By: donnajane027
30/04/2008
10:49 am Yahoo! Profile:
donnajane027 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I agree to the new child support reforms.As a receiver of child support i beleive the new system is fairer as long as the other party sticks to it aswell.Well done csa.Oh buy the way my payments went down not up |
|
By: leeethal2
30/04/2008
11:47 am Yahoo! Profile:
leeethal2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Mine went down too, but hey as long as they appear more often, and my girl gets to see her Dad as much as she/he wants I am happy :) |
|
By: beaumulligan
30/04/2008
11:58 am Yahoo! Profile:
beaumulligan Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The changes occured as a direct result of literally thousands of letters sent to the Govt highlighting the extent to which the CSA was blatantly anti male. Its to bad the reforms dont extend to a full enquiry into the disgusting discrimination handed out to the thousands of good men who were held to ransom by greedy, vindictive and manipulative women who were allowed to use children as a weapon in destroying mens lives as well as the lives of new partners who may have caome into their lives.
Case of too little too late but i guess with the current pro woman everything climate, any progress against the anti male brigade is good. |
|
By: leeethal2
30/04/2008
12:02 pm Yahoo! Profile:
leeethal2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I love my daughter, and for that matter my ex I can no longer live with, to stoop to that kind of behaviour Beau. |
|
By: nessa_sarily_so
30/04/2008
12:13 pm Yahoo! Profile:
nessa_sarily_so Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| If everyone had put their children first none of this would have come about. I'm glad to see the system made a bit fairer and its sad that there are still parents shirking their responsibilitys or taking unfair advantage. |
|
By: beaumulligan
30/04/2008
12:19 pm Yahoo! Profile:
beaumulligan Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Not for a moment leethal could i ever suggest such cr@ppy behaviour relates to your good self. Of course i dont know you so please dont ever feel my observations relate to any specific individual. I do however keep a keen eye on social trends and stand firmly behind the assertion that such a huge ammount of women were using the previous anti male system along with children to inflict what was to often, bitter revenge for a relationship gone wrong. That was never (gladly) an option for men. |
|
By: leeethal2
30/04/2008
12:26 pm Yahoo! Profile:
leeethal2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
No I didn't take it personally, was actually trying to point out that not all are after money, and even indeed that sometimes a situation MAY appear to be a bad one, or my even be painted that way by some who may be disenfranchised... but really there are not that many evil manipulative people out there.. not in my experience anyway:)
Most women have their kid's interests at heart. |
|
By: beaumulligan
30/04/2008
12:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
beaumulligan Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I agree of course, most do. But its the many who my beef is with that did indeed behave in the way i describe. Please understand i have never been badly treated by a woman at all, love me Mum, am not Gay e.t.c,but as i said i do observe society and was well aware of the battle men in those situations faced. It was not fair and that is why changes have been made. I can assure you if women were facing a similar conspiracy , leading to record suicides and great misery i would defend them just as vigourosly. A biased, anti male system was allowed to flourish for to long and allowed children to be used as weapon, it was wrong , has now been found to have been wrong and has been partially fixed. Thats gotta be good. |
|
By: leeethal2
30/04/2008
12:41 pm Yahoo! Profile:
leeethal2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Beau you're starting to sound not bad at all...I agree with the new system..
So onto sorting out domestic violence then for us girls? |
|
By: reidsays
30/04/2008
12:42 pm Yahoo! Profile:
reidsays Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
" It was not fair and that is why changes have been made. I can assure you if women were facing a similar conspiracy , leading to record suicides and great misery i would defend them just as vigourosly."
aww schucks beau, given a few years difference in years and eras i am sure you would have been a staunch feminist supporter!! |
|
By: beaumulligan
30/04/2008
12:54 pm Yahoo! Profile:
beaumulligan Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Well i wish i had all the answers leethal, Domestic violence is deplorable but at the risk of sounding like one or two of my detractors, it is now an issue that affects both sexes. I dont seek to muddy the waters by using a few isolated cases to justify a stance of equal guilt, but either way it happens its not on.
