Jail for non-compliant women
 

I read on one of the Fathers4Justice websites that they are campaigning for mini-jail terms of about 3 days for mothers who don't comply with court orders which grant access to their children for the father. Now we all know how heavily biased the family court systems are toward the mothers and in some cases this might be justified but it's time action was taken against the time-wasting women who enjoy watching the father of their kids go through an emotional hell of helplessness. I've never been in favour of taking serious action againt the mother due to the effect it could well have on the child, but such a short spell in jail of 3 days could be a good idea. Providing suitable provisions can be made to look after the child or children, I really think this could be workable.

Opinions?

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

If practical for the father, make it Friday, Saturday and Sunday and let the father look after the child for that period. Seems to me a logical solution to the problem of not having access.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

i think it would be a good idea, especially if the father was given unlimited access to the child while the mother was inside.

I reckon the 3 day sentence should be a stepping stone to a more severe punishment. If a woman is given one and then continues to deny access to the father i think some further action should be taken, as this proves she obviously has no respect for the court that made the ruling. I am not suggesting a longer sentence, or giving full custody to the father instead... infact i can't think of a suitable punishment.... but i am sure that someone can!

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

I think it would be a very good idea and has been said make it at a time where the father can look after the children.

It's about time the scales were tipped back to respect the needs of the children to have contact with their father rather than the selfish behaviour of some mothers following the break up of a marriage/relationship. :)

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

NICE ONE RUSS. As a single parent who had his son taken at 9 months old by his mother I agree 100%. Now there are going to be people out there who may be pro women but I can tell you know you don't have a clue. Women are not what they used to be like 20/30yrs ago.

I wont go into my story but my ex's own family don't wont to know her that's the sort of person she is.I used to have my son every weekend and travelled 30 miles each way to get him. This Christmas however he had enough. She was always having different guys there and her moving in a guy straight out of prison for manslaughter(the day he was out) was enough for him. He's now living with me.

The system however kept him from being with me sooner. Its one big sexiest thing. Most of my women friends agree with me on this one too so its not a men vs women thing.

As for the CSA they took every fecking penny I had most of which never seen its way to my son. It went on her nights out. She freely admits to going night clubbing 5 nights aweek.

The whole system stinks and theres no reason for it to be either because I know most women already know the score but the government are scared of doing anything about it. Equal rights my arse

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

I agree in principal that action needs to be taken but I think jail is a bit harsh, someone with a prison record near enough has their entire employment life ruined, perhaps as a last resort maybe. (yes, I am in the same position with a neglegent ex-partner)

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Yes, definately as a last resort. As for their having their employment life ruined, imagine how ruined the personal life of the fathers will be when they are denied the right to see their own kids despite court orders allowing them to.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

I think it was on a recent show about baylifts where a single mum had a debt, the father was giving CSA contributions, but because she was on benifit, she didn't get a penny of it which confused me. Any one know anything about this?

The family courts need a good overhaul, this idea that the mother is automatically the best parent is stupid.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Family courts have no power over it now. They actually apologised to me because of the way the CSA were treating me. Believe it or not the CSA women stood up in court and DEMANDED TO SEE THE DOCUMENTS I GAVE THEM. Yep and the court didn't say a thing to her about the way she behaved!.

If the mother if on DSS she may not get any of the contributions. It all depends on how much the father is left with. DSS try and claim moneys back for what they are already paying the mother. My ex however was getting moneys from both which is why I was always left skint

:(

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

So if she's on benifit, she just gets the benifits she'd get anyway, but the father still has to pay, so the CSA/gov cream off his wages.
Damn this is all so wrong.
A friend found out her husband had been having an affair, which produced a child. The mistress took him to the CSA, and they contacted my friend to see how much she earnt because they would take that into account when deciding how much money her husband should pay this other woman!
She told them to get stuffed.
He ended up having to pay about £400 a month I think, even tho the mistress was earning about £30K

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Surely the courts already have the power to punish people who ignore court orders? Is that not contempt of court (ignoring a court order)?

