombudsman
• The Ombudsman for Children
• The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission

One eyed Jack

haveringchick wrote: »

No. Why should the mother give up her payment? If relations are cordial between them and they are coparenting the children peacefully, then she can just give him the CB every month, if that is the arrangement that suits both of them
If she doesn't agree then he shouldn't be able to just remove it from her against her will, do you not agree?

I do agree, but I don't think that's the situation for the OP. I think what they're describing is that he and his wife have agreed that he would claim CB for the third child, and he cannot, under current legislation.

I think the OP is trying to highlight the gender discrimination in legislation regarding CB is all. I don't think they have any practical concerns as such.

runawaybishop

haveringchick wrote: »

No. Why should the mother give up her payment? If relations are cordial between them and they are coparenting the children peacefully, then she can just give him the CB every month, if that is the arrangement that suits both of them
If she doesn't agree then he shouldn't be able to just remove it from her against her will, do you not agree?

No, its not 'her' payment. This is flagrant discrimination.

haveringchick

The vast majority of school going children in this country who have a mother, live with that mother, as is the case with the OP
There are a lot of single parent families in the country and in the vast majority of these families the single parent is the mother
Do you agree so far?
Say it's possible for the father of the children to qualify for CB
So mam and dad split, he leaves and goes to live elsewhere, having access weekends etc
But he's got the CB and he says he needs it . What then?
Or mother leaves with the children to live somewhere else, dad has the CB, he says he needs it and he's not giving it to he?

haveringchick

runawaybishop wrote: »

No, its not 'her' payment. This is flagrant discrimination.

The VERY FIRST sentence of this article tells you who the payment is made to

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/social_welfare_payments_to_families_and_children/child_benefit.html

haveringchick

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

If your wife is getting child benefit for the other two children paid directly into the bank, then can't you just get her to change the bank details to your bank account?

This arrangement would mean that the OP was not feeling outraged about how discriminated against he felt, that would not do at all

haveringchick

gizmo555 wrote: »

It's not "her" payment - the clue is in the name, you know, "Child Benefit". Not "Mothers Benefit" . . .

Is the payment given to the child then?

runawaybishop

haveringchick wrote: »

The VERY FIRST sentence of this article tells you who the payment is made to

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/social_welfare_payments_to_families_and_children/child_benefit.html

Nope. It cannot be paid to the father if both parents live together. That's discrimination, plain and simple.

Gloomtastic!

haveringchick wrote: »

The VERY FIRST sentence of this article tells you who the payment is made to

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/social_welfare_payments_to_families_and_children/child_benefit.html

But according the CB Office the payment must go to the mother. So Citizens Information should state that.

haveringchick

runawaybishop wrote: »

Nope. It cannot be paid to the father if both parents live together. That's discrimination, plain and simple.

But it will be paid to the father if the mother lives separately to her children
The OP stated that CB can't be paid to fathers
That's not true

runawaybishop

haveringchick wrote: »

But it will be paid to the father if the mother lives separately to her children
The OP stated that CB can't be paid to fathers
That's not true

No, that's not what the op says.

The payment can only be made to the father if both parents live apart, despite who the primary carer is. The father is being discriminated against because of his gender.

Cakerbaker

My sister in law was told they could choose what parent applied for it. Maybe the issue is different payments going to different parents in the one household for different children? Maybe the system is set up in such a way that the payments must go to one parent in a household?

fiachr_a

WHO IS ENTITLED TO CHILD BENEFIT

Child Living Full-Time With Mother/Step-Mother
Child Benefit is paid to the mother (or step-mother).
Child Living Full-Time With Father/Step-Father Only
Child Benefit is paid to the father (or step-father).
Child Not Residing Full-Time With Either Parent

1. Parents residing in separate households
   Child Benefit is payable to the parent with whom the child resides the majority of the time. If the child resides 50% of the time with each parent, the mother is paid.
2. Parents Dead/Children Abandoned/Child Fostered
   Child Benefit is payable to the woman who has care and charge of the child in the household in which the child lives (or the head of the household where there is no such woman in the household).
3. children In Institutions
   Where a child is placed in an Institution on a voluntary basis, Child Benefit is payable to the person who would normally get the benefit - provided that person is making adequate contributions towards the cost of the child's maintenance in the institution.
   Where the child is placed in an Institution through a Court Order, Child Benefit is only payable if the child returns home on a regular basis.

https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Child-Benefit.aspx

gizmo555

haveringchick wrote: »

Is the payment given to the child then?

