Fathers right march (85)
Keep us informed of this.
I know a few who would be interested.
I know a few who would be interested.
Mariannette: Keep us informed of this.
I know a few who would be interested.
Sure thing Marianette will do ,its going to be a big day out.I know a few who would be interested.
Ideally, both parents are focussed on the best interests of the child and negotiate how they are going to share responsibility for that effectively.
So, it doesn't always work out like that. Sometimes people simply don't have the knowledge, or resources to understand what to do, or how to parent. Sometimes, parents have different opinions about what is in the best interests of the child. I also think parenting is an emotive subject and its very, very difficult to be object when you're in the thick of parental conflict.
If I had it my way, we'd get rid of all phrases like 'dead beat dad', or 'using the kids for leverage'. I think they're all catch phrases and stereotypes which distract and dismiss the real issues. Both mums and dads may do this, so maybe we need some new vocabulary and new modes of effective communication to dig a bit deeper and actually resolve some issues. Personally, I'm a great fan of mediation.
On the subject of vocabulary, I think 'father's rights' has been tainted by an element of poor behaviour - an organisation here was dissolved because the healthy ethos was taken over by some men who only had the skills to angrily demand their own needs were satisfied, disregarding, or not being able to perceive the child's needs. It was a terrible shame that things got out of control.
Personally, I think you'd be better off having a 'children's paternal rights' march, as it puts the focus back in the arena of the child's needs and is more inclusive - many women would be able to relate to children's paternal needs being satisfied.
Its about time this issue was less separatist in its campaign stage, otherwise how can people hope to resolve anything together?
So, it doesn't always work out like that. Sometimes people simply don't have the knowledge, or resources to understand what to do, or how to parent. Sometimes, parents have different opinions about what is in the best interests of the child. I also think parenting is an emotive subject and its very, very difficult to be object when you're in the thick of parental conflict.
If I had it my way, we'd get rid of all phrases like 'dead beat dad', or 'using the kids for leverage'. I think they're all catch phrases and stereotypes which distract and dismiss the real issues. Both mums and dads may do this, so maybe we need some new vocabulary and new modes of effective communication to dig a bit deeper and actually resolve some issues. Personally, I'm a great fan of mediation.
On the subject of vocabulary, I think 'father's rights' has been tainted by an element of poor behaviour - an organisation here was dissolved because the healthy ethos was taken over by some men who only had the skills to angrily demand their own needs were satisfied, disregarding, or not being able to perceive the child's needs. It was a terrible shame that things got out of control.
Personally, I think you'd be better off having a 'children's paternal rights' march, as it puts the focus back in the arena of the child's needs and is more inclusive - many women would be able to relate to children's paternal needs being satisfied.
Its about time this issue was less separatist in its campaign stage, otherwise how can people hope to resolve anything together?
It's bad enough in the UK but entrenched olde worlde catholic values and the legal system, I know, make it worse in Ireland..... much worse. I have a friend who went through custody battles for years, met with ministers, appeared on RTE and still got nowhere. 
modermen: Fathers right march in Dublin
March / Demonstration to the Dail for Parental Equality - To Grant Fathers Equal Rights as Parents to be held on Fathers Day 2013. Fathers Have No Rights in Ireland - Please spread the word, invite your friends, Come along for the march and get some rights for fathers as they dont have hardly any
March / Demonstration to the Dail for Parental Equality - To Grant Fathers Equal Rights as Parents to be held on Fathers Day 2013. Fathers Have No Rights in Ireland - Please spread the word, invite your friends, Come along for the march and get some rights for fathers as they dont have hardly any
You are contradicting yourself in you statement. Do they none? Or do they have hardly any?
I can only speak from personal experience and some of my friends have kids with women they are no longer with. They pay towards the upkeep of their kids, they treat the lady with respect and they have good access to their kids.
I think a lot (not all) of the Dads who dont get access or are treated unfairly are Dads who dont take enough responsibility after the split and dont pay enough towards their kids upkeep.
single fathers in ireland have no rights at all only what the ladies or courts permit them to have as a single dad to 4 god forbid my ex dies i have no rights over my kids they go to her parents or god parents i would have to go to court and adopt them enen though they all bare my surname
earleybird66: single fathers in ireland have no rights at all only what the ladies or courts permit them to have as a single dad to 4 god forbid my ex dies i have no rights over my kids they go to her parents or god parents i would have to go to court and adopt them enen though they all bare my surname
If they are your kids why is your name not on the birth cert?
sofarsogood74: You are contradicting yourself in you statement. Do they none? Or do they have hardly any?
