Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Should non custodial parents be sent to jail for failing to pay child support

Options
«134567

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Kristopherus
    Registered Users Posts: 11,907 ✭✭✭✭Kristopherus


    What's jain ???:D:D:D


  • Options
    #3
    _blaaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭_blaaz


    Lads are sent to jail suprisingly regularly here for non paying maintenance


    Its rarely ever reported as family courts matters are usually kept out of papers


  • Options
    #4
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    _blaaz wrote: »
    Lads are sent to jail suprisingly regularly here for non paying maintenance


    Its rarely ever reported as family courts matters are usually kept out of papers


    That many not paying to THAT extent?? Really?

    That is nuts.


  • Options
    #5
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    No, it would be easier and cheaper to just make an attachment order to their earnings.

    Deduct at source.

    It costs how much to house a prisoner per week?


  • Options
    #6
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Johnny Dogs wrote: »
    No, it would be easier and cheaper to just make an attachment order to their earnings.

    Deduct at source.

    It costs how much to house a prisoner per week?

    I was thinking that. Perhaps they don't surrender their info or go awall.

    And obv its not just men. Any non custodial parent.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    any Irish figures at all at all


  • Options
    #8
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Deleted User wrote: »
    any Irish figures at all at all

    Difficult to say
    Ireland has no state agency with responsibility for child maintenance payments.


  • Options
    #9
    machiavellianme
    Registered Users Posts: 12,411 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    Does the father get any access at all? If not, then why should they pay? I'm aware of cases where the father hasn't seen his children in 2 years (missing communions, Christmas, birthdays, everything) as the court keeps setting a new date and the mother seems to be able to spout whatever lies she likes, yet he is expected to pay every month.


  • Options
    #10
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    _blaaz wrote: »
    Lads are sent to jail suprisingly regularly here for non paying maintenance


    Its rarely ever reported as family courts matters are usually kept out of papers


    That isn't true actually in 2017 only three people were sent to jail for this.


    That is not from papers but the prison service statistics.
    The Irish Prison Service (IPS) confirmed yesterday that only three fathers were jailed for maintenance arrears last in2017 ; one in 2016 and this followed one in 2015 and five in 2014.

    One of these men was working and found 6000k his first night in prison suddenly. He also was paying no rent where he lived.

    https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/10-days-jail-for-dad-accused-of-not-paying-enough-maintenance-826118.html


  • Options
    #11
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    machiavellianme wrote: »
    Does the father get any access at all? If not, then why should they pay? I'm aware of cases where the father hasn't seen his children in 2 years (missing communions, Christmas, birthdays, everything) as the court keeps setting a new date and the mother seems to be able to spout whatever lies she likes, yet he is expected to pay every month.


    1.Firstly that is psychotic. Its like you are saying a father should only be a father for what he can GET out of his children. Children are not there to give.

    2.Of course he gets access.

    3 There are plenty of non custodial parents who don't bother to turn up blaming the custodial parent. Then when the child is older living alone they still don't bother and the truth is revealed.

    I know plenty of people who feel let down by the non custodial parent as adults who still cannot get hold of the non custodial parent even then ,whatever their gender.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Turtyturd
    Registered Users Posts: 28,394 ✭✭✭✭Turtyturd


    Send them to American prisons.


  • Options
    #13
    Loveinapril
    Registered Users Posts: 2,327 ✭✭✭Loveinapril


    machiavellianme wrote: »
    Does the father get any access at all? If not, then why should they pay?

    They are not paying maintenance to see their child, they are paying maintenance because their child exists and needs shelter, food and clothes.


  • Options
    #14
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,671 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    machiavellianme wrote: »
    Does the father get any access at all? If not, then why should they pay? I'm aware of cases where the father hasn't seen his children in 2 years (missing communions, Christmas, birthdays, everything) as the court keeps setting a new date and the mother seems to be able to spout whatever lies she likes, yet he is expected to pay every month.