As the site you linked to states, it is paid to the parents. It is for the support of children, not their mothers. However, as we know in practice, if the parents live together with the children it will not be paid to the father without the mother's consent, nor can the father prevent it being paid to the mother by withholding his consent. This is blatant, gender-based discrimination.

(By the way, now that we have same sex marriage, which mother gets the payment where there are two?)

banie01

I'm male and I receive Child Benefit payment for my son.
Granted my wife is deceased but I had no issue transferring the payment to me.

Any parents in a similar situation should also take a look at http://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Homemakers-Scheme.aspx for information on benefits relating to PRSI for time out of the work force too.

Gloomtastic!

gizmo555 wrote: »

You could consider taking a complaint to one or more of:

• The Ombudsman
• The Ombudsman for Children
• The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission

Not sure whether anything would happen if I talked to any of these organisations, Glorified quangos IMHO.

Going to talk to a Court Solicitor friend of mine. See what he thinks.

gizmo555

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Not sure whether anything would happen if I talked to any of these organisations, Glorified quangos IMHO.

You could be right. The big advantage though, compared to going legal, is you don't have to pay to make a complaint. Could take a lot of Child Benefit to bring a case to the High Court . . .

heroics

So haveringchick. If it was the other way around and a couple were married and only the father could get the allowance unless they were separated and the children living with the mother would you see that as discrimination? Or is it just because as you said earlier it is "her"payment that you think there is nothing wrong?

haveringchick

Cakerbaker wrote: »

My sister in law was told they could choose what parent applied for it. Maybe the issue is different payments going to different parents in the one household for different children? Maybe the system is set up in such a way that the payments must go to one parent in a household?

Your sister in law is mistaken

Carawaystick

haveringchick wrote: »

Not possible, calls are recorded now for just this very kind of allegation.

I'm unsure how recording a call can stop incorrect information being imparted.

irishgrover

haveringchick wrote: »

But it will be paid to the father if the mother lives separately to her children
The OP stated that CB can't be paid to fathers
That's not true

I think (and I could be wrong) that you are missing the point.....
All other things being equal (eg both parents at home) the man has no rights to, or ability to engage with the department with regards to CB. If the mother is in the home, then the Dept will ignore the man, be that for application or administrative purposes. That is, if a mother exists in the home, then the father has not authority, say or rights with regards to CB.

henryd65

I am a father of 2 children. I live with my wife. I get paid the CB.
However, for this to happen, my wife had to instruct the CB office in relation to this.
I do not have any rights in this matter without my wife's approval, which I agree is discrimination.

My favorite legal discrimination against fathers relates to adoptive leave, which the adopting mother only can avail of.

irishgrover

henryd65 wrote: »

I am a father of 2 children. I live with my wife. I get paid the CB.
However, for this to happen, my wife had to instruct the CB office in relation to this.
I do not have any rights in this matter without my wife's approval, which I agree is discrimination.

My favorite legal discrimination against fathers relates to adoptive leave, which the adopting mother only can avail of.

apologies, then I stand corrected....a few years ago our CB was stopped, my wife was out of the country on business and the dept would not even talk to me about it....

haveringchick

heroics wrote: »

So haveringchick. If it was the other way around and a couple were married and only the father could get the allowance unless they were separated and the children living with the mother would you see that as discrimination? Or is it just because as you said earlier it is "her"payment that you think there is nothing wrong?

But that would never be the rule, and its not the rule, for very good reason.
in the vast, vast majority of single parent households, the single parent is the mother.
it wouldn't make any sense for the payment to be made payable only to the father.
it makes perfect sense for it to be made payable, by default, to the mother.
why can you not see that?

haveringchick

irishgrover wrote: »

I think (and I could be wrong) that you are missing the point.....
All other things being equal (eg both parents at home) the man has no rights to, or ability to engage with the department with regards to CB. If the mother is in the home, then the Dept will ignore the man, be that for application or administrative purposes. That is, if a mother exists in the home, then the father has not authority, say or rights with regards to CB.

In any SW payment the Department will only engage with the applicant.
Why do you think that CB would be any different??
If I have a State Pension, and my husband rings the State Pension section, or writes to them, to discuss my pension, I wouldn't expect them to discuss it with him? would you?

gizmo555

haveringchick wrote: »

In any SW payment the Department will only engage with the applicant.
Why do you think that CB would be any different??