I can only speak from personal experience and some of my friends have kids with women they are no longer with. They pay towards the upkeep of their kids, they treat the lady with respect and they have good access to their kids.
I think a lot (not all) of the Dads who dont get access or are treated unfairly are Dads who dont take enough responsibility after the split and dont pay enough towards their kids upkeep.
I can only speak from personal experience and some of my friends have kids with women they are no longer with. They pay towards the upkeep of their kids, they treat the lady with respect and they have good access to their kids.
I think a lot (not all) of the Dads who dont get access or are treated unfairly are Dads who dont take enough responsibility after the split and dont pay enough towards their kids upkeep.
In this country access issues are dealt with from the perspective of the best interests of the child and entirely separately from financial issues. I'm really not sure if that's a good thing, or a bad thing. I'm inclined to think that financial upkeep of a child is part of the responsibility and integrally linked to the responsibility of physical care.
My daughter is fast approaching 19 and I'm still waiting for some maintenance payments from her father, but the real difficulty came when he stopped seeing her at age 9/10. At least when he had her at weekends, I could work extra hours. I found it frustrating to have to depend upon state handouts when, if we had worked together we could have managed between us without.
The difficulty I had with him having her every weekend was that she'd have a ball every weekend with him and then I'd be doing all the naff stuff during the week like homework and sensible bed times. It affected my relationship with my daughter - I'd save up to have some spare cash for school breaks, but it was like, "We must enjoy ourselves NOW!!!" which felt artificial and forced.
I'm not sure that parental roles should be automatically split so dad coughs up some dosh and gets the weekends and part of children's parental rights should be about this standard division of care. I often think that parents who split costs and split all aspects of care have it right, but then some kids end up like nomads carrying all their school books, gym kit, clothes, blah, blah, blah around with them every day, having to be prepared for every eventuality. I'm not sure that is in their best interests, either.
Further to that, there's always the issue where children might be better off with the father as the primary carer and the mother having access/financially contributing.
Negotiation on an individual basis is the best way, but there really needs to be more education on the possibilities and the communication skills required in order to achieve this. Its very tricky when parents have just ended a relationship and have their own emotional issues to deal with as well.
jac379: In this country access issues are dealt with from the perspective of the best interests of the child and entirely separately from financial issues. I'm really not sure if that's a good thing, or a bad thing. I'm inclined to think that financial upkeep of a child is part of the responsibility and integrally linked to the responsibility of physical care.
My daughter is fast approaching 19 and I'm still waiting for some maintenance payments from her father, but the real difficulty came when he stopped seeing her at age 9/10. At least when he had her at weekends, I could work extra hours. I found it frustrating to have to depend upon state handouts when, if we had worked together we could have managed between us without.
The difficulty I had with him having her every weekend was that she'd have a ball every weekend with him and then I'd be doing all the naff stuff during the week like homework and sensible bed times. It affected my relationship with my daughter - I'd save up to have some spare cash for school breaks, but it was like, "We must enjoy ourselves NOW!!!" which felt artificial and forced.
I'm not sure that parental roles should be automatically split so dad coughs up some dosh and gets the weekends and part of children's parental rights should be about this standard division of care. I often think that parents who split costs and split all aspects of care have it right, but then some kids end up like nomads carrying all their school books, gym kit, clothes, blah, blah, blah around with them every day, having to be prepared for every eventuality. I'm not sure that is in their best interests, either.
Further to that, there's always the issue where children might be better off with the father as the primary carer and the mother having access/financially contributing.
Negotiation on an individual basis is the best way, but there really needs to be more education on the possibilities and the communication skills required in order to achieve this. Its very tricky when parents have just ended a relationship and have their own emotional issues to deal with as well.
My daughter is fast approaching 19 and I'm still waiting for some maintenance payments from her father, but the real difficulty came when he stopped seeing her at age 9/10. At least when he had her at weekends, I could work extra hours. I found it frustrating to have to depend upon state handouts when, if we had worked together we could have managed between us without.
The difficulty I had with him having her every weekend was that she'd have a ball every weekend with him and then I'd be doing all the naff stuff during the week like homework and sensible bed times. It affected my relationship with my daughter - I'd save up to have some spare cash for school breaks, but it was like, "We must enjoy ourselves NOW!!!" which felt artificial and forced.
