General Chat

be less than 'judicious' ;)

Quoting Mr Cameron,

"I also think we need to make Britain a genuinely hostile place for fathers who go AWOL. It’s high time runaway dads were stigmatised, and the full force of shame was heaped upon them. They should be looked at like drink drivers, people who are beyond the pale. They need the message rammed home to them, from every part of our culture, that what they’re doing is wrong – that leaving single mothers, who do a heroic job against all odds, to fend for themselves simply isn’t acceptable. "

"heroic job"?...that's why, I suppose, this government is making it harder than ever for single mothers to look after their children
( you HAVE to make yourself available for work, now matter how difficult getting child care is, no matter how few jobs there are).

At the same time the CSA ( which finally caught up with son's father and is making him pay 15 years after the event lol) is useless in so many cases, over penalising fathers who HAVE made every effort to support their children...whilst letting others off the hook because they have run and can't ( apparently) be found ( because it takes too much effort!).

Secondly, this angers me because a large number of decent, caring men are,, through no fault of their own, obstructed from seeing their children on a regular basis...perhaps because mum has moved on to another relationship and doesn't want the 'hassle'.

To compare these men with "drunk drivers" is APPALLING!

Broken relationships are hard enough surely, without 'demonising' the men (or women) involved.

What example is that to set to a child? "Your dad left us so he's a really bad man" ? He may not be a man who can cope, he may be immature and irresponsible, he may feel he is doing better by you by staying out of your life, he may be lots of things that are not 'admirable' ...... but to compare him to a drunk driver?

"When fathers aren’t there for their kids, those children are more likely to live in poverty, fail at school, end up in prison and be unemployed later in life. " This may be statistically true...it is true of all children that live in poverty....but it is again another sweeping statement...and pays no acknowledgement to the number of single mums and dads who bring their children up to be responsible adults.

I've known through my life some great fathers who were cut out of their childrens life, because the courts always used to favour the mother.

Make it easier for fathers to stay a part of their children's life...don't make them into a 'faceless enemy', and we might get somewhere Mr Cameron!

Happy Fathers day, to all the caring dads who may or may not have a part in their children's life but wish they had.

( rant over.. :-) )

Lol. Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

Bad choice of words and too generalistic but maybe he is trying to sort out some of the problems of the poverty caused to single mothers by absent fathers. What he should be doing is sorting out the extremely inefficient CSA.

Rant on RR,

I know many single Mums and some single Dads who have bought up great Children.
Also seen Children from two parent families go off the rails.

Everyone is individual and each case is individual.

Teresa :-)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/8584238/David-Cameron-Dads-gift-to-me-was-his-optimism.html

Fot the full article...being fair there are good points in the article... BUT!

On the TV now, Ann, they are saying he is going to introduce £ 100 charge to single mums who apply to the CSA and ( I think ) 12% of what they get to the CSA ...running costs? ?? so that's going to help a lot...

for some children its better to have one loving parent
then two at war
yes some people can work it out
but sometimes it imposible to work out
due to domestic violence ect

so each to their own

but i do think farthers should be made to pay for their children
and i dont mean a £5 a week
which is insulting to the child

Rose is one of us confused ? :-)

I thought DAvid Cameron was talking about

....... It’s high time runaway dads were stigmatised, and the full force of shame was heaped upon them. They should be looked at like drink drivers, people who are beyond the pale. .........

but you are talking about

........ Secondly, this angers me because a large number of decent, caring men are,, through no fault of their own, obstructed from seeing their children on a regular basis...perhaps because mum has moved on to another relationship and doesn't want the 'hassle'. ..........

isn't one a runaway dad and the other is a pushedaway dad ? I don't think a dad is a runaway dad just because he separates from the mum, he is a runaway dad if he 'runs away' from his duties as a father ?

I agree about the CSA, I have two friends who could not get any support for years because their exes worked off the books and so they could plead poverty and noone was the wiser ...... and they didn' t want to see their kids ......

How on earth can they charge single mothers to make a claim? That doesn't make sense does it? Where are they supposed to get that sort of money I wonder?

I don't think he was making a sweeping statement about ALL absent fathers, but those who are deliberately shirking their responsibilities, and I'm sure if he were asked he would confirm that he did not mean those fathers who cannot live within the family home for whatever reason but will still take full responsibility for their children.

But if you listen to Fathers for Justice, they will say he should be talking about the absent PARENT, as some mothers are no better, leaving fathers as lone parents, and as was my other half, bringing up their children on their own without the help of the CSA or any maintenance payments whatsoever, and competing against the grudges that they receive any benefit whatsoever.

However, for him to introduce a charge to mothers to use the services of the CSA and then take 12% or whatever from any payment made is beyond the pale. That is NOT what the CSA was formed for in the first place, and again, it is attacking the easy target.

So, his cuts are directly attacking at least three vulnerable parts of society so far, pensioners, disabled and single parents.

