The Myth of Absent Fathers - a Response to the Government Consultation on the CSA
On BBC's Sunday a.m. the would-be Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne described the tax incentives which a future Conservative Government would create in order to encourage marriage, because statistics show marriage is the best environment for children. So far, well done! It is refreshing to hear a politician base family policy on fact rather than prejudice.
However, Mr Osborne then added the rider, which is almost obligatory these days, that many single mums do a heroic job, and more should be done to pursue absent dads. Single mums come and tell him this, he said, in his surgery. So, does Mr Osborne accept at face value someone who tells him how disreputable her ex-partner is and how heroic she is, with no thought that the ex-partner, who is conveniently absent, might have a different story to tell? If so, Mr Osborne should be a push-over at G7 meetings.
Just as history is written by the winners, the same is true when accounts are told of family breakdown. Given that in 93% of cases it is the mum who wins the children in the family court lottery, it is hardly surprising that the myth has arisen of heroic single mums being abandoned by worthless dads.
Such an important issue as the raising of our children is deserving of more careful analysis. Labour politicians were happy to conceal the defects of the Child Support Agency by blaming absent fathers, trumpeting that two thirds of them did not pay. It was only when investigative campaigners uncovered the true figures, i.e. two thirds of dads did pay, that the government acknowledged their error. Nevertheless, not letting the facts get in the way of a good story, politicians of all colours have continued to blame absent fathers for not supporting their children, when the true fault lay with a Child Support Agency which was, and still is, hopelessly incompetent.
Last week, the government consultation on the review of the CSA ended, with all the indications that the same mistakes will be repeated by whatever replaces the CSA, because lessons have not been learned. The simple truth is that most absent dads do not want to be absent. They are desperate to be allowed to play a full part in raising their children, and feel excluded. However, the CSA has no interest in this - it's role is simply to collect money.
"Child support" should, surely, be about more than money. Whatever new child support system is put in place, it's main function should be to ensure that both parents are fully involved in raising their children whether living together or apart. By contrast, the CSA was underpinned by thinking which knew the price of everything, and the value of nothing. Unless this changes, children will continue to be let down by whatever replaces the CSA.