I'm not sure that parental roles should be automatically split so dad coughs up some dosh and gets the weekends and part of children's parental rights should be about this standard division of care. I often think that parents who split costs and split all aspects of care have it right, but then some kids end up like nomads carrying all their school books, gym kit, clothes, blah, blah, blah around with them every day, having to be prepared for every eventuality. I'm not sure that is in their best interests, either.
Further to that, there's always the issue where children might be better off with the father as the primary carer and the mother having access/financially contributing.
Negotiation on an individual basis is the best way, but there really needs to be more education on the possibilities and the communication skills required in order to achieve this. Its very tricky when parents have just ended a relationship and have their own emotional issues to deal with as well.
I could not agree more. I dont think the Dad should have to pay for 100% of the childs upkeeep and take kids at weeekends only either. I think if the mother is working then she should pay her fair share. Also the mother will be getting child benefit so that should be taken into account.
As I said I can only speak from what I see with my friends. They usually take their kids 3 days a week...they sometimes take them during the week and sometimes at weekends. If they only took the kids at weekends it would not be fair on them as they deserve a weekend out with friends now and then as do the Mums.
Its all about comprimise and everyone thinking of whats best for the child or children.
sofarsogood74: I could not agree more. I dont think the Dad should have to pay for 100% of the childs upkeeep and take kids at weeekends only either. I think if the mother is working then she should pay her fair share. Also the mother will be getting child benefit so that should be taken into account.
As I said I can only speak from what I see with my friends. They usually take their kids 3 days a week...they sometimes take them during the week and sometimes at weekends. If they only took the kids at weekends it would not be fair on them as they deserve a weekend out with friends now and then as do the Mums.
Its all about comprimise and everyone thinking of whats best for the child or children.
As I said I can only speak from what I see with my friends. They usually take their kids 3 days a week...they sometimes take them during the week and sometimes at weekends. If they only took the kids at weekends it would not be fair on them as they deserve a weekend out with friends now and then as do the Mums.
Its all about comprimise and everyone thinking of whats best for the child or children.
Golly, I'm having trouble conceiving of the idea of father's paying 100% of the child(ren)'s upkeep. I've never heard of that. I think my daughter's father is supposed to be paying a bit less than 12.50 (I don't have pound signs on my keyboard!) a week.
If you go through the Child Support Agency here, the absent parent is liable to pay 15% of spare income (once mortgage, pensions, living expenses etc. are deducted) for one child and 20% for more than one child.
I pay 35 pounds a week just to keep my daughter in college, before any other living expenses like food, bills, rent, clothes, shoes, etc.
I'm not sure child benefit should be taken into account. I've had that paid into her account for at least 10 years now and she's had to budget that for her extra-curricula education, or indeed now, it goes towards her college expenses. Perhaps this is another reason why such things should be negotiated on an individual basis.
Its interesting you mention going out at the weekends. I really do think its important that parents get to recharge their batteries and that is shared. I've often heard it resented in a "My money is being spent on her going out, not on my child" kind of way. I think if the child wants for nothing, a re-charged, chilled out parent is good for children.
So, whilst we take into account the best needs of the child, parent's needs may be part of that in quite a big way.
In Ireland a father can apply for a single parent's tax allowance if he has proof he takes his child one night of the year...so if the relationship with the mother is amicable enough all that is required is a letter from her to say that...and this can be backdated for a number of years...so money and rights are available through certain channels...
jac379: Golly, I'm having trouble conceiving of the idea of father's paying 100% of the child(ren)'s upkeep. I've never heard of that. I think my daughter's father is supposed to be paying a bit less than 12.50 (I don't have pound signs on my keyboard!) a week.
If you go through the Child Support Agency here, the absent parent is liable to pay 15% of spare income (once mortgage, pensions, living expenses etc. are deducted) for one child and 20% for more than one child.
I pay 35 pounds a week just to keep my daughter in college, before any other living expenses like food, bills, rent, clothes, shoes, etc.
I'm not sure child benefit should be taken into account. I've had that paid into her account for at least 10 years now and she's had to budget that for her extra-curricula education, or indeed now, it goes towards her college expenses. Perhaps this is another reason why such things should be negotiated on an individual basis.
