What if --- Trying to cover my bases...

[Inertia]

Ok, some background for those who haven't read anything on it.

When I was young and stupid I married a moron and had 2 kids. Then I grew a brain.

XH wanted all the stuff, and to keep all the stuff, he and I signed a statutory declaration (two in fact, one each) that stated that he got the stuff, and I got all "parental rights and responsibilities" of the two children. When I attended court for the divorce hearing, the judge asked about custody and settlement and I advised of the Stat Dec and what it contained and that we were both in agreement with these arrangements.

Zoom forward 10 years to today. A couple of days ago I got the surprise of my life. A letter from CSA turned up and said he has to start paying me more than the base rate... I could have dieeeeed!

If you were a fly on the wall in XHs place though - you'd get a show. He is not going to be happy. He tried to get me to agree to him not paying child support at all and the ONLY reason I got away with that one was I told him its out of my hands - centrelink and CSA control that - not me.

But what if now he decides since he is paying so much, he wants to start sticking his nose in more - or worse, want shared care so his rate gets reduced (he is sadly smart enough to work that out).

Where do I stand on that? Kids are 13 (on Sept 18) and 12 (On Aug 28). Do they have a say in it?

Help!

[willow5]

YES! The kids are too old for a court order, if he wants shared care and is willing to take it to court it won't even get there. The magistrate (if it was even to get that far) would take the kids aside and ask them what they want.

The only time at their age a court order would be put in place is if there was any neglect or abuse.

[willow5]

When I was young and stupid I married a moron and had 2 kids. Then I grew a brain.

Me too.

[Inertia]

Thats fabulous news. As far as they are concerned he made his feelings quite clear over the last 10 birthdays and are smart enough that they would pretty much see right through it anyway.

So long as they get a choice, I am more than happy with that.

Thanks!

[Amity]

They would probably have to see an independent psychologist and give the independent psychologist their "wishes" pursuant to the Family Law Act.

It is unlikely that any Court would make orders in respect to children of those ages, unless it was clear that one party had "alienated" them from the other - obviously not in your case, as it's his choice!

HTH.

[Trillian]

Well that would be proof enough that he wants no part in their lives as well as the stat dec. Unfortunately the CSA has to by law persue any child support claim and mutual agreements are not enough these days.

[Floweryfields]

Maybe stupid question, but if he wanted shared care, wouldn't that end up costing him alot more? I know what you get paid for support is not enough to raise a child, so to have to actually feed and clothe them himself for half the week would surely be more expensive.... wouldn't it?

[Inertia]

They would probably have to see an independent psychologist and give the independent psychologist their "wishes" pursuant to the Family Law Act.

It is unlikely that any Court would make orders in respect to children of those ages, unless it was clear that one party had "alienated" them from the other - obviously not in your case, as it's his choice!

HTH.

The stat dec should go a long way to proving he removed himself - not the other way around.

Well that would be proof enough that he wants no part in their lives as well as the stat dec. Unfortunately the CSA has to by law persue any child support claim and mutual agreements are not enough these days.

Thats what I told him. At the time I was a non working single mum to 2 kids - I wasnt risking losing $200 a fortnight so he could skip out of $25 a month. But thats what he was asking me to do, knowing full well I'd lose most of my ftba.

Maybe stupid question, but if he wanted shared care, wouldn't that end up costing him alot more? I know what you get paid for support is not enough to raise a child, so to have to actually feed and clothe them himself for half the week would surely be more expensive.... wouldn't it?

Yeah - sadly its not about the money so much as the fact that he has to "give it to me".

[widdly]

thank goodness the kids are so old so that they wont be forced to spend time with their sperm donor.

Hope things dont get too messy for you

[Amity]

Yes, the Stat Dec shows his intention at that time.

The Court will not be completely interested in his intention at that time - the Court must look at what is in the best interests of the children at the time the application is made. Look at s60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 which sets out what the Court must consider when making Orders in respect to children.

I talk to people about this every day - I'm a barrister whose main practice is in family law.

[willow5]

I just think it's sad when people don't want anything to do with their kids until they work out they might not have to pay as much child support, it's just not fair if this is his only motive.

[Inertia]

Yes, the Stat Dec shows his intention at that time.

The Court will not be completely interested in his intention at that time - the Court must look at what is in the best interests of the children at the time the application is made. Look at s60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 which sets out what the Court must consider when making Orders in respect to children.

I talk to people about this every day - I'm a barrister whose main practice is in family law.

I just meant in regards to the fact that I didnt alienate him from them. But honestly, I think its in the best interests of my kids to not be told 10 years later when they have a stable, albeit it blended, family that behaves like a nuclear family that they need to start spending time with a guy they don't remember and be told that its best for them because he is their dad.. They have a dad now and his contribution to the last 9 years of their lives should also be considered here - and certainly shouldnt be walked on because the ex contributed a bit of DNA 9 months before they were born!

I just cant see how any good could come from it for them. Then again, those kids were the only good that ever came from him, so I may be bias. LOL

I just think it's sad when people don't want anything to do with their kids until they work out they might not have to pay as much child support, it's just not fair if this is his only motive.

It would be just like him - which is why I am getting all the info I can now in case he tries it. I honestly didnt know whether to cheer or worry when the new assessment came in.