Parental Rights And Money

Pay up or else …

If a parent who is responsible for paying court-ordered child support fails to pay his or her due, do you think that the parent in question should be prohibited from seeing their child? Why or why not?

I honestly do not think this question can be answered with a simple yes or no as it has to depend on the people involved and their circumstances.

* The non custodial parent has no interest in the child.
* The non custodial parent was tricked into having the child.
* It would be dangerous for the child if the non custodial parent knew where they
are.
* The non custodial parent cannot afford the amount to be paid. (I don't mean
pretending it is too much money or just not wanting to, I mean those who genuinely
love the child but cannot afford to pay and live.

These reasons should be taken into consideration when the courts are ordering money to be forcibly taken from the bank account for example and given to the one with the child.
If the relationship finished because of abuse then surely it is better for that child to have no contact and if that means no financial support also then so be it.

If the parents themselves are happy with the financial arrangements they have then surely we should just leave them be. It is much better for the child involved to have two parents who are amicable towards each other than to have parents who are full of vitriol and blame. Money is not everything, nor is it the most important consideration.

If it is a case of the parent just not wanting to have to pay out then yes, the money should be forcibly taken, but it should be between the parents and not involve the child or their relationship with the other parent.

I found this one so difficult to answer as my own experiences have affected my emotions and thoughts on this subject. I've tried to be as fair as I possibly can, hopefully I've been successful but for some an emotive issue I think I most likely failed.