Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ontario welfare reform

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ontario welfare reform

    So now.. any opinions on the recommendations that single parents be no longer forced to go after the other parent for CS?Or that parents that receive it can keep half of it instead of it being all clawed back?

  • #2
    IMHO welfare isn't just for the adult, it is for the child too. While I think the system is "clumsy", if a parent is on welfare, the rules need to address the fact that a child is involved and needs to be supported.

    The welfare amount, while paltry, is increased to support the child. I do want my government to insure that the child is also being supported by the other parent.

    CS is not intended to be the only support for a child. OW should not have the perspective that the child is on welfare, and OW should not be clawing back money that is intended for the child.

    The flip side to this is idea of someone collecting CS, increased welfare to support several children, and quite possibly over $1000 per month CCTB and other supplements, all tax free, living in subsidized housing etc. and ending up with the equivalent to a taxable income over 70k. Should someone in this situation be receiving welfare at all?

    Should a family be penalized for being separated/divorced? If an intact family were on OW, should the rules be different than for a single parent? IMHO yes, because the single parent we talking about is receiving support from the other working parent. So the comparison to the intact family is of one where there is someone working.

    This leaves me in the middle. CS and CCTB should be considered money for the child and should not be clawed back. That said, if the child is being supported, then only the parent should be receiving welfare; there should be no supplement for the child unless there is a unique hardship circumstance. There are already substantial supplements to the CCTB for low income parents. If the parent is not receiving CS, then in order to receive a supplementary amount for the children, the parent should be pursuing the other for CS. If the other parent is whereabouts unknown, then the supplementary amount should continue.

    Comