nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

ILoveYourVibes

Less than half of custodial parents in the US recieve full child support due

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2018/cb18-tps03.html

About half (50.2 percent) of all 13.6 million custodial parents had either legal or informal child support agreements. Custodial mothers were more likely to have agreements (52.7 percent) than custodial fathers (39.6 percent).

The aggregate amount of child support due in 2015 was $33.7 billion, a decrease of $14.0 billion from 2003.

About 60 percent of the child support due in 2015 was reported as received, averaging $3,447 per year per custodial parent who was due support.

https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2018/demo/p60-262.html

Child support is calculated (in the states at least)as a percentage of the non custodial parents income. This can be varying or flat.

The situation with parents not paying is not much better in Ireland. And for a while some parents got away with not paying child support after the age of seven. https://www.thejournal.ie/child-maintenance-3750905-Dec2017/Arrears in maintenanceare common.

Though they are getting though. https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/10-days-jail-for-dad-accused-of-not-paying-enough-maintenance-826118.html Last year this judge sent a father to jail for 10 days for failing to pay child maintenance.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ILoveYourVibes

Lillyfae wrote: »

Am I missing something here? Do you expect some kind of admiration for not asking questions or requesting information about things you don't understand?

I think you misunderstand. I don't talk to other people about my financial situation EVER. I don't want to know their financial situation either. I don't ask questions.
TBH if someone told me anything financial i would tell them they are being quite unwise.

I have no idea where you are getting the admiration thing from. That's quite baffling.

ILoveYourVibes

Kimsang wrote: »

I do not have statistics for this, i doubt anyone does. I do however have circumstantial evidence.

https://www.treoir.ie/groups/father/

http://www.irishdads.ie/links/family-law-ireland

I also have anecdotal evidence from speaking to fathers challenging for custody and their solicitors.
Collaborative practice is recommended. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJeegVYlGoY

I mean, do you think every father that wants custody of their child fights for it? With all the financial costs that comes with it, not to mention the success rate being low.

Oh yes i did always think that unmarried fathers not on the birthcert was odd.

morphman

ILoveYourVibes wrote:

Sounds heartbreaking.

ILoveYourVibes wrote:

Thank you for sharing your story.

ILoveYourVibes wrote:

I take your point about taking it on a case by case basis.

Iloveyourvibes, it's just the way it goes.i could have went to court to get access but how would that effect my daughter. I constantly ask myself if I should have but I made my decision and that's it. Hopefully things might change and I have spoke to my daughter but the picture has been painted that I abandoned her and it's very hard to undo all that. I don't even know if she truly is in college and it may be something I will have to try and find out.

Kimsang

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Oh yes i did always think that unmarried fathers not on the birthcert was odd.

Apparently it means diddly squat anyway.

Unmarried fathers have all the responsibilities of being a Dad, without any of the rights.

morphman

ILoveYourVibes wrote:

Oh yes i did always think that unmarried fathers not on the birthcert was odd.

My name is on the birth cert and my daughter's surname on it is mine but she goes by her mams surname.

Sardonicat

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Do you not speak to colleagues or friends about this? I don't know how anyone with two feet on the ground can think that most people have private pensions (no offence)

I would definitely never talk about money. People are iffy about it. I am iffy about it.

Yeah you would not be the first to tell me i don't have my feet on the ground in fairness. I am not in the slightest offended.

I did honestly think most people had private pensions i was genuinely shocked.

If you're working at minimum or just above wage, are on zero hours contract, how do you think you're gonna aford to make pension contributions on top of your other survival costs? People can't afford to house themselves NOW, nevermind making provision for decades ahead.

B0jangles

Kimsang wrote: »

I do not have statistics for this, i doubt anyone does. I do however have circumstantial evidence.

https://www.treoir.ie/groups/father/

http://www.irishdads.ie/links/family-law-ireland

I also have anecdotal evidence from speaking to fathers challenging for custody and their solicitors.
Collaborative practice is recommended. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJeegVYlGoY

I mean, do you think every father that wants custody of their child fights for it? With all the financial costs that comes with it, not to mention the success rate being low.