    Some fathers do, some fathers don’t. Either way, access is unrelated to maintenance. Both parents are obligated to maintain their children regardless of whether or not they are granted access to their children through the courts. Custody and access issues are predicated upon what is determined by the Courts to be in the best interests of the children, not the best interests of the children’s parents.


  • Options
    #15
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Turtyturd wrote: »
    Send them to American prisons.

    Is sending them to prison really the best option though??

    I mean is it really going to help an acrimonious family environment?

    Couldn't we have some sort of attachment counseling program for non custodial parents with such emotional difficulties?

    Its obviously not just money.

    Post natal depression doesn't happen to just women and can affect the father /child bond.


  • Options
    #16
    banie01
    Registered Users Posts: 16,485 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Access and Child Support payments all too often become conflated in people's head.

    They are not and should not be seen as related.
    Access for non custodial parents and their children is important, but that access should not be used as a weapon to punish non compliance, as IMO the child suffers more.

    Without going into the vagaries of whether a non-custodial parent can't pay or just won't pay, it is important to ask if as a society we are willing to take such a regressive step?

    We have moved far beyond using Jail as a means of punishing Debtors or of coercing their payment.
    If we move towards jailing CS defaulters, we are criminalising what is at its very core a civil matter.

    We are locking up someone who likely has no or a minor criminal history. We will be placing these people on a criminal register and sending them to what basically amounts to a criminal university given the current recidivism rates.

    It is only a small step in real terms between locking someone up because they CS payments, to locking them up because they owe any other money!
    It is a dangerous and reckless step that criminalises a non custodial parent regardless of the circumstances of their non-payment and that has the potential to creep in to other areas of debt enforcement.

    TLDR: It's a bloody awful idea


  • Options
    #17
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Johnny Dogs wrote: »
    No, it would be easier and cheaper to just make an attachment order to their earnings.

    Deduct at source.

    It costs how much to house a prisoner per week?
    something like between 2 and 6k.

    Completely agree. Attatch earnings, why should the taxpayer pay twice?


  • Options
    #18
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    machiavellianme wrote: »
    Does the father get any access at all? If not, then why should they pay? I'm aware of cases where the father hasn't seen his children in 2 years (missing communions, Christmas, birthdays, everything) as the court keeps setting a new date and the mother seems to be able to spout whatever lies she likes, yet he is expected to pay every month.


    Also i have just found something that confounds your theory.


    In the UK 87% of non custodial parents see their kids regularly. But only 68% of non custodial parents pay child support.

    Unsurprisingly of non custodial parents who don't see their kids regularly only 29% pay any child support.


  • Options
    #19
    Feisar
    Registered Users Posts: 6,608 ✭✭✭Feisar


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Some fathers do, some fathers don’t. Either way, access is unrelated to maintenance. Both parents are obligated to maintain their children regardless of whether or not they are granted access to their children through the courts. Custody and access issues are predicated upon what is determined by the Courts to be in the best interests of the children, not the best interests of the children’s parents.

    A1, call me psycho however if I'm every in that boat goodbye well paid job, hello rock and roll.

    First they came for the socialists...



  • Options
    #20
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    banie01 wrote: »
    Access and Child Support payments all too often become conflated in people's head.

    They are not and should not be seen as related.
    Access for non custodial parents and their children is important, but that access should not be used as a weapon to punish non compliance, as IMO the child suffers more.



    It is only a small step in real terms between locking someone up because they CS payments, to locking them up because they owe any other money!
    It is a dangerous and reckless step that criminalises a non custodial parent regardless of the circumstances of their non-payment and that has the potential to creep in to other areas of debt enforcement.

    TLDR: It's a bloody awful idea


    Well first lets get real. Men emotionally link supporting a child with the emotional connection to them. And some men are not connected emotionally to children they don't live with.

    Perhaps that connection can be nurtured.

    I agree sending Daddy to jail for not paying child support is not best for the child imo.