Its interesting you mention going out at the weekends. I really do think its important that parents get to recharge their batteries and that is shared. I've often heard it resented in a "My money is being spent on her going out, not on my child" kind of way. I think if the child wants for nothing, a re-charged, chilled out parent is good for children.
So, whilst we take into account the best needs of the child, parent's needs may be part of that in quite a big way.
If you go through the Child Support Agency here, the absent parent is liable to pay 15% of spare income (once mortgage, pensions, living expenses etc. are deducted) for one child and 20% for more than one child.
I pay 35 pounds a week just to keep my daughter in college, before any other living expenses like food, bills, rent, clothes, shoes, etc.
I'm not sure child benefit should be taken into account. I've had that paid into her account for at least 10 years now and she's had to budget that for her extra-curricula education, or indeed now, it goes towards her college expenses. Perhaps this is another reason why such things should be negotiated on an individual basis.
Its interesting you mention going out at the weekends. I really do think its important that parents get to recharge their batteries and that is shared. I've often heard it resented in a "My money is being spent on her going out, not on my child" kind of way. I think if the child wants for nothing, a re-charged, chilled out parent is good for children.
So, whilst we take into account the best needs of the child, parent's needs may be part of that in quite a big way.
I agree with most of what you say and I cant tell you what to do with your child benefit as you're in the UK and its none of my business.
But in Ireland we have huge problems at the moment. Child benefit has been cut time after time and it is paid to everyone no matter what they earn. So while we have mothers who use it to feed their kids, put clothes on their kids back, pay for heating in the winter and many more important things we also have people putting it in bank accounts for their kids to do what they want with it when they are 18 or 21. This is not what child benefit was started for in my opinion. It should be means tested and only people that need it should get it....as a country we cant afford to be paying for kids to go on junkets when they get older.
As I said I know it means tested in the UK so I am by no means directing that at you.
sofarsogood74: I agree with most of what you say and I cant tell you what to do with your child benefit as you're in the UK and its none of my business.
But in Ireland we have huge problems at the moment. Child benefit has been cut time after time and it is paid to everyone no matter what they earn. So while we have mothers who use it to feed their kids, put clothes on their kids back, pay for heating in the winter and many more important things we also have people putting it in bank accounts for their kids to do what they want with it when they are 18 or 21. This is not what child benefit was started for in my opinion. It should be means tested and only people that need it should get it....as a country we cant afford to be paying for kids to go on junkets when they get older.
As I said I know it means tested in the UK so I am by no means directing that at you.
But in Ireland we have huge problems at the moment. Child benefit has been cut time after time and it is paid to everyone no matter what they earn. So while we have mothers who use it to feed their kids, put clothes on their kids back, pay for heating in the winter and many more important things we also have people putting it in bank accounts for their kids to do what they want with it when they are 18 or 21. This is not what child benefit was started for in my opinion. It should be means tested and only people that need it should get it....as a country we cant afford to be paying for kids to go on junkets when they get older.
As I said I know it means tested in the UK so I am by no means directing that at you.
I didn't know it was means tested in the UK.
I do know that it can't be put into a trust, or savings account in the child's name, but for some reason they allow the money to go into my daughter's account which is still a child's account. I'm not sure if it counts as a current account, or if they allowed it because I've said she uses it specifically for her college expenses. We certainly have proof its not accumulating, goddamit.
AmusThree: In Ireland a father can apply for a single parent's tax allowance if he has proof he takes his child one night of the year...so if the relationship with the mother is amicable enough all that is required is a letter from her to say that...and this can be backdated for a number of years...so money and rights are available through certain channels...
Does a father need the mother to confirm that? Or can it witnessed by other means?
I can't imagine why someone wouldn't confirm that if its ultimately beneficial for the child, though.
A useful piece of information for many, Amus, no doubt.
jac379: I didn't know it was means tested in the UK.
I do know that it can't be put into a trust, or savings account in the child's name, but for some reason they allow the money to go into my daughter's account which is still a child's account. I'm not sure if it counts as a current account, or if they allowed it because I've said she uses it specifically for her college expenses. We certainly have proof its not accumulating, goddamit.
I do know that it can't be put into a trust, or savings account in the child's name, but for some reason they allow the money to go into my daughter's account which is still a child's account. I'm not sure if it counts as a current account, or if they allowed it because I've said she uses it specifically for her college expenses. We certainly have proof its not accumulating, goddamit.