The discussion was around child custody being awarded in the US, so these links aren't relevant to that, plus you must know how generally reliable anecdotal evidence is. (it isn't)

Is the success rate for fathers seeking custody in Ireland low? Surely there must be data for that?

edit: I wouldn't be in the least surprised to hear that some of the judiciary in Ireland is still stuck in the mindset of thinking that children automatically belong with their mother by the way, I just absolutely disagree that the answer to this is to say 'oh well' and give up without a fight - nothing changes if no-one is willing to fight for it.

Kimsang

morphman wrote: »

Iloveyourvibes, it's just the way it goes.i could have went to court to get access but how would that effect my daughter. I constantly ask myself if I should have but I made my decision and that's it. Hopefully things might change and I have spoke to my daughter but the picture has been painted that I abandoned her and it's very hard to undo all that. I don't even know if she truly is in college and it may be something I will have to try and find out.

Good luck, hope it goes well for you.

Kimsang

B0jangles wrote: »

The discussion was around child custody being awarded in the US, so these links aren't relevant to that, plus you must know how generally reliable anecdotal evidence is. (it isn't)

Is the success rate for fathers seeking custody in Ireland low? Surely there must be data for that?

I wasn't solely talking about America, but is is no much different there. If anything the law is worse here for fathers, but people here are more amicable in general.

I also would like to see the success rate for father's seeking custody in Ireland, I have searched, but to no avail.

Remember that men that don't go to court would not be included in the statistics if some sort of census could be taken.

I know it's 'only' anecdotal, but most of the stories I hear and read are similar to that of Morphman.

Kimsang

B0jangles wrote: »

The discussion was around child custody being awarded in the US, so these links aren't relevant to that, plus you must know how generally reliable anecdotal evidence is. (it isn't)

Is the success rate for fathers seeking custody in Ireland low? Surely there must be data for that?

edit: I wouldn't be in the least surprised to hear that some of the judiciary in Ireland is still stuck in the mindset of thinking that children automatically belong with their mother by the way, I just absolutely disagree that the answer to this is to say 'oh well' and give up without a fight - nothing changes if no-one is willing to fight for it.

This is a big part of the problem, the very act of 'fighting' is disruptive to a family, and not something a judge wants to see. So if a dad disagrees with the mother, to fight is generally not a good solution to get custody.

B0jangles

Kimsang wrote: »

I wasn't solely talking about America, but is is no much different there. If anything the law is worse here for fathers, but people here are more amicable in general.

I also would like to see the success rate for father's seeking custody in Ireland, I have searched, but to no avail.

Remember that men that don't go to court would not be included in the statistics if some sort of census could be taken.

I know it's 'only' anecdotal, but most of the stories I hear and read are similar to that of Morphman.

Yes, but the post I was responding to was specifically talking about US, so answering a query I made about that, with information about Ireland is not relevant.

Spreading anecdotal evidence that men seeking custody are doomed to failure is doing nothing at all to help them, it is in fact hurting them because it is telling them to give up without even trying.

Nothing changes if people give up without trying.

Here we go

No but better faster court systems with the power to deduct straight from income should be put into law go to law ith sides give there case judge decides how much e be paid and it's deducted from pay or welfare so parent doesn't have to ask for it
A as we

ILoveYourVibes

Sardonicat wrote: »

If you're working at minimum or just above wage, are on zero hours contract, how do you think you're gonna aford to make pension contributions on top of your other survival costs? People can't afford to house themselves NOW, nevermind making provision for decades ahead.

I hadn't thought about it. I will be honest.

Yes my Father always thought zero contract hrs were very unfair.

I think they are illegal now though no?

