child maintance

daithi123

i was awarded full custody of my 2 kids 13yrs and 16yrs by the courts in july, does the mother now have to pay maintance to me??

Cavehill Red

Theoretically yes, but good luck in getting anything. Courts don't do anything to mammies that could possibly be perceived by them as punitive, including paying their way. Only daddies can be deadbeats according to the Irish family law system.

I'm a single father - paid out a fortune in maintenance in my time despite sharing custody in practice for much of it. Never saw a bean once I obtained full custody, needless to say. When I took it to court, they made an order which was not complied with. The mother claimed penury, and the court told me my order was unenforceable (which makes me wonder why they made it in the first place if they intended for it not to ever be enforced.) I contrast that somewhat wryly with my being told by a judge that I could be jailed if I didn't pay a maintenance order that amounted (at the time) to half my post-tax income, even though the child was with me at least half of the time at that point.

In short, don't bank on getting a penny, OP. We need our family law system radically overhauled, but unfortunately a combination of legal conservatives and vested interests within the single mummy lobby are in league to prevent this from happening.

RandolphEsq

Ask her to pay you maintenance. If she refuses then go into the courts and apply to them for her to pay you maintenance. Maintenance and custody are separate issues.

Peregrinus

Only if the court orders it. But if you look for an order you may very well get it (depending, of course, on your financial circumstances and on hers).

another question

Wish it was like the way it is in the States, no getting away with not paying child maintanence there. Will fathers ever be treated equally in this country? It is ridiculous. As another poster said, you may very well get an order but this is undoubtably based on her financial ability to pay. Even if she is on the dole and has only 1 euro left a week, she should be made pay it in maintanence. It should hurt. You created the child, you have to support it. How dare she expect to have nothing to pay in contribution to her children's needs, so she's the mother and she expects you to feed them, cloth them, send them to school and she does nothing. This makes me so angry as it comes up so often, I hope you persue this and that she is made pay.

Bannasidhe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Theoretically yes, but good luck in getting anything. Courts don't do anything to mammies that could possibly be perceived by them as punitive, including paying their way. Only daddies can be deadbeats according to the Irish family law system.

I'm a single father - paid out a fortune in maintenance in my time despite sharing custody in practice for much of it. Never saw a bean once I obtained full custody, needless to say. When I took it to court, they made an order which was not complied with. The mother claimed penury, and the court told me my order was unenforceable (which makes me wonder why they made it in the first place if they intended for it not to ever be enforced.) I contrast that somewhat wryly with my being told by a judge that I could be jailed if I didn't pay a maintenance order that amounted (at the time) to half my post-tax income, even though the child was with me at least half of the time at that point.

In short, don't bank on getting a penny, OP. We need our family law system radically overhauled, but unfortunately a combination of legal conservatives and vested interests within the single mummy lobby are in league to prevent this from happening.

Not so. A close friend of mine has been paying her ex-husband maintenance for their 16 year old son since he (the son) requested that he live with his Dad 2 years ago. They did go to court to get the agreement formalised and so Child Benefit could be transferred.

Ironically, she pays in full and on time every week even though technically her ex 'owes' her several thousand euro in missed maintenance payments over a 4 year period.

Cavehill Red

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Not so. A close friend of mine has been paying her ex-husband maintenance for their 16 year old son since he (the son) requested that he live with his Dad 2 years ago. They did go to court to get the agreement formalised and so Child Benefit could be transferred.

Ironically, she pays in full and on time every week even though technically her ex 'owes' her several thousand euro in missed maintenance payments over a 4 year period.

Yes, so. In the case you mention, the mother has not contested the maintenance order. She's paying because she had already reached an agreement with the father to their mutual arrangement. She'd likely be paying nothing if she had fought the order for maintenance, and she would face no threat of punitive action by the courts were she to ignore such an order.
Fair play to her for paying. She's an exception to the rule.

Bannasidhe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Yes, so. In the case you mention, the mother has not contested the maintenance order. She's paying because she had already reached an agreement with the father to their mutual arrangement. She'd likely be paying nothing if she had fought the order for maintenance, and she would face no threat of punitive action by the courts were she to ignore such an order.
Fair play to her for paying. She's an exception to the rule.

