Current Affair Forums

Posted: 06 June 2007 at 10:29am | IP Logged

This was on Yahoo news this morning. What do you think?

Single mothers are to be invited to give the go-ahead to the naming and shaming of deadbeat dads who fail to support their children.

Letters are going out to around 100 parents - almost all of them mothers - asking if they want their former partner's name to be included on an internet list of people who have dodged maintenance payments.

The move came as Work and Pensions Secretary John Hutton published a Bill to replace the crisis-plagued Child Support Agency with a new commission with tougher powers to make absent parents pay.

The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission (C-MEC) will be able to deduct cash direct from non-payers' bank accounts, as well as take away their passports and impose curfews on them if they fail to support their children.

And it will be able to charge absent parents for the cost of pursuing them if they default on payments, potentially saving the taxpayer millions of pounds.

Under the new system, parents will be encouraged to come to private agreements on financial support for children when they separate, rather than requiring them to comply with officially-set maintenance arrangements, as the CSA does.

The letters from the CSA relate to absent parents who were convicted in the first three months of this year of failing to provide the information needed to deal with maintenance claims for their children.

The parents looking after the children will be asked if they object to their former partner being named and shamed. If they do not object within 14 days, the names of those dodging payments will be posted on the CSA's website www.csa.gov.uk.

"We feel that taking this action and making an example of those who commit these offences will encourage other non-resident parents to give us the information we need straightaway," says the letter.

"Our intention is to make it clear that it is not acceptable for non-resident parents to fail to support their children. We want to get more money flowing to more children and one way of doing this is to convince non-resident parents who don't pay that we are serious about taking action to recover what they owe."

Posted: 06 June 2007 at 10:51am | IP Logged

I think it might be a good idea. There are lots of absent parents who get away with not contributing to there own children while the parent that is there has no choice but to go without things for themselves to make a better life for their children.

Hopefully it won't have a negative affect on those people who have been messed around due to the faults of CSA system.

Posted: 06 June 2007 at 11:13am | IP Logged

Im not sure about this, what do they mean by non paying parents?? ones who don't pay because they don't want to or because they can't??

The reason i ask.. df isn't working, his a homedad.. so he doesn't pay maintenance.. yet we have tried to speak with his ex about it, and I offered to put so much away in to a bank account for Kay, if she needs anything we would get it as i know full well if i gave her the cash it would go on her weekly friday saturday and sunday pub crawls!! .. she said no, ok those weren't the words she used.. but she doesn't want MY money.. fair enough.. i have 3 kids of my own to support without having to support a child which isn't mine.

Would df be classed as a non paying parent??

on the flip side.. for the parents who blatently refuse to help support there child/kids, i think they should be names and shamed.. it might give them the kick up the arse to start helping towards there child/kids

Posted: 06 June 2007 at 3:04pm | IP Logged

It shouldn't just be the non paying parents, my kids dad has somehow managed to con the CSA into believeing he only earns £70 a week, though he works well over full time hours on a good wage.  I receive just £5 a week from him towards all 4 kids.

I know it's not always possible for one or the other to make payments but where it is and they refuse, I think they should be named and shamed!

Posted: 06 June 2007 at 3:27pm | IP Logged

my dad never paid a penny maitenance to my mum and my initial thought this am was to put him on the list however since then i have took a deep breath and decided against it as he has two children with a new partner and wouldn't want to upset their life plus i haven't seen him since i was 5 and dont want anything to do with him.

i think the desision lies with the individual to make a choice about what is best for all concderned.

Posted: 06 June 2007 at 3:42pm | IP Logged

I think it is a great idea.

My eldests Dad, Mark, left me when I was 3 months gone with her and I never saw him again. Not received one penny from him in nearly 16 years.

He was contacted to have DNA testing, but he refused to go, wonder why eh ?

Posted: 06 June 2007 at 5:33pm | IP Logged

Im undecided. Joshua's dad has twice refused to pay for Joshua after being contacted by the CSA. However, I was forced into giving his details when I made claims for benefits. Ive never asked his dad for anything, yes it would have been useful some days but Ive managed. I dont see how putting him on a list will change anything, although I do believe I have that option as the latest claim for CSA was earlier this year which he refused.

I think an on line list should be drawn up for absent parents who wont have contact with their child! Parental contact is far more important that £5 a week, in my opinion.

I doubt I will opt to put his dad's name on the list, it wouldnt achieve anything, and may cause more problems than it would solve them.

Posted: 07 June 2007 at 9:54am | IP Logged

The news bulletin that I heard said that the only parents who could go on this list would be ones who had been to court as repeat non-payers who were in breach of their agreements. If they've already been to court, then I don't really see what putting them on a list would do. If they were going to feel any shame from their actions, they would be far more likely to feel it after the humiliation of going to court than by having their name on a list that, really lets face it, not many people are going to look at any way. It might make the mothers fighting for justice feel a bit better, and if so, then fair enough, but I don't think it would make one bit of difference to the absent dads.

The CSA has hardly had a record for sorting things out in a fair and equitable way and I doubt a new organisation would fare much better, so I can just see this causing more problems than it's worth, with the wrong people being named, and no difference being made to those who don't pay anyway. If a bad parent wont support their child, and going to court doesn't make them, then I can't see how this will achieve anything.