So why the need for a campaign ?

Just a little confused here really ?

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

The courts currently have NO means to punish a mother for failure to comply with an access order.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Ha thats nothing she was getting the money from her boyfriends wages too. The women can't realy go wrong:mad:

PS oh some may remember how the goverment changed things in 2000 so the guys only have to pay 15% of there wages for 1 child. Well WRONG there still sorting that out now !

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

When the parent with care is on income support the dss will pursue the absent parent for payments through the csa. The dss will take ALL of the money to cover the payments they make to the parent with care.

THis is exactly what happened to me. :(

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

I remember a radio play based on a true story where a guy had an affair, woman got pregnant, had child, then was killed in a car accident.
He was basically told that if he wanted custody of his daughter, rather than her grandmother getting it (simply because the baby was living at the grandmother/mother's house), he should have abducted her as the courts wouldn't want to disrupt the status quo of her then living with him.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Nah thats not right, sorry russ.

Have a look here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2987836.stm

"Deliberate refusal to obey any court order is contempt of court that can be punished with a fine or imprisonment.

"However, the courts may consider that such a penalty might not be appropriate in a child contact case because of the effect that would have on the children at the centre of the dispute."

I think there is a real issue here, but propagating incorrect information does nothing to help the situation imo. Not having a go Russ, just that if you want to 'support' these fathers then it's prob best to get your facts straight.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Are you saying the father shouldn't pay out for the child at all?

I just wish the divorce courts and courts in general would at least give equal access to both parents and equal custody to both parents.It only makes sense and then prevents one half of the parenting unit from lording it over the other.It's time that the outmoded and outdated attitude that only a mother can take care of a small child was revised espcially in this day and age of equal rights.

However I believe that the rights of the child HAVE to be paramount at all times.What is best for the child must be the first and main issue.Children are not property as some parents seem to think and deserve to be put first by BOTH parents.

Incog. :)

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

OK Erol, want to find me just one instance where a court has enforced such a breach? Simple - they won't, and this HAS to change.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

So what the hell are your and her national insurance and income tax payments for then? :mad:

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

haha look abroad for that lol

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

I'm saying that if your husband has an affair, produces a child and is taken to the CSA, why should *you* as his wife have to pay towards that child?

And if she is on benifits, and the husband is paying, then surely his payments which are for the child, should go to the child, not the CSA/gov

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Now this is another thing which is wrong. When my sister got married her husband already had a child. The CSA wanted to know how much my sister was making though. They class this as THERE business. She had to go along with it in the end which left them both worse off. I believe his ex has a very nice house and that now mind

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Just incase no one has got the picture yet some women are doing very well by this (legel)thievery don't you think

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Trouble is m8 the dss treat the absent parent's payments through the csa as income, so they deduct it from your benefit payments.

I was the parent with care in my case as my then wife left me with our children to bring up. I had to quit my job to do that.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

But if the woman was on 30K why did she get the CSA on her case?Why would she be claiming benefits?I'm not having a go I just want to understand why the CSA were involved.

Yes I agree about the wife but you know this is what happens to second wives.Their income is included in the decision of how much a husband has to pay in alimony to a first wife and children.

Incog.

Ah! Defiant got there before me. :)

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Do the CSA go after absent mothers?

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Lack of Judges choosing to prosecute for contempt in such cases is very different from the courts having NO power to prosecute (your original assertation). I am sure there are some cases and am equally sure that they are very rare as well.

As I say I think there is a real issue here. I do think in general there has been a swing past the 'fair' mark re such issues in our courts in the last 30 years or so. However I also think this a natural and inevitable result of it having been so far the other side of fair for so long previous to that.

I realise this is little comfort to those fathers that have suffered from this issue and they have my sympathies. I also think they should protest what they consider is unfair. However spreading false information does nothing constructive for futher this cause imo.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

One would hope so.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

News to us

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Yes see my post #24 m8. :)

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

I misunderstood, so shoot me.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

I think they do but I guess the situation is rare in the extreme (first that the father gets custody and not the mother and secondly that the mother does not pay support for the child). My perception of the CSA and it's main problem is they concentrate their efforts on 'easy' targets and let the real abusers get away - as they are hard and expensive to catch vs just hammering the 'honest' partners that are liable for support payments.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

The woman on 30k isn't on benifits, that was a totally seperate situation.