I must confess to not being completely ignorant to the Springer style barneys which are often highlighted on T.V. What is always evident is wild, angry women laying into men at will with no intervention until a man finally has enough and moves toward the woman. Then we see the outraged avalanche of intervention as the male is overpowered and accused of being all the Bstards under the sun. The message there and in many other enviroments is that its o.k for women to assault men but certainly not the other way around. That leads us to what is happening in society as women are often guilty of escalating a situation to a physical level and then freaking out when they get assaulted! I dont for a moment condone domestic violence in any scenario but women could try to accept a little responsibility in not always taking arguments to the brink, and definitly not fooling themselves that if they bash a man he will not retaliate!
In a nutshell its wrong, wrong wrong! for both sexes. |
|
By: leeethal2
30/04/2008
1:11 pm Yahoo! Profile:
leeethal2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| He he well having grown up with five brothers you can be sure I will NEVER make that mistake:) |
|
By: sapperrh
30/04/2008
1:12 pm Yahoo! Profile:
sapperrh Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Having worked for CSA a long long time ago, I have seen the best, and unfortunately worst, coming from both custodial and non custodial parents. I have seen some paying parents blatantly side step their obligations while some custodial parents have used their children for financial gain and as a weapon against former partners. However, I believe that these people are in the minority overall. Add to that the emotional baggage that you get when a CSA client commits suicide because of your actions (within the law) and it makes it a very depressing subject to deal with.
I don't know the full details of all the changes, but I believe that any changes made have to be better than the system that has used to date. Fortunately, I am not part of the system both personally or professionally anymore, but a close relative is about to be put through it, so I am sure I will see more of it in future.
Systemic problems calculating payments, enforcing collection and ensuring appropriate use of money led me to believe that I could no longer work for a system that I found morally questionable.
Having said that, more former colleagues should be given a break as they have a very demanding job to do, often with demadning work *** and little resources. You may not like their decisions, but remember that they are only there to enforce the law, they don't make the law. Also remember they may not like what they have to do either. |
|
By: leeethal2
30/04/2008
1:17 pm Yahoo! Profile:
leeethal2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| One of my best friends now works for the CSA... hard yakka that. |
|
By: beaumulligan
30/04/2008
1:22 pm Yahoo! Profile:
beaumulligan Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Not agreeing with or liking ones job is no excuse for assisting in the promotion of a clearly discriminatory programme. Well done for being as honest as you are and non judgemental but the fact is CSA like many other current organisations allowed itself to be hijacked and manipulated by the powerful feminist Lobby group. Its rulings were nearly always in favour of the women and it was well known as one of many organisations "BY women For Women".If judged fairly by todays anti discrimination laws it would be found guilty of gross injustices against men, which often led to such pure frustration that violence or suicide would often follow.
The often highlighted sight of some "Crazy" man holding someone hostage or killing himself or others was actually often a direct result of that man being robbed of his family by a vindictive ex with the full support of a pro woman Dept ,again fully supported by a feminist influenced Govt. The Dept has blood on its hands. |
|
By: reidsays
30/04/2008
4:00 pm Yahoo! Profile:
reidsays Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
that's interesting what you say beau.....cause in the mid 90s onwards they treated me in the same way as you say they treat the men and how feminist and independent a lady could i be hey???
so i reiterate again.....the government isn't necessarily feminist influenced....it isn't after women's independence at all, but returning women to a lifestyle under the 'female role' as seen by many religious org.an.is. ations.
if the government is influenced by anything it is quite obvious it is definitely influenced by the bible and christian religion........donations , attitudes, predominance of religious politicians making decisions based on their religious beliefs rather than reflecting the needs of the secular feminists????.....THAT is what i see, whereas you see feminism???
who is right i wonder? |
|
By: nessa_sarily_so
30/04/2008
4:13 pm Yahoo! Profile:
nessa_sarily_so Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
A part of the problem is 'estimate your wages' and 'last years taxable income'.
