Whitehall Scumbags And Errant Fathers
FATHERS who fail to pay child support are to be targeted by a revamped Child Support Agency.
The agency has come under fire for its lack of organisation and failure to collect an estimated £3.5billion in maintenance. But now the Government is eager to crackdown on runaway dads.
Central to the new plans will be the naming and shaming of errant fathers with their details posted on a new-look CSA website. Guilty péres could also be fined and even have their names put on a credit blacklist.
Plans to impose curfews and confiscate passports are also currently being considered.
However, the names will only be published after consent from the mother has been obtained.
A senior Whitehall source says: “We will be writing to the first group of mums to get their permission. These dads are failing to pay maintenance for their kids and causing real hardship and misery. We want to hear what mums think about this. But we believe it is right to let people know what scumbags they are.”
What’s the world coming to – a senior official using the word “scumbag”.
Posted: 6th, June 2007 | In: Money Comments (4) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- Desperate Dan on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
- Desperate Dan on The 14 Ten Most Offensive Google Search Results
- Clive on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
- yampster on Jamie Cullum Sings The Persuit, In Pictures
- yampster on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
June 18th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
It sure is time we did something to set the record straight before the powers that be destroy what little is left of the traditional family. We for our part implore all who suffer at the hands of family law and those who cherish a child’s need for both maternal and paternal input in their formative years to come out and denounce the systematic destruction of society before it is too late. To sit by and witness the State destroy what our forefathers fought for namely freedom and family life would be an insult to their sacrifice and memory.
June 8th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
Mike, perhaps you know someone who could set up a website with the intention of publishing the names of mothers who wilfully break court orders.
Though of course in the spirit of equity this should only be done with the fathers permission!
June 7th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
The National Society for Children and Family Contact can do no better than quote the wise words of Mr Justice Munby, a leading and outspoken family court judge who not so long ago referred to the removal of children “as surely the most terrible power the state may wield over a citizen once capital punishment was abolished”. We can add only this that unfortunately he forgot to mention the effect is the same upon parents invariably fathers in ordinary family court disputes who’s access to children is suddenly prevented or severely restricted, and this is without question or doubt happening daily throughout the land. Suffice to say when this power is wielded in almost complete secrecy then there has to be a fundamental flaw in the functioning of democracy and about this all victims be they enforced absent fathers can only but see Hutton’s threats towards them as nothing short of governmental bias. For in reality there are thousands upon thousands of fathers out there who would dearly love to bear the duties, benefits and privileges of fatherhood but are denied these opportunities as a consequence of decisions of the so called “Family Courts” who, it seems are as anti family as is the current Government. So when Mr Hutton says he intends to name and shame so-called errant fathers does this mean that his government intends to name and shame mothers also who wilfully break court orders thus denying fathers their contact rights and if not then why not, does he also not see the need for family law reform in which parity will prevail and does he not realize that by naming and shaming anyone to do with child proceedings is to identify the child involved and this in itself may not be in the best interest of the child. Surely what is good for the goose is also good for the gander? A pity also is the lack of identificaton by the above article to name and shame the Whitehall source who used the word scumbags.
http://www.nscfc.com
June 7th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
will they ever get it right?