Changes to the child support system
TO THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF
THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
This petition of the undersigned shows: the considerable amount of injustices within the Child Support system.
- If the primary care giver (parent 1) CHOOSES to go against Court Orders/agreements, the only way to fight that is to spend thousands on court costs and lawyers, which many cannot afford; there are no consequences for parent 1. Family Relationships do mediations however; their exact advice was “if the children don’t want to see their father, they shouldn’t be forced to”. The kind of agency that actually tells family’s that they don’t really need a father shouldn’t have a say in any family matters. Too many parent 1’s are putting their greed over the actual best interests of the children.
- If parent 2 over pays parent 1 for any reason, parent 1 does not have to pay it back.
- Child support is calculated on an income BEFORE tax, this is unfair as it is not actually the amount of money you ever physically have. You can’t pay for things with money that doesn’t actually exist.
- If parent 2’s income goes up, it doesn’t mean that the children’s NEED’S increase. The more parent 2 earns to try and provide for dependants, the more he/she has to give parent 1. If parent 1 was already getting enough to help support the children, why do they need more?
- The whole CSA formula (as explained by the CSA) is based on “the theory that if the parents had stayed together, then the children would have the benefit of both incomes”. This system alters many people’s entire lives based on a HYPOTHETICAL. This is not a reality. Laws should be based on facts, not “what if’s”.
We therefore ask the House to: make the following changes:
- The CSA should be linked with Family Courts and any breaches should be dealt with. When parent 1 or children CHOOSES to go against those orders and cut parent 2 out of their lives, they should only receive the amount of child support based on the care arrangements stated (except when domestic violence is a contributing factor). More parent 2’s would still be involved in their children’s lives if parent 1 didn’t get paid for their rule breaking.
- Change the formula to be more consistent. By calculations, the child support payable by parent 2, for 2 children (based on $150000 gross) is around $37000, yet the amount allocated for parent 2 to provide for 3 dependants currently under their care is only $32460. The CSA determine it costs $37000 to raise children A & B, but children C, D & E only cost $32460.
- Parent 2 is responsible for more than half of the costs to raise the children, and parent 1 still gets to claim all Centrelink benefits as child support is not considered a taxable income. They get Government perks and they don’t even have to pay an equal amount to raise the children. Costs should be shared equally, at the least.
Name: Bettina Gear
Email (if available): email@example.com