I think any household that an earner earns over 90k a year does not get it in the UK. I could be wrong about that but I think that's the case.
sofarsogood74: I think any household that an earner earns over 90k a year does not get it in the UK. I could be wrong about that but I think that's the case.
If that's the case, its an interesting perspective on means testing.
I imagine its simply the thin end of the wedge in eradicating it, but maybe more subtly and fairly than is happening your way right now, eh?
For the UK:
This is only recent.
"From next week, families with one parent earning more than £50,000 will no longer be eligible for the full sum in a shake-up first announced in 2010.
Officials have written to 784,000 of the estimated 1.1 million affected and say the message is "getting through".
But Labour says many people unaware of the move face a "nasty surprise".
Changes to child benefit payments for the better-off - introducing means-testing for the previously universal benefit - come into effect at midnight on 7 January.
Families where one parent earns between £50,000 and £60,000 will see their benefit - worth £20.30 a week for the first child and £13.40 for each child after that - progressively reduced based on income.
Eligible households where one individual earns more than £60,000 will lose them altogether, with the money to be recovered through the tax system. "
This is only recent.
"From next week, families with one parent earning more than £50,000 will no longer be eligible for the full sum in a shake-up first announced in 2010.
Officials have written to 784,000 of the estimated 1.1 million affected and say the message is "getting through".
But Labour says many people unaware of the move face a "nasty surprise".
Changes to child benefit payments for the better-off - introducing means-testing for the previously universal benefit - come into effect at midnight on 7 January.
Families where one parent earns between £50,000 and £60,000 will see their benefit - worth £20.30 a week for the first child and £13.40 for each child after that - progressively reduced based on income.
Eligible households where one individual earns more than £60,000 will lose them altogether, with the money to be recovered through the tax system. "
MADDOG69: Eligible households where one individual earns more than £60,000 will lose them altogether, with the money to be recovered through the tax system. "
What does this bit mean?
MADDOG69: For the UK:
This is only recent."From next week, families with one parent earning more than £50,000 will no longer be eligible for the full sum in a shake-up first announced in 2010.
Officials have written to 784,000 of the estimated 1.1 million affected and say the message is "getting through".
But Labour says many people unaware of the move face a "nasty surprise".
Changes to child benefit payments for the better-off - introducing means-testing for the previously universal benefit - come into effect at midnight on 7 January.
Families where one parent earns between £50,000 and £60,000 will see their benefit - worth £20.30 a week for the first child and £13.40 for each child after that - progressively reduced based on income.
Eligible households where one individual earns more than £60,000 will lose them altogether, with the money to be recovered through the tax system. "
This is only recent."From next week, families with one parent earning more than £50,000 will no longer be eligible for the full sum in a shake-up first announced in 2010.
Officials have written to 784,000 of the estimated 1.1 million affected and say the message is "getting through".
But Labour says many people unaware of the move face a "nasty surprise".
Changes to child benefit payments for the better-off - introducing means-testing for the previously universal benefit - come into effect at midnight on 7 January.
Families where one parent earns between £50,000 and £60,000 will see their benefit - worth £20.30 a week for the first child and £13.40 for each child after that - progressively reduced based on income.
Eligible households where one individual earns more than £60,000 will lose them altogether, with the money to be recovered through the tax system. "
I think those figures sound fair enough to me. The cost of living in the UK is lower than ours so 60k is a very good wage there. (Not that its a bad one here).....I think personally any household with over 150k going into it does not need child benefit.
Some may say 150k is too high a treshold but there are people earning 120k a year with big mortgages, big bills and kids to raise so it does not make them automatically well off. The treshold has to start somewhere and 150k sounds alright to me.
More Threads
Would you hire this guy - for any job?
Ladies
Unions support Democrats!
Why is this shameful?
Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
Kultur-multur
beauty of the heart
I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
men's perspective towards women
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Stats for this Thread
3,765 Views
84 Comments
Created: Jan 2013
Last Viewed: Apr 26
Last Commented: Jan 2013
0 Likes
Related Forums
- Would you hire this guy - for any job?
- Ladies
- Unions support Democrats!
- Why is this shameful?
- Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
- Kultur-multur
- beauty of the heart
- I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
- Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
- men's perspective towards women
March / Demonstration to the Dail for Parental Equality - To Grant Fathers Equal Rights as Parents to be held on Fathers Day 2013. Fathers Have No Rights in Ireland - Please spread the word, invite your friends, Come along for the march and get some rights for fathers as they dont have hardly any