She did ensure the court was aware that her ex had failed to pay for 4 years. A fact that the court was already aware of as she had to take him to court on many occasions due to his failure to pay. Yet, he not only escaped sanction, he managed to avoid paying what he owed and was awarded maintenance from her.

So much for the all powerful single mother lobby eh?

OP - yes. You can apply for maintenance and there is no reason to assume the courts will refuse.

daithi123

she has a partner living with her but she claims he is not so she claims of the state for rent and benifits she also has a childminding job cash in the hand so if i did bring her to court on paper she gets no money so i don't think the court would award anything to me, suppose better off leaving well enough alone as she hasn't bothered to see are call the kids since july , just thought she should have to pay for her kids as i had to for years.........

Bannasidhe

daithi123 wrote: »

she has a partner living with her but she claims he is not so she claims of the state for rent and benifits she also has a childminding job cash in the hand so if i did bring her to court on paper she gets no money so i don't think the court would award anything to me, suppose better off leaving well enough alone as she hasn't bothered to see are call the kids since july , just thought she should have to pay for her kids as i had to for years.........

The fact that she is claiming State benefits is immaterial. My son was on JSA and was still ordered to pay maintenance for his 2 kids.

Cavehill Red

Bannasidhe wrote: »

She did ensure the court was aware that her ex had failed to pay for 4 years. A fact that the court was already aware of as she had to take him to court on many occasions due to his failure to pay. Yet, he not only escaped sanction, he managed to avoid paying what he owed and was awarded maintenance from her.

So much for the all powerful single mother lobby eh?

OP - yes. You can apply for maintenance and there is no reason to assume the courts will refuse.

You're still being disingenuous. Firstly, she agreed to pay maintenance with the father before going to court. It was entirely up to her whether to contest the order. And as I said, she can freely expect not to be held accountable should she choose not to pay (just as you allege the father managed).
We're all forced to discuss anecdotal evidence here due to the ongoing injustice of in-camera courts, but nevertheless it is clear from the sheer volume of anecdotal evidence that the Irish family law system will not punish a mother who fails to pay maintenance (nor one who fails to comply with access orders). I don't dispute your suggestion that a rare case of gender inversion might have occurred also. Again, this merely confirms for me the necessity of overhauling our antiquated legislation and practices in this area.

Cavehill Red

daithi123 wrote: »

she has a partner living with her but she claims he is not so she claims of the state for rent and benifits she also has a childminding job cash in the hand so if i did bring her to court on paper she gets no money so i don't think the court would award anything to me, suppose better off leaving well enough alone as she hasn't bothered to see are call the kids since july , just thought she should have to pay for her kids as i had to for years.........

She ought to morally and ethically. Also legally, but as you're aware, that's unlikely to happen. My advice would be to spare yourself the time and effort of pursuing a pyrrhic victory and move along with parenting your children. Good luck with that.

Bannasidhe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

You're still being disingenuous. Firstly, she agreed to pay maintenance with the father before going to court. It was entirely up to her whether to contest the order. And as I said, she can freely expect not to be held accountable should she choose not to pay (just as you allege the father managed).
We're all forced to discuss anecdotal evidence here due to the ongoing injustice of in-camera courts, but nevertheless it is clear from the sheer volume of anecdotal evidence that the Irish family law system will not punish a mother who fails to pay maintenance (nor one who fails to comply with access orders). I don't dispute your suggestion that a rare case of gender inversion might have occurred also. Again, this merely confirms for me the necessity of overhauling our antiquated legislation and practices in this area.

Yes. I agree the whole system badly needs to be overhauled.
What I am taking issue with is your suggestion there is some 'all powerful single mother lobby' that influences court decisions. There isn't.

What there is is an antiquated legal system with 19th century perceptions of gender roles. Women were victimised by the Irish legal system for decades and yes, in recent years as far as the Family Court is concerned, the bias has swung the other way. Both are equally bad. But to claim this is because of some mythical single mother lobby makes you sound like John Waters.