It's about time he 'paused, listened, and reflected' again. He's totally out of touch here.

Back to the topic in hand, yes I do believe the absent parent, not just fathers, but the absent mothers too, should be made to pay for their children, a certain percentage of their income, whether it be from benefit or salary. That is parental responisbility, but it is difficult to convince some absent parents when they perhaps have little or no contact with their children perhaps because the other parent has moved themselves and said children a long distance away.

It's too complex a topic to generalise to be fair, but lets not forget, there are two parents, and sometimes, more often than is recognised, its the fathers who are left holding the baby.

Will "stigmatising" someone for not being there ( financially and/or in persion ) make them more or less likely to want anything to do with their children I wonder? will it make them more or less of a 'better parent' either in the short or long term if they have been described in such terms?

I don't know but i always think it's better to help someone 'become something' than stigmatise them for not being it in the first place? Education not isolation perhaps ?

....... It’s high time runaway dads were stigmatised, and the full force of shame was heaped upon them. They should be looked at like drink drivers, people who are beyond the pale. .........

I could not agree more....!

The CSA need s to be scrapped tomorrow. It was championed by Gordon Brown who hadn't got a clue. I dread to think how much it has cost the taxpayer, for what?

Absolutely, stigmatising belongs to history, when single parents, illegitimate children and all were 'stigmatised'. If we go down the route he is proposing we may as well bring back the stocks, for what good they did.

Greenpen, the CSA was formed long before Gordon Brown, long before Tony Blair, and not so long before John Major....now who would that be? Oh yes, another of Maggies ideas...backed by John Redwood and others, when they were attacking single parents.

What do you suggest as an alternative to the CSA IGP?

we 'educate' people about drunk driving ..... not to be drunk drivers ...... but we still 'stigmatise' people who drive drunk ........

I would say that educating is excellent to keep people from doing things that hurt other people or hurt society ..... but once they do them ...... ?

I don' t see Mr Cameron saying he wants to 'stigmatise' people who have done nothing wrong .... :-S

Very easy to attack absent fathers - bit like the way people go on about single mothers. I know several blokes who have become absent fathers and I can see how it's happened - may not be right but I think sometimes it's understandable.

Um.

The CSA was introduced under the Tories in 1991 - let's not blame Gordon for trying to sort out a mess not of his making.

I do believe strongly that the absent parent should provide for the child. Even if he/she rarely sees the child, that child still has to be fed and clothed and that is the responsilbility of *both* parents. Access and support are two different issues. No parent should be allowed to say he/she will only pay support if he/she can see the child. If the absent parent is earning money then he/she should be compelled to pay child support, not leave the rest of us to pick up the tab.

I think Cameron is maybe thinking of the "Deadbeat Dads" who are named and shamed in the USA. Any parent not paying towards the upkeep of a child should feel ashamed, sadly a lot don't. But I'm not sure how much good stigmatising them will do. If they feel no shame in not paying then they won't be bothered by that.

Edit to say a friend of mine is owed more than £100,000 awarded in maintenance by the courts in the early 70s and her ex legged it to South Africa to avoid paying. He'll be arrested if he ever tries to come back here but that's small consolation. She managed to work and bring up the children but it was very hard - he and the second wife were living the high life.

Gwynne

The trouble with blanket stigmatising of certain people is that innocent people get dragged into it as well. The way we are talking here is as though ANY parent not at home with their children must be shirking their responsibilities, which is simply not the case.

Each case is different, there are a multitude of reasons why a father or mother does not or cannot pay toward their children, or keep up an involvement in their upbringing, it's not as simple as 'they can't be bothered'.

The whole topic is far too complex to just cover with one blanket policy.

Gwynne, are access and support really two different issues? I'm not sure it's that straightforward. If a parent turns a child against the parent who's left the home, the child doesn't want to see the absent parent and the relationship is completely broken, should the absent parent contribute?

Funny I am still seeing Mr Cameron say 'runaway dads' and not 'absent parents' ........ or talking about 'stigmatising' anyone but 'runaway dads' ......

All parents should contribute financially for their children, it is not the child' s fault if the other parent turns the child against the parent , how will the parent not contributing help to make the child ever feel differently ? punish the child for both parents' bad deeds ?

Yes, I think they should, Uggers. The child needs to be fed and clothed whether there is access or not. And if the absent parent has an income the child is entitled to financial support.

Parents not allowed to see their children for reasons of child protection should still provide financial support if they have an income.

In the past absent parents have used finance to blackmail the custodial parent ..... no money unless .... which is why the courts separated the two. That may have changed now but I don't think so.

Gwynne

I'm undecided about it - but then with the couples I know, the parent who has the child haven't tried to claim anything. I'm not sure if one parent refuses to let the absent parent be a mum or dad, they shouldn't have to foot the bill themselves. Either way, it's a shame for the child.