ILoveYourVibes

Here we go wrote: »

No but better faster court systems with the power to deduct straight from income should be put into law go to law ith sides give there case judge decides how much e be paid and it's deducted from pay or welfare so parent doesn't have to ask for it
A as we

Bingo.

morphman

When I initially split with my ex, the area of maintenance was a very contentious subject. It was all solved by the department of social welfare coming after me for the money as she was claiming lone parents. Until such a time when she stopped claiming it I paid the maintenance to social welfare and not her. She got a job and then I paid it to her.

Kimsang

B0jangles wrote: »

Yes, but the post I was responding to was specifically talking about US, so answering a query I made about that, with information about Ireland is not relevant.

Spreading anecdotal evidence that men seeking custody are doomed to failure is doing nothing at all to help them, it is in fact hurting them because it is telling them to give up without even trying.

Nothing changes if people give up without trying.

Apologies for that.

Plopsu

Instead of sending people to jail, just make split custody the default. Then both parents are supporting their child equally.

meeeeh

Plopsu wrote: »

Instead of sending people to jail, just make split custody the default. Then both parents are supporting their child equally.

That doesn't really work. That would mean both parents would have to live in the neighbourhood of the school, there could be issues around work and so on. One parent could be abusive or could neglect kids. 50/50 custody is noble aim but it doesn't suit most families.

Lillyfae

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I think you misunderstand. I don't talk to other people about my financial situation EVER. I don't want to know their financial situation either. I don't ask questions.
TBH if someone told me anything financial i would tell them they are being quite unwise.

I have no idea where you are getting the admiration thing from. That's quite baffling.

Grow up. Discussing pension arrangements does not equate to disclosing your wealth to people. Bolded the bit no-one is going to give you a medal for either- if you don't understand how your pension works, ask questions.

Dravokivich

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

The amount of people justifying men not paying for kids they have all had while WE all have to is baffling!

I'm a single father, and our child lives with me. Initially I had submitted for maintenance but it wasjlnt possible at the time so I dropped it. Looking at it further now 3 and a half years after finishing in the courts, I'd be very hard pressed to put it in again. It'll become too much of a tax liability for me and could close out dsp supports if/when I need them, becuase its perceived as income for me, not the child. I'd rather his mother be able use it for him instead of that headache.

Plopsu

meeeeh wrote: »

That doesn't really work. That would mean both parents would have to live in the neighbourhood of the school, there could be issues around work and so on. One parent could be abusive or could neglect kids. 50/50 custody is noble aim but it doesn't suit most families.

I think doesn't suit some families would probably be more accurate (unless you have some stats). The rest of the above is covered by the word default. Split custody wouldn't always be possible but it should be the starting point.

Dravokivich

B0jangles wrote: »

Yes, but the post I was responding to was specifically talking about US, so answering a query I made about that, with information about Ireland is not relevant.

Spreading anecdotal evidence that men seeking custody are doomed to failure is doing nothing at all to help them, it is in fact hurting them because it is telling them to give up without even trying.

Nothing changes if people give up without trying.

When I went for custody, the judge told me I should be happy with guardianship. 1 month later he signed a temp order for custody, 2 months after that it became formalised.

I'm very much in the minority if that's what the judge is going to say after reading an application.

meeeeh

Plopsu wrote: »

I think doesn't suit some families would probably be more accurate (unless you have some stats). The rest of the above is covered by the word default. Split custody wouldn't always be possible but it should be the starting point.

No I don't have stats neither I have any agenda around the issue. I'm pretty sure that it's not how I would want to live as a parent or as a child.

morphman

This is it wrote:

It's obviously your prerogative, I chose different to you, I fought for years to get meaningful access to my son. A disagreement over money meant 4 months of no access to my son, missed his first birthday too, another disagreement over money.

This is it wrote:

I swore to myself, before my son was born, that I would always do my best for him and I believe having a relationship with me, and I with him, is best for him.