Plus, as maintenance, access etc is a civil matter it is nearly impossible to get orders enforced as they should be - for men or for women.

planetX

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Theoretically yes, but good luck in getting anything. Courts don't do anything to mammies that could possibly be perceived by them as punitive, including paying their way. Only daddies can be deadbeats according to the Irish family law system.

I'm a single father - paid out a fortune in maintenance in my time despite sharing custody in practice for much of it. Never saw a bean once I obtained full custody, needless to say. When I took it to court, they made an order which was not complied with. The mother claimed penury, and the court told me my order was unenforceable (which makes me wonder why they made it in the first place if they intended for it not to ever be enforced.) I contrast that somewhat wryly with my being told by a judge that I could be jailed if I didn't pay a maintenance order that amounted (at the time) to half my post-tax income, even though the child was with me at least half of the time at that point.

In short, don't bank on getting a penny, OP. We need our family law system radically overhauled, but unfortunately a combination of legal conservatives and vested interests within the single mummy lobby are in league to prevent this from happening.

Wow, where is this 'single mummy' lobby? I'd like to contact them (sounds like a term of derision btw, we're all lone parents) The only accurate part is that we need our family law system overhauled. Do you really have no idea that bad justice is out there equally for parents of either sex, and that there are so many mothers in the exact same situation as your own.

Cavehill Red

Let me flip this around. Where is the state-funded single fathers lobby? There isn't one.
There is, on the other hand, at least half a dozen nominally single parent organisations which are entirely dominated by women, largely hostile to male involvement, who generally lobby solely for the interests of mothers and not for single parents as a whole.
There is demonstrable desire from the public to drag our family legislation kicking and screaming into the 20th century, if not the 21st, but all attempts to do so have thus far been stymied by conservatives in the legal profession (who do nicely out of Kramer vs Kramer adversarial systems) and the above mentioned lobby groups who will not campaign on any issue which would see mothers disenfranchised, even in circumstances where fathers are demonstrably being discriminated against.

Bannasidhe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Let me flip this around. Where is the state-funded single fathers lobby? There isn't one.
There is, on the other hand, at least half a dozen nominally single parent organisations which are entirely dominated by women, largely hostile to male involvement, who generally lobby solely for the interests of mothers and not for single parents as a whole.
There is demonstrable desire from the public to drag our family legislation kicking and screaming into the 20th century, if not the 21st, but all attempts to do so have thus far been stymied by conservatives in the legal profession (who do nicely out of Kramer vs Kramer adversarial systems) and the above mentioned lobby groups who will not campaign on any issue which would see mothers disenfranchised, even in circumstances where fathers are demonstrably being discriminated against.

What State funded lobby groups would these be?

Cavehill Red

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What State funded lobby groups would these be?

Treoir, OneFamily, etc.

Bannasidhe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Treoir, OneFamily, etc.

Well, Treoir, of whom I have experience, were incredibly helpful when my son was seeking joint-guardianship and access and have continued to support him as he tries for joint custody so I really can't see how you could claim they are part of this so-called 'single mother lobby'.

Cavehill Red

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Well, Treoir, of whom I have experience, were incredibly helpful when my son was seeking joint-guardianship and access and have continued to support him as he tries for joint custody so I really can't see how you could claim they are part of this so-called 'single mother lobby'.

I suspect you're ideological about this, and I'm not inclined to argue with you about it here, since it would be off-topic to the OP's question.
Nevertheless, simply because Treoir fulfill their funded remit of providing information to fathers who request it does not conflict in any way with my assertion that they and every other single parent organisation are dominated by the interests of single mothers solely, and that not one of them have lobbied in the interest of genuine parental equality in this country.

Bannasidhe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I suspect you're ideological about this, and I'm not inclined to argue with you about it here, since it would be off-topic to the OP's question.
Nevertheless, simply because Treoir fulfill their funded remit of providing information to fathers who request it does not conflict in any way with my assertion that they and every other single parent organisation are dominated by the interests of single mothers solely, and that not one of them have lobbied in the interest of genuine parental equality in this country.