For jobs with irregular income, contractors, self-employed, farming (lots of things really) it is hard to know where you stand financially. |
|
By: leeethal2
30/04/2008
4:16 pm Yahoo! Profile:
leeethal2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| arrrggh herein lies my problem, na dbceause my ex has his own company they cannot enforce it. :( |
|
By: leeethal2
30/04/2008
4:17 pm Yahoo! Profile:
leeethal2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| na dbceause = and because..oops |
|
By: beaumulligan
30/04/2008
4:22 pm Yahoo! Profile:
beaumulligan Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Off track again there im afraid Reid, how can you claim the Govt is controlled by religion when just today they have announced further concessions to h0mo couples? You ask for proof, I provide it, then you find another wordplay twist to deflect the facts. Govts only concern is votes, at present they are aware that they can continue to discriminate against men and hetrosexuals without to many probs at the polling booth. Not so for women who have been manipulated by the manbashers into thinking they are in some kind of war and must all hit the whinge button everytime they dont get their demands met in Parliment. Therefore you have constant pressure on Govt by the Feminist lobby, supported by the dumbed down female masses, to keep on implementing ridiculously biased, female friendly laws at the expense of men who as yet are doing little in their defence.
Im glad to say though that the self defeating male chivalry is fast dissapearing as blokes wake up to just how much they are being held back so that women can enjoy the kind of perks they claim not to be weak enough to need. |
|
By: nessa_sarily_so
30/04/2008
4:31 pm Yahoo! Profile:
nessa_sarily_so Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
One thing I will never agree with - especially if I were a father - is real dad not paying CM because there is another man in the kids home. See that happen from time to time.
To me it would be giving too much financial power to another person over my kids. |
|
By: reidsays
30/04/2008
5:13 pm Yahoo! Profile:
reidsays Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
off YOUR track beau?
if the governments only concern is votes then why were they accepting so much money from a religion (exclusive brethren) that did not have to vote nor have it's hand in political parties???
"supported by the dumbed down female masses"....why are they 'dumbed down' beau...thru the media you mean??
as you say...money talks for votes...and the male hmsxl community is quite a rich one....they cannot be ignored any longer?
where exactly is the discrimination against men and htsxls???...except in the previously female domains?
the women you describe sound like children used to having their own way...not feminists who most definitely haven't...
nothing wrong with a discussion of differing povs surely beau? |
|
By: reidsays
1/05/2008
9:18 am Yahoo! Profile:
reidsays Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| so where oh where is donnajane027??? |
|
By: sapperrh
1/05/2008
10:36 am Yahoo! Profile:
sapperrh Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I can't agree with you when you say that CSA has been hijacked by feminist groups. There is a legislative platform that is established by the government and the department and its employees simply enforce the laws as they stand.
If you are going to blame anyone for the laws being discriminatory, blame the members of parliament that support the legislation as it stood previously or as it will stand under the reforms.
The work of the CSA is no different to that of a policeman for example. They don't make the laws, they just enforce them.
BTW, while a majority of CSA employees are female (as is the case for the public service in general) you will find most of its Executives are probably male. |
|
By: reidsays
1/05/2008
10:55 am Yahoo! Profile:
reidsays Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
great post sapperrh!
nessa...."One thing I will never agree with - especially if I were a father - is real dad not paying CM because there is another man in the kids home. See that happen from time to time."
this is a dilemma all round nessa...
mothers are told a male role model is needed, yet if they have a boarder in their home that is male they are assumed to be de facto and the male held financially accountable!!!
even IF defacto placing the burden of care over the children onto a man that may only be relating to the women. is not only presumptuous but also dangerous?
many women say they need a man around...(and social and religious paradigms back that!)..should this man be automatically made responsible for the children and the mother's finances altered???
with the instances of unrelated 'step parents' taking control over children....and involving abuse....this really needs attention:(
perhaps there should be an official 'acceptance ceremony' by the unrelated male.....to accept responsibility for the children or not??
to force it is ultimately detrimental?
To me it would be giving too much financial power to another person over my kids." |
|