This is it wrote:

After the initial 4 months of denied access I had weeks of one hour weekly visits, it was heartbreaking. Bit by bit, hour by hour, and now almost 4 years later, I have my son about 45 weekends of the year and I have him for dinner during the week most weeks.

This is it wrote:

Through all the above I never once stopped paying maintenance. As much as I know that could have hurt my ex, I know my son needed food, clothing, a roof over his head, and this was my way of contributing to that.

This is it wrote:

It's obviously your prerogative, I chose different to you, I fought for years to get meaningful access to my son. A disagreement over money meant 4 months of no access to my son, missed his first birthday too, another disagreement over money.

This is it wrote:

I swore to myself, before my son was born, that I would always do my best for him and I believe having a relationship with me, and I with him, is best for him.

This is it wrote:

After the initial 4 months of denied access I had weeks of one hour weekly visits, it was heartbreaking. Bit by bit, hour by hour, and now almost 4 years later, I have my son about 45 weekends of the year and I have him for dinner during the week most weeks.

This is it wrote:

Through all the above I never once stopped paying maintenance. As much as I know that could have hurt my ex, I know my son needed food, clothing, a roof over his head, and this was my way of contributing to that.

This is it wrote:

The family courts are a slow, arduous process, but believe me it's definitely worth it in the end.

This is it wrote:

Anyone not paying maintenance, mother or father, I believe it should be taken at source.

This is it wrote:

It's obviously your prerogative, I chose different to you, I fought for years to get meaningful access to my son. A disagreement over money meant 4 months of no access to my son, missed his first birthday too, another disagreement over money.

This is it wrote:

I swore to myself, before my son was born, that I would always do my best for him and I believe having a relationship with me, and I with him, is best for him.

This is it wrote:

After the initial 4 months of denied access I had weeks of one hour weekly visits, it was heartbreaking. Bit by bit, hour by hour, and now almost 4 years later, I have my son about 45 weekends of the year and I have him for dinner during the week most weeks.

This is it wrote:

Through all the above I never once stopped paying maintenance. As much as I know that could have hurt my ex, I know my son needed food, clothing, a roof over his head, and this was my way of contributing to that.

This is it wrote:

The family courts are a slow, arduous process, but believe me it's definitely worth it in the end.

This is it wrote:

Anyone not paying maintenance, mother or father, I believe it should be taken at source.

Fair play to you. As I said each situation is different but the fact that my ex brought my daughter at 10 years of age to court with her for the maintenance was just unreal. Sometimes the toxicity of the situation makes for hard choices, I am not trying to make excuses and I am responsible for my decision which at the time thought was best.

Plopsu

meeeeh wrote: »

No I don't have stats neither I have any agenda around the issue. I'm pretty sure that it's not how I would want to live as a parent or as a child.

No idea what your agenda comment means.

As a father with split custody, I can tell you I'm fine with it, my ex is fine with it and my kids are doing fine too. It works just fine.

B0jangles

Dravokivich wrote: »

When I went for custody, the judge told me I should be happy with guardianship. 1 month later he signed a temp order for custody, 2 months after that it became formalised.

I'm very much in the minority if that's what the judge is going to say after reading an application.

I'm genuinely delighted for you that your fight was successful - the judge absolutely should not have presumed that basic guardianship would be enough for you, and you shouldn't have had to fight against preconceptions about who is best suited to raising a child.

Every single case should be judged on its own merits and for the best outcome of the child. Unfortunately many of our judiciary are stuck in a mindset that is about 30 years out of date, (and was wrong even then)

BrokenArrows

meeeeh wrote: »

The person who has kids and is struggling doesn't have the luxury of not finding food for them unless they are highly negligent.

Obviously, but you can't draw blood from a stone. If the money isn't there to pay the mandated amount then what do you expect the person to do?

If they had the child in their custody and they had no money then the government would provide support.

meeeeh

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Obviously, but you can't draw blood from a stone. If the money isn't there to pay the mandated amount then what do you expect the person to do?

If they had the child in their custody and they had no money then the government would provide support.

