Defiant father read the Riot Act by Judge over maintenance

Here is a recent case of a father trying to intimidate the mother regarding the issue of maintenance.  The judge was suitably robust.

UKAP wonders if some fathers refuse to engage with the process when maintenance is the issue in the same way that some mothers refuse to engage where contact is the issue. In cash cases, the father usually has the ‘whip hand’ where with contact cases, the power lies with the mother.  The court’s job in both cases is surely to level the playing field.

In essence, the concerns seem to be:

1 The court’s failure to as robust in contact matters as it seems to be in financial matters;

2 Our privileging, as a society, of cash over kids. When we get the kind of ruling re contact as the court gave us in White v White on the issue of cash, maybe we can make some progress. Let us hope the FNF initiative on Standing Temporary Orders gains some traction with the new President of the Family Division

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *