It is a fucked arrangement, but I wouldn't want the government to have the ability to control or scrutinise what people spend their money on. I think the suggestion in the article is much better:
Fuck "keeping her in the lifestyle to which she is accustomed" in a split. The lifestyle is what she gets as reward for being pleasant enough that you want to keep her around.
Also: What the fuck is the "mens rights agency" and why oh why is a shiela the director of it?
Quote:Quote:
Director of the Men’s Rights Agency, Sue Price, said non-custodial fathers often raise fears their child support is not being spent on their children.
“For a lot of them it isn’t, it funds the mothers’ lifestyle, and what adds insult to injury is they don’t get to see their children — that’s the worst offence.
But Ms Price said she did not think it was wise to introduce a system where the child support agency, or another body, scrutinised what custodial parents spent their child support on.
Instead she proposed all child support payments should be limited to “a reasonable amount” akin to the support provided through the Federal Government’s Family Tax Benefits.
Fuck "keeping her in the lifestyle to which she is accustomed" in a split. The lifestyle is what she gets as reward for being pleasant enough that you want to keep her around.
Also: What the fuck is the "mens rights agency" and why oh why is a shiela the director of it?