Why do you think it's acceptable that the Department will refuse an application for CB based purely on the gender of the applicant?

TheChizler

haveringchick wrote: »

But that would never be the rule, and its not the rule, for very good reason.
in the vast, vast majority of single parent households, the single parent is the mother.
it wouldn't make any sense for the payment to be made payable only to the father.
it makes perfect sense for it to be made payable, by default, to the mother.
why can you not see that?

Surely it makes perfect sense for it to be paid by default to the primary carer of the children, why can you not see that?

heroics

haveringchick wrote: »

But that would never be the rule, and its not the rule, for very good reason.
in the vast, vast majority of single parent households, the single parent is the mother.
it wouldn't make any sense for the payment to be made payable only to the father.
it makes perfect sense for it to be made payable, by default, to the mother.
why can you not see that?

You see as soon as I suggested that the payment by default go to the father you think this is wrong but have no problem with the default going to the mother and in some cases even though the father is the primary carer they cannot get the allowance.

Just because the majority of single parent families are mother and child that does not apply in this case as the couple are married and living together. It is discrimination that the father who is staying at home as the primary carer cannot get this allowance and it has to go to the mother who is working. I can't explain this any clearer and I don't understand how you cannot see this.

Maybe you cannot see the discrimination as you keep bringing this back to single parent families but this has nothing to do with that as in single parent families the father or mother can get the allowance.If it is a single parent situation then obviously whichever parent the child lives with should get the child allowance. See fiachr_a post above

You have not explained to me why when the parents live together the father cannot be the one to get the allowance?

heroics

haveringchick wrote: »

In any SW payment the Department will only engage with the applicant.
Why do you think that CB would be any different??
If I have a State Pension, and my husband rings the State Pension section, or writes to them, to discuss my pension, I wouldn't expect them to discuss it with him? would you?

But why can the applicant only be the mother if the mother and father are living together?
Also from all of your posts it seems that you think this is YOUR entitlement. It is not, it is an allowance for the care of the child.

Senna

Get the feeling if the words Mother and Father were swapped in every post on this thread, Haveringchick would be the first here to complain about discrimination

esforum

haveringchick wrote: »

This is not true. You have either misunderstood what you have been told by the department or you are deliberately misconstruing the information for some reason
CB is paid to the father of the children if the mother of the children is not living with the family, for whatever reason.
You complete an application form and submit it. A letter explaining the circumstances of the absence of the mother is helpful but not necessary
If the mother of the children is alive and her whereabouts are known to the applicant, then her address should be supplied so that in the interests of natural justice the Dept can contact her to give her the opportunity to contest the allegation that she is not living with her children
In any case, CB will forward the application to a local SW inspector who will make a home visit to establish the facts
Of course if the mother has died, a death certificate would eliminate the need for the inspector.
By all means engage a solicitor to do this for you if you feel it is too complicated

and yet none of this needs to be done if the application is in the mothers name.

Its also a shocking fact that where theres a stepmother the application must be in her name and not the biological fathers.

I had the same grief, its not constitutional, its part of the legislation that its prioritised as follows:
Mother of children
Stepmother
Father
Guardian

Its absolute bull****. I lodged a discrimination case with the equality authority, still awaiting the hearing but got a 100 page rebuttal that basically said its law so tough and it was to avoid duplicate claims and payments which is rubbish.

Oh and was also told that I was a male chauvinist pig for controlling my wife and not allowing her to make the application in her own name (my wife is dyslexic and English isnt her native tongue so avoids paperwork when possible) and they wanted to talk with my wife directly. As if its their ****ing business how we operate within our marraige!

OP, make a discrimination complaint, they will accept it and do all the legal work for you

gizmo555

esforum wrote: »

I had the same grief, its not constitutional

I would be curious to see if articles 41.1 and 41.2 of the constitution would be invoked in your complaint:

41.1° In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.

41.2° The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.

irishgrover

haveringchick wrote: »

In any SW payment the Department will only engage with the applicant.
Why do you think that CB would be any different??.....

but the point is that I could not and cannot be the applicant independently of my wife, whereas my wife can be and is the sole applicant, independent of me... so yes, I consider it to be odd / discriminatory....