The 30K woman (lets call her Carol) is a messed up woman, she's always wanted (lets call him Dave) since she was a pupil of his.
She saw his wife as having the life she wanted and used their daughter as a weapon against Dave. Dave at the time was claiming he'd had the affair for 3 years, not 11.
He did something to upset Carol, so she contacted the CSA hoping they would increase the £500 a month he was already paying her (private agreement), CSA contacted Dave's wife (my friend) and wanted to take her income into account so that if she was earning a lot, Dave would have to pay more. Thankfully the CSA deemed £400 was the amount he should pay, so it backfired on Carol.

I feel that it shouldn't be like that.
Why should you pay for another couple's kids?

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Like I said originaly Russ I was not having a go. I just think with issues as emotive as these it's important to get the facts straight, thats all.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

afaik the earned income of the parent with care is not included in the calculation.

check out the calculator - here

It makes no mention of the income of the parent with care.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

When I got my son I had to fill out x amount of forms. One of these forms was a CSA one. I asked why am I filling this out are you going after her. The women there admitted its very unlikely. I just laughed I'm had them on my back so long I knew the score and always thought there sexiest

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Now I see :)

It's stupid, the payments made are supposed to be for the benifit of the child, therefore it's the child's income, not the custody holders.
If someone isn't on benifit, then their child gets more.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

If the state is paying someone benefits to support a child and they subsequently get the missing partner to pay support for the child, then it seems right to me that they either stop the benefits or carry on the benefits and take the child support? Or have I missed something here?

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Tell me about it m8... I would rather they had put it into a trust fund for the children which they could use for further education or something like that.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

They get benifits for being unable to work, such as housing benifit, unemployment benifit, council tax relief, and the £10 (or what ever it is now) a week child benifit.
The majority of those benifit £ÃÆ ’‚£Ãà¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚£ are there for the adult to be able to live, not for the child.
The CSA says that the father should pay £400 a month for the child.
But the mother's benifits are taken out of that, so either the child gets the £400 and the mother has no benifits, or the mother uses some of the £400 to simply live, and the child then gets less than £400, less than what the CSA has deemed the child needs per month to have a good standard of living.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Well housing benefit is as much for the child as parent I guess. Child support is not means tested - its just paid to all parents (I think). However people with low incomes and children will get additional child support on top of this standard allowance paid to all.

I may be wrong but my understanding is that the amount the absent parent pays is not determined based on 'what the child needs' but on what the state determins is apporiate for the absent parent to pay based on their income. Earn loads and you pay more. That does not mean that a child of a rich absent parent needs more money than one of a poor absent parent.

If you imagine a person leaving their super rich partner and taking their child. Initally the rich partner pays nothing. So the state steps in to help support both the parent and the child (cheaper and better than taking the child into care). Then the missing rich parent starts to cough up £2000 a week in child maintance (to pluck a figure out of the air). You think in such a situation the state should continue to pay support to the parent with the child?

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

But the person gets the same housing benifit if childless. It's not because they have a child.

There's a max amount, which is why Chris Evans despite having millions pays less than 6000 a year for his daughter.
The CSA money is for the sole purpose of the child, not the parent.
Other benifits are there to support the parent, benifits which they would be entitled too even if they didn't have a child, so why should they lose those benifits when the CSA money isn't for them, but their child, meaning they have to use their child's money to live on, depriving the child.
A woman on benifit getting £400 a month CSA will have less than £400 a month to spend on her child.
A woman earning £20K and not on benifit will have the £400 CSA to spend on her child

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

My experience has generally been that mums who have the kids living with them treat the absent dad in an horrendous way. It's either cough up more money or swing from trees or you don't get to see the kids. Dads usually have to go along with loads of crap just so they can see the kids which is crazy. Kids are treated as bargaining tools and it's about time this was stopped.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Totally agree Debs
That's how Carol used her child with Dave (mentioned earlier, names changed)
It would be "do as I tell you or you don't see your daughter"

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Just off the top off my head I know two of my friends who are having the problem now with ex's and demands for money or you're not seeing the kids. In both cases the ex has laughed at the thought of the court forcing access......

