Press Releases

STATEMENT OF IMPORTANCE OF BOTH PARENTS IN LAW WILL COMPLEMENT THE WELFARE NEEDS OF CHILDREN; IMPROVEMENT OF ENFORCEMENT WILL INCREASE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN SYSTEM

Families Need Fathers welcomes the Government’s response to the Family Justice Review. Although there is much work to be done to ensure that the family justice system provides better outcomes for children and families in practice, the Government’s proposals mark a clear step forward for private family law in the UK.

Families Need Fathers agrees that disputes about parenting arrangements are best settled out of court, and supports the Government’s proposals to increase the frequency and strength of private family arrangements. However, there will always be a sizeable minority of intractable cases where court becomes unavoidable, and it is in these cases that today’s recommendations mark a positive development for the family justice system. Key proposals include the intention to introduce a legislative statement on the importance of children having an ongoing relationship with both parents following separation wherever possible, and a desire to strengthen enforcement sanctions where court orders are breached.

Ken Sanderson, CEO of Families Need Fathers, commented, “The proposals announced today will help to improve public confidence in the family justice system. By reinforcing the law’s commitment to ensure children benefit from the love and support of both parents following separation, the Government will help to ensure that it is not children who continue to be punished when acrimony between separating parents is played out in the courts.”

“This is not a question of equally dividing time, but of ensuring that children get to benefit from the full involvement of both parents following family breakdown. We support the Government’s belief that developing legislation emphasizing the importance of both parents in a child’s life is complimentary to the welfare needs of the child, and hope that this will be the beginning of a process of reform that will see the development of a family justice system fit for the needs of children and their families.”

Other important proposals include the replacement of ‘contact’ and ‘residence’ orders, which encourage a ‘winner takes all’ mentality in private family law disputes, with ‘child arrangements orders’, which are more child focused. However, the decision to continue requiring grandparents to apply for permission before they can make an application to court to see their grandchildren indicates that there is still work to be done to ensure that the rights of children to a relationship with their wider family are adequately protected.

ENDS 

For comment, case studies or information please contact:

Ross Jones, Acting Director of Policy and Research 0300 0300 110

Vahsti Hale, Policy and Research Officer 0300 0300 110

Note for editors: Families Need Fathers (FNF) is a registered charity providing information and support on shared parenting issues arising from family breakdown, and support to divorced and separated parents, irrespective of gender or marital status.  

Our primary concern is the maintenance of the child’s relationship with both parents. 

Founded in 1974, FNF helps thousands of parents every year.

What do you think?

Send us feedback!

NEARLY HALF OF PARENTS PAYING MAINTENANCE THROUGH THE CSA ARE UNEMPLOYED; PLACING ALL CHARGES ON THESE PARENTS WOULD RESULT IN CYCLES OF DEBT AND ARREARS THAT WOULD PREVENT THEM FROM BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR CHILDREN

Figures released this morning by the Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission for December 2011 show that 46.5% of ‘non-resident parents’ using the CSA are unemployed (http://www.childmaintenance.org/en/publications/stats1211.html). This demonstrates that the proposed amendment from Lord Mackay of Clashfern scheduled today in the House of Lords to place all charges for collection of child maintenance on the ‘non-resident parent’ would be unworkable. His belief that the CSA is used almost exclusively to target fathers who wish to shirk their parental responsibilities is a gross misrepresentation of the financial and personal realities of many separated families, and the amendment would be damaging to the best interests of children in the long term.

Research from Australia has previously shown that the costs of parenting are much higher for parents who are not living with their children than they are in intact families (http://washingtonsharedparenting.com/web/cswg/2001HenmanNCPCostofContact.PDF). This means that low-income fathers who wish to have an active role in their children’s lives are already often placed in untenable financial positions, which would be exacerbated by Lord Mackay’s proposals.

Ken Sanderson, CEO of Families Need Fathers, commented, “Low income fathers are not bad parents as Lord Mackay’s comments suggest. Many, though, are forced to live on the bread-line if they want to remain a part of their children’s lives. Placing all of the charges for collection of maintenance onto these parents would only result in a vicious cycle of accumulated debts and arrears, harming their capability to get back in to work and to a position where they would be able to support their children in the long term. This clearly would not be in the best interests of the children involved, and would be a regressive step for child maintenance in the UK,”

The majority of families using the CSA are those where trust has broken down irrevocably between the parents. Lord Mackay’s view that this is almost always a result of fathers who do not wish to support their children is dangerously misguided.

Ken Sanderson commented, “The reduction of shared parenting or a meaningful relationship to time alone in the report is a complete misunderstanding of the issues. Shared parenting is not about an equal share of time; it is about ensuring the full involvement of both parents in a child’s life, with both parents having an equal say in areas such as education and health, as well as routine and leisure time. The adoption of these proposals would continue to deny thousands of children the full involvement of two loving parents following family breakdown, and to do so would be a betrayal of yet another generation of children in this country in family law. 

Ken Sanderson, CEO of Families Need Fathers, commented, “It is wrong for someone in Lord Mackay’s position to give the impression that the CSA exists because fathers do not want to support their children. The existing culture around maintenance though is that the CSA is the default option, which the Government is attempting to change. Lord Mackay’s assumption that the CSA is only used because fathers want to avoid their responsibilities has no justification, and is not only an insult to those providing for their children, but also perpetuates a negative stereotype of separated fathers which is outdated and wrong.”

ENDS 

For comment, case studies or information please contact:

Ross Jones, Acting Director of Policy and Research 0300 0300 110

Vahsti Hale, Policy and Research Officer 0300 0300 110

Note for editors: Families Need Fathers (FNF) is a registered charity providing information and support on shared parenting issues arising from family breakdown, and support to divorced and separated parents, irrespective of gender or marital status.

What do you think?

Send us feedback!

Reports this morning in the press suggest that the Government will announce plans on Monday to introduce legislation ensuring children have the right to maintain a meaningful relationship with both parents following divorce and separation. This move would represent a tremendous step forward for family law, and benefit the thousands of children who lose contact with a loving parent unnecessarily each year.

Ken Sanderson, CEO of Families Need Fathers, commented, “A move to introduce legislation enshrining a child’s rights to an ongoing meaningful relationship with both parents would be a victory for children. For too long, we have seen children of many separating couples across the country lose out on the emotional and social benefits of a loving relationship with both parents following separation and divorce, and we are delighted that the government intends to address this situation. This is not a question of fathers’ or mothers’ rights; it is about protecting the rights of children to have two loving parents fully involved in their lives wherever possible, to the benefit of the children, their families, and wider society.”

Families Need Fathers will release a more detailed response on Monday, once the details of the Government proposals have been officially announced.

ENDS 

For comment, case studies or information please contact:

Ross Jones, Acting Director of Policy and Research 0300 0300 110

Vahsti Hale, Policy and Research Officer 0300 0300 110

Note for editors: Families Need Fathers (FNF) is a registered charity providing information and support on shared parenting issues arising from family breakdown, and support to divorced and separated parents, irrespective of gender or marital status.

What do you think?

Send us feedback!