Child-support payments and parental alienation, by Augusto Zimmermann.
Reliable studies indicate that children often adapt better to their parents’ divorce if they are allowed to have a continuing contact with their non-custodial parents. Indeed, a recurring theme in the field of child psychoanalysis is that children of divorced parents often desire to develop a meaningful relationship with their non-custodial parents. …
Is it possible this situation, maybe, could be gamed? Who benefits?
Contrary to popular belief, child-support payments have nothing to do with fathers abandoning their children or reneging on their marital vows. In a “no-fault” system such as Australia’s, of course, nobody can contest their unilateral divorce. That being so, it is possible to envisage a loving father being forcibly separated from his beloved children and such payments being awarded ostensibly, without any reference to “fault” whatsoever.
Originally justified as a simple method of recovering welfare costs, child-support payments have been transformed into a massive federal subsidy on unilateral divorce. In other words, child-support payment is an entitlement to be automatically assessed on all non-custodial parents, and even on those who were unwillingly separated from their children against their personal will.
As noted by U.S. sociology professor Stephen Baskerville: “No-fault divorce allowed a mother to divorce her husband for any reason or no reason and to take the children with her. Child support took the process a step further by allowing the divorcing mother to use the now-fatherless children to claim her husband’s income – also regardless of any fault on her part (or lack of fault on his) in abrogating the marriage agreement.” …
A parent who holds temporary custody may procrastinate as much as possible with custody litigation in order to prevent the other parent any right of access to their children. When this awful reality takes place, an innocent parent will lose access to their children and financially reward the other parent responsible for the alienation through no fault or agreement of his or her volition. …
Unfortunately, some excellent parents have completely lost any access to their children. This is particularly so when non-custodial parents are falsely accused of child abuse and neglect, and even the sexual molestation of their children.
Family Violence Orders (FVOs) are a common strategy for the purposes of generating parental alienation. Such orders are easily obtainable and they can be used to alienate an innocent parent from their children. The custodial parent only has to defame the other parent without the slightest need of proof. Such accusations completely tear apart entire families, all on the word of one person and with no need of evidence. …
Since the amount of payment is proportional to the time of visitation, the alienation strategy is undoubtedly linked to child-support payments. Support payments have been transformed into a perverse incentive to unilateral divorce and parental alienation.
Ever noticed how this unjust situation receives almost no discussion in the media? Again, who benefits?