Maybe they should apply to change the amount they are paying. I'm not heartless but the poorest households in Ireland are one parent families and it's not fair that the other parent can often live irresponsibly and not contribute their share.

Btw I was working in a system where traffic fines were deducted at source if they were not paid in certain time frane. You could only deduct wages up to a certain amount, not all income was taken.

Dravokivich

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Obviously, but you can't draw blood from a stone. If the money isn't there to pay the mandated amount then what do you expect the person to do?

If they had the child in their custody and they had no money then the government would provide support.

When going over maintenance the applicant needs to show the requirements and respondent needs to show means. A judge wont sign off on maintenance that the respondent cant afford.

One eyed Jack

B0jangles wrote: »

I'm genuinely delighted for you that your fight was successful - the judge absolutely should not have presumed that basic guardianship would be enough for you, and you shouldn't have had to fight against preconceptions about who is best suited to raising a child.

Every single case should be judged on its own merits and for the best outcome of the child. Unfortunately many of our judiciary are stuck in a mindset that is about 30 years out of date, (and was wrong even then)

Every single case is judged on its own merits in determining an outcome that is in the best interests of the child or children involved. When you say many of our judiciary are stuck in a mindset that is about 30 years out of date, they’re really not. It’s not even about fighting preconceptions about who is best suited to raising a child. Because decisions are made which are in the best interests of the child, it will often appear to both parents in a dispute over custody that they are being treated unfairly. They miss the point that it’s not about them, and it’s not about preconceptions about who is best suited to raising a child, or what arrangements are more convenient for the parents, or treating the parents fairly above the interests of the child or children. It’s entirely based upon deciding in the circumstances before them, based upon evidence presented by both sides in the dispute, and in some cases social workers and guardians ad litem acting in the best interests of the child or children, or even when it is determined that the child or children are in a position to advocate on their own behalf; all of this contributes to decisions regarding custody and access arrangements which are determined to be in the best interests of the child or children involved in any particular case.

It’s an inevitability that both parents will feel they were hard done by by the Courts, because decisions which were made in the best interests of the child or children don’t align with their self-interest. That statistics tell us that mothers are overwhelmingly granted primary custody doesn’t actually tell anyone anything about individual cases. Statistics also tell us that even today, mothers are the primary caregivers of their children, and because a relationship between their parents breaks down, that shouldn’t mean it should be the child or children who suffer in the pursuit of an ideological notion about being fair to the child or children’s parents.

The reason why custody cases end up in the Courts is because the parents are often more concerned with what is in their best interests rather than that of their children, and that’s why the Courts are acting as an independent arbiter in each case that comes before the Courts, simply because custody battles can often bring out the spiteful nature in some people who fail to consider what is actually in the child or children’s best interests, above their own.

I’m not entirely sure what mindset you’re referring to that’s out of date, but if people are still of that mindset, then it’s still very much a modern mindset, like the mindset that suggests the parent who is in a better financial position to be able to provide for the child should be the sole determining factor in child custody cases. That would overwhelmingly favour fathers, but because it’s not necessarily in the child or children’s best interests overall, that’s one of the reasons why it’s more common that mothers are granted primary custody of their children and fathers are obligated to maintain their children financially. If the father is of the belief that their child or children’s welfare is being neglected, then they have every opportunity to bring that to the attention of the authorities.

Instead, this kind of nonsense sentiment is all too common among men -

Feisar wrote: »

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

I’m not going to call the poster psycho, that would be almost as silly as their assertion that should they ever find themselves in a position where their relationship with their children’s mother has broken down, they would rather quit their job and go on the dole to spite the mother of their children, rather than maintain their employment and provide for their children as best they can. Not psychotic, just spiteful, and certainly doesn’t demonstrate any evidence that they are acting in the best interests of the child or children, but rather they would be acting in what they believe are their own best interests (it would even be short-sighted on their behalf, but spite makes people behave irrationally anyway).