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Not sure about that. Someone on housing benefit with 6 kids must get more than a lone adult surely?


OK I was not aware of such a cap (or that Chris Evans had a child :) ). I see what you are saying and kinda agree with it but it's not quite a simple as it seems. For a start a lone adult with a child, that needs it, will get more benefit than a lone adult without a child. So certainly it seems fair to me that such benefits (the extra for the child) should be 'discounted' against the child support payment from the absent parent.

I think everyone would agree with this but I guess the real question is how do you stop acrimonious parents using the kids in such a way?

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Only in that they'll get more rent paid due to the larger house that's required.
And more council tax paid as with a larger house it's likely to be in a higher band.
Nothing related to having kids.

Child benifit and CSA gives more for the first kid than any subsiquent kids.
So with CSA, the first kid gets £400 for instance, the second and third get £250 each (example)

But you don't get any extra benifits like that for having kids.
With the gov seeing the CSA money as an income rather than a child benifit, they take away *all* benifits up to that amount
So if a mother gets £200 a month benifit, she'll be given £400 from the CSA and no benifits.

By the courts enforcing visitation rights perhaps? ;)

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Well related to having kids in the sense that having kids requires a bigger house and therefore more support.

You do get extra benefits if you have children.

See here
http://www.jobcentreplus.gov.uk/cms....geBenefits/493

"Personal allowances for dependent children:from birth to the day before 19th birthday - £38.50"

Not sure if that is per child but I assume it is.

I see what you are saying and also see the unfairness of taking all benefits away against the maintance from absent parent. However benefits which relate to the child should be taken away I think. Those that relate to the adult alone, I agree should not. Then there will be some that related to both and I spose some for of pro ratering on these would seem right.

I am not convinced of this. If the courts were to relentlessly prosecute the parent with custody, for obstucting visiting rights, then the parent without custody could use this as a threat against the other parent - just more acrimony imo (let me see my child on day x at time y or I get the courts to lock you up for obstucting my access rights). I assume the reason such prosecutions are so rare is that the courts (rightly imo) consider the locking up or even fining of a parent with custody is not in the childs best interest.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

That's a practicality rather than a direct benifit, if you see what I mean.


I sit corrected.

That's the injustice I'm on about, why lose housing benifit/unemployment benifit when the CSA money is supposedly for the child.

Most visitation orders are specific, like every other weekend, every other half term, first 2 weeks of summer holidays etc.
So it's not like 2 hrs a week to be decided by the father, so you won't get into the situation of let me see my child on day x at time y.
Anyway, it's normally the main custody holder who uses the child as a weapon, ie even tho the courts say you can see our child this weekend, I'm not going to let you because I know it rips your heart to shreds.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

Perhaps if the divorce courts(and child welfare agencies) could get away from the gladiatorial way of deciding child custody then just maybe everyone could feel that they get fair treatment.Maybe solicitors and barristers should be kept out of the equation when the pro's and cons of a childs needs and desires are discussed in court.I wonder how often children get to be actually listened to in court?How many even go to court when their future is being discussed?

I so often feel that despite all the protestations that children and their needs/rights should come first they so often don't,either with the courts or their parents or the child welfare agencies.

Incog.

Re: Jail for non-compliant women
 

How can that be assuming

Child Maintenance Calculator
Number of children maintenance will be paid for: 1

Number of other children living in the non-resident parent's household: 0

Number of nights, on average, the non-resident parent has the child(ren): Less than 52

The non-resident parent's net weekly income: £2000

The weekly amount of maintenance to be paid is approximately: £300

Anually thats nearly 16k.