I suspect you have an agenda which coloured your response to the OP's question and dragged this thread off topic.

Cavehill Red

The only agenda I have is the desire to see parental equality implemented in Ireland for the benefit of Irish children. It didn't happen during my child's childhood and it won't happen during the OP's children's childhood either, hence my suggestion he forget about a pointless legal battle to pursue maintenance.
The thread was dragged off-topic at 12.34 today and not by me. I was simply answering your question in the mistaken belief you were seeking knowledge or information. I'll know better next time.

Bannasidhe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Courts don't do anything to mammies that could possibly be perceived by them as punitive, including paying their way. Only daddies can be deadbeats according to the Irish family law system.

a combination of legal conservatives and vested interests within the single mummy lobby are in league to prevent this from happening.

I dragged it off topic did I?

You had a bad experience - I get that. But to try and imply there is some 'single mummy lobby' working to ensure father's are penalised is disingenuous in the extreme. When I pointed this out you became passive aggressive and accused me of having some ideological agenda when I was simply pointing out that the courts can and do grant custody to men (yourself and the OP both got custody) and the courts do order women to pay maintenance so your contention that the OP would be wasting him time is demonstrable incorrect.

I do not have an agenda, I believe both parents should be treated absolutely equally unless there are verifiable reasons why this should not happen.

Given that my own son is being held to ransom when it comes to his kids it would be in my interests that I support what you claim about vested interests and some mythical lobby group. But I cannot as I know it is incorrect.

Cavehill Red

No, I didn't say you dragged it off-topic. I said it was dragged off-topic at 12.34 yesterday. Reading back through the thread will indicate who did so, and it wasn't me.
No Irish court granted me custody, incidentally, and the OP has not provided information on his circumstances either. The %age of single fathers (including widowers) lies at just over 10%, indicating that the Irish courts most certainly do not treat fathers equally in custody matters.
If you truly believe in parental equality, and there is no single mother lobby, despite not one state-funded 'single parents' advocacy group having a male representative, then perhaps you could explain to me why not one of any of those groups have ever advocated for parental equality to be introduced in legislation? Perhaps you could explain their defence of in-camera courts?

planetX

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Let me flip this around. Where is the state-funded single fathers lobby? There isn't one.
There is, on the other hand, at least half a dozen nominally single parent organisations which are entirely dominated by women, largely hostile to male involvement, who generally lobby solely for the interests of mothers and not for single parents as a whole.
There is demonstrable desire from the public to drag our family legislation kicking and screaming into the 20th century, if not the 21st, but all attempts to do so have thus far been stymied by conservatives in the legal profession (who do nicely out of Kramer vs Kramer adversarial systems) and the above mentioned lobby groups who will not campaign on any issue which would see mothers disenfranchised, even in circumstances where fathers are demonstrably being discriminated against.

Actually you've flipped it backwards. Single fathers have AMEN. There isn't any single mothers group, all of the rest are for lone parents of either sex. And as a member of several I can tell you that there are men present as members, and that there is NO bias in lobbying. There are plenty of mothers who would like to see a child-centred approach taken by the courts.

Cavehill Red

planetX wrote: »

Actually you've flipped it backwards. Single fathers have AMEN.

WTF? AMEN are a charity representing the interests of male domestic abuse victims, not single fathers!

planetX wrote: »

There isn't any single mothers group, all of the rest are for lone parents of either sex.

In theory, yes, otherwise their funding could be legally challenged. In practice, they are single mothers representative organisations.

planetX wrote: »

And as a member of several I can tell you that there are men present as members, and that there is NO bias in lobbying.

All I can say is LOL to this. Name one of these organisations that has a man in a position of authority?
Name one occasion when any of these organisations campaigned on an issue, such as for example mandatory naming of fathers on birth certs, or automatic rights for unmarried fathers, which would have benefited men and the interests of equality to the expense of women, in whom the status quo is skewed?

planetX wrote: »

There are plenty of mothers who would like to see a child-centred approach taken by the courts.

This is utterly true. I have met many single mums who lament our outdated approach in relation to children's legislation.