Giffey suggestion: Should committed fathers really pay less maintenance?

Fathers who take care of their child should have to pay less maintenance, demands Family Minister Franziska Giffey. A good idea? We asked separate mothers and fathers what they think about it.

Federal Family Minister Franziska Giffey (SPD) wants to better serve fathers with dignity. If you spend a lot of time with your children – at least ten days a month – this should affect the maintenance payments. Giffey said in the “Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung”:

It does not matter that the father has to continue to pay full support, even if the child spends a lot of time with him and even has his own room with him.

The law must be adapted to the social realities, the family minister said.

The current case law is still based on the “residence model”, in which the child lives with one parent (usually the mother) and the other parent (usually the father) receives access rights and pays maintenance. But there are more and more fathers who take their parenting seriously and take over a large part of the care – beyond the usual in some families regulation, in which the child is only every other weekend with the father.

Is the initiative of the family minister overdue, or does it make the situation of single parents more difficult? We asked separate mothers and fathers for their opinion:

Alfred (one daughter, 11, change model)

“My daughter’s mother and I try to be good parents and share everything, we do not care about upkeep, a kid should be all about making him feel good.” I wish that such discussions about maintenance do not have to be conducted at all. “

Maria (two daughters, 6 and 10, change model)

“I think the proposal is a good one and right, because the men automatically pay for the child when it’s theirs, so I think it’s difficult to do so, how can a man prove that in a dispute how many days he has Or the other way around: How should a woman prove that he has not taken enough care of himself, I find the control very difficult. “

Susanne (a son, 14, residence model)

“Of course, it should be taken into account when a parent invests significant time and money in their child.” Why should a father who is there for his child pay as much child support as one who has gone underground? that the many women who manage parenting almost always leave out part of their income, which can lead to poverty at the latest in old age, but this problem should not be solved via child support, but through a reform of childcare: when If a parent finances a child, he or she should receive financial compensation from the other, and at a time when women and men earn their own income, then family work can no longer be free of charge, but overall, as a society, we should no longer have children “Women’s thing” are – both parents should take equal care of the offspring. “

Niels (a son, 16, is cared for in equal parts by three parents)

“We are very fortunate that money is seldom an issue for us, which of course looks different for many, but in the end our son should be well looked after and, in my opinion, the proposal of the family minister is too short Both parents – finances, housing, living conditions – are still not given enough consideration, but at least the fact that fathers should no longer just be paymasters is a start. “

Katrin (first time pregnant)

“I think Giffey’s proposal is wrong! The idea of ​​rewarding fathers for caring more for their children is understandable. But the road to it does not lead to maintenance cuts. I fear that most single mothers would be at a disadvantage as a result of this change in the law. Many mothers work part-time and are paid less than most fathers anyway. Other threats behind Giffey’s proposal: Either mothers who suffer from the financial cuts, deliberately keep their children away from the father in order to obtain full support can. This would especially affect those fathers who would like to see their children more often. The second danger: Fathers who have little or no caring for the children, will only want to ride with the children for more time because of the money. Both would be fatal – especially for the children. Counterproposal: The amount of the maintenance payment should not be linked to the time spent with the child, but should be individually assessed according to the financial situation of the mother and father. So you could be sure that every parent spends time with the child, because that’s what they want from their heart – and not because it’s financially profitable. “

Michael (four children, two live with him, two change models)

“This change in legislation is urgently needed, the old regulation is really outdated and penalizes fathers, and I hope the Minister of Family Affairs succeeds with a fairer solution.”

Christin (one son, 6, change model)

“In principle, I think the idea is good because it’s fair, but it could bring with it the danger that women get the idea of ​​withholding their children from men because they do not want to give up the money.”

Katharina (two sons 14 and 17, single)

“I think it’s good if the fathers are given more consideration in education, and possibly financially, but unfortunately it’s the women who are responsible for ensuring that the children are well cared for.”

You’re about to burst the collar? In the BRIGITTE community you can talk about the topic!

Leave a Reply

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

We use cookies to offer you a better browsing experience, analyze site traffic, personalize content, and serve targeted advertisements. Read about how we use cookies and how you can control them by clicking “Privacy Preferences”. If you continue to use this site, you consent to our use of cookies.