  • Options
    #21
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Feisar wrote: »
    A1, call me psycho however if I'm every in that boat goodbye well paid job, hello rock and roll.
    What??


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    Us child-less are already footing the bills for child households.

    I know this is Australia, but its very similar here.


  • Options
    #23
    corner of hells
    Registered Users Posts: 8,358 ✭✭✭corner of hells


    Send the kids to jail, it would be handier all round.


  • Options
    #24
    banie01
    Registered Users Posts: 16,485 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Just to add.
    While there are many people jailed in Ireland for non payment of CS.

    AFAIK, jail in those circumstances is because of breach of a court order rather than explicit non payment.
    Similar to contempt of court, rather than non payment of CS itself being the offence.
    It's a technical fudge that allows a judge to use jail as a compliance for court ordered maintenance.
    Paying the CS purges the contempt and allows release.

    I may be mistaken on this, if I am I do apologize and would appreciate any correction.


  • Options
    #25
    Feisar
    Registered Users Posts: 6,608 ✭✭✭Feisar


    ILoveYourVibes wrote: »
    What??


    A1, CALL ME PHYCHO HOWEVER IF I'M EVER IN THAT BOAT GOODBYE WELL PAID JOB, HELLO ROCK AND ROLL.

    First they came for the socialists...



  • Options
    #26
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Kimsang wrote: »
    Us child-less are already footing the bills for child households.

    I know this is Australia, but its very similar here.


    Yes we do. Good lord THAT is shocking!

    Single working parents poverty has doubled in Ireland in the last 5 years. So I imagine its the same here.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/poverty-rate-among-working-lone-parents-doubled-in-five-years-1.3814178?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fireland%2Firish-news%2Fpoverty-rate-among-working-lone-parents-doubled-in-five-years-1.3814178

    Well now anytime single Dads who don't pay want to moan i can remind them i am paying for their kids.


  • Options
    #27
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    something like between 2 and 6k.

    Completely agree. Attatch earnings, why should the taxpayer pay twice?


    I assume its because there is currently no state body that handles this. You have to go through the courts and this is costly.


  • Options
    #28
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    corner of hells wrote: »
    Send the kids to jail, it would be handier all round.


    maxresdefault.jpg


  • Options
    #29
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    ILoveYourVibes wrote: »
    I assume its because there is currently no state body that handles this. You have to go through the courts and this is costly.
    Revenue already attaches the earnings of people and companies who are not tax compliant, including payment of the property tax. I'm pretty sure the Department of Social Protection can also deduct payments to welfare recipients, and certainly can do so on the direction of a court.

    It seems reasonably straightforward.


  • Options
    #30
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,060 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    banie01 wrote: »
    Just to add.
    While there are many people jailed in Ireland for non payment of CS.

    AFAIK, jail in those circumstances is because of breach of a court order rather than explicit non payment.
    Similar to contempt of court, rather than non payment of CS itself being the offence.
    It's a technical fudge that allows a judge to use jail as a compliance for court ordered maintenance.
    Paying the CS purges the contempt and allows release.

    I may be mistaken on this, if I am I do apologize and would appreciate any correction.
    I think you are mistaken. There isn't a separate offence of "not paying court-ordered maintenance", for which people get tried and convicted. They're simply committed for non-compliance with a court order (to pay maintenance). And according to the newspaper report linked in post #10, this happens fairly rarely. (Which is what you'd expect, since committal to prison will not often be the most effective way to enforce payment obligations, as already pointed out by others in this thread.)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    ILoveYourVibes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,176 ✭✭✭✭ILoveYourVibes


    Feisar wrote: »
    A1, CALL ME PHYCHO HOWEVER IF I'M EVER IN THAT BOAT GOODBYE WELL PAID JOB, HELLO ROCK AND ROLL.

    Yeah that is truly psycho. It didn't mean anything in lower case letters either.


Advertisement