If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Australian Federal Goverment Dept against shared custody
Shared custody could cost hundreds of millions: reportBy Annabel Crabb
Political Correspondent Canberra November 1, 2003 Print this article Email to a friend Sharing child custody equally between divorcing or separating parents would cost the welfare system hundreds of millions of dollars in extra payments, according to a Federal Government department. The Family and Community Services Department report says that if just 30 per cent of separated parents acquired joint custody, taxpayers would pay another $156 million a year in unemployment and family tax benefit payments. As more parents took on custody responsibilities in such an arrangement, payments from non-custodial parents would be reduced and the cost burden would shift to the Government. Nine out of 10 non-custodial parents paying maintenance are male, says the department's submission to Parliament's joint custody inquiry. If 30 per cent of the 685,000 families now in maintenance arrangements swapped to a 50/50 system where each parent had equal time with their children, parent's maintenance payments would fall by $360 million a year. But welfare payments would increase as the parents assuming care responsibilities would gain more entitlements. "If the parent now with extra care is receiving Newstart allowance and is single, the higher 'with child' rate would generally become payable," the submission says. Parliament's Family and Community Affairs Committee is examining how parents could share care of their children after separation or divorce, after Prime Minister John Howard commissioned a report. At issue is a proposal that the Family Law Act be changed to include a "rebuttable presumption" of joint custody, where the starting point for custody negotiations would be that children should spend equal time living with each parent. The Family Court, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission and federal departments have criticised the proposal. Non-custodial parents' groups have argued that the Family Court has an informal "presumption" against joint custody, disadvantaging fathers. The inquiry will report by the end of the year. ================================================== ====== PM backs dads in custody overhaul The Australian newspaper carries a report this morning that "A dramatic shift in family law could see divorced parents given automatic shared custody of their children. John Howard is considering the radical proposal, triggering concerns about disruption for children, who mainly live with mothers, and greater conflict between parents. But lobbyists for divorced men who had little access to their children welcomed government plans for a review. Mr Howard told Coalition MPs yesterday he was "interested in the broad concept" of rebuttable joint custody - where the court presumes a child should spend equal time living with each parent unless there are strong reasons against it. His spokeswoman said later that the Prime Minister was "mindful of the need for male role-models for children, and the desire for both parents to have continuing responsibility for their upbringing". The move would be a dramatic shift from present arrangements after divorce, where the vast majority of children live predominantly with their mother, but stay at their father's home maybe every second weekend. Only 16 per cent of divorced couples in Australia have the children living with each parent for more than 30 per cent of the time. SOURCE - FULL STORY: The Australian 18 Jun 2003 -------------------------------- I was in court the other day and was so saddenned to see so many fathers who have lost everything due to the ridiculous dark ages laws of child support in Australia. It is really sickenning. Our primeminister is finally trying to do something right and the CSA (Child Support Agency) and Family Court are against it. What crap! I feel for these real dads. My situation is bad enough. A woman has declared that I am the father of her child outside Australia (and I'm not!) and the CSA has come after me with guns blazing. I have had to go to court at great expense just to get the CSA to listen to my case. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
State Foster Care Reform Efforts Face Federal Financing ''Straitjacket,'' New Report by Fostering Results Shows | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | March 15th 04 11:45 PM |
State Foster Care Reform Efforts Face Federal Financing ''Straitjacket,'' | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | March 11th 04 05:37 PM |
The Determination of Child Custody in the USA | Fighting for kids | Child Support | 21 | November 17th 03 01:35 AM |
LaMusga, Braver, Burgess, and Move-aways | Asherah | Child Support | 14 | July 28th 03 11:58 PM |
LaMusga, Braver, Burgess, and Move-aways | Asherah | Single Parents | 0 | July 25th 03 06:20 PM |