David Cameron criticised after attacking 'runaway dads'

David Cameron has been accused of "ripping away" support from single parents, just hours after making a stinging attack on absent fathers.

The prime minister said "runaway dads" should be "stigmatised" in the same way as drink-drivers.

But charity Gingerbread said government proposals to charge those needing state help to obtain child maintenance would make life harder for lone parents.

Ministers said they wanted to encourage parents to settle their own affairs.

'Beyond the pale'

Writing in the Sunday Telegraph to mark Father's Day, the prime minister said fathers who failed to "financially and emotionally" support their children must face consequences.

"It's high time runaway dads were stigmatised and the full force of shame was heaped upon them," he said.

"They should be looked at like drink-drivers, people who are beyond the pale.

"They need the message rammed home to them, from every part of our culture, that what they're doing is wrong; that leaving single mothers, who do a heroic job against all odds, to fend for themselves simply isn't acceptable."

But Fiona Weir, from Gingerbread - which campaigns on behalf of single parents - criticised the prime minister.

"David Cameron is right that single mums - and indeed single dads - do a heroic job, but those same parents are about to have government support ripped away from them if they need help securing child maintenance payments from their child's other parent," she said.

"If the prime minister really wants to support heroic single parents, he must withdraw these damaging proposals which would limit access to the CSA [Child Support Agency]."

Since 2008 - when the much-maligned CSA was effectively axed - the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission (CMEC) has collected money from non-resident parents.

But earlier this year, the government said it wanted to encourage separating couples to organise their own payments and was proposing to charge those who did not for accessing the services of the CMEC.

They would be required to pay an upfront fee of £100 (or £50 if they claim benefits), plus an ongoing charge of between 7% and 12% of the money paid.
'Lack of understanding'

For Labour, shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said Mr Cameron's words were "hollow".

"His government is making it much easier for deadbeat dads to run from their responsibilities by charging mums to use the Child Support Agency," she said.

Mr Cameron also said he was determined to introduce tax breaks for married couples - despite Liberal Democrat opposition to the idea.

But Ms Cooper said such a policy would "reward runaway dads who remarry".

Erin Pizzey, the founder of the first UK's women's refuge, said Mr Cameron was displaying a lack of understanding about the reality of family break-ups.

"There are a lot of reasons why [fathers are] not with their children... not least that women won't let them," she said.

Ms Pizzey said it was wrong to single out men, adding: "There is a vast mass of women who are equally as feckless as the men and we never talk about them."

Bob Greig, from the single parenting website Only Dads, agreed that the prime minister's argument was "too simplistic".

"There are many cultural, employment, financial, [and] legal issues as well which prevent dads from having a full-on relationship with their children post-separation and divorce," he told the BBC.

"Why that isn't recognised in his article in the Telegraph I just don't know."

The Camerons have three children, Nancy, Arthur and Florence - who was born last August.

Their first child, Ivan, who was born profoundly disabled and needed 24-hour care, died in February 2009.

BBC News - David Cameron criticised after attacking 'runaway dads'

---

Thus we see the conservative version of the nanny state in action. Obviously aligned with "traditional marriage", what we end up with is a pretty coercive package.

Tax cuts for married couples, which benefit of course be received rather more up the social scale than down it, combined with charges for (mostly) women to access the CSA, are plretty clearly aimed at coercing couples to stay together, although the pressure will be on the mother to compromise.

I'm no friend of fathers who refuse to support their children, but I don't think either party in a separated couple is inherently beyond the pale. Sometimes it doesn't work out, that's just the way it goes, and this is all simply trying to force people to conform to an idealised version of nuclear family monogamy, while ratcheting up the rhetoric against those who for whatever reason can't make it work.

I obviously agree with you and I think that the rethoric from the PM is indeed simplistic - Although, as opposed to some of the people quoted, I think it's indeed a perfectly coherent approach - Everything but nuclear families are to be made to suffer, especially dads who can't/refuse to finance their kids after a break-up [because of the associated costs with bad kids].

It's the same old "back to the 50s" we always get from Conservatives when it comes to social mores.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

The inconsistency is in saying that fathers should support their children while making it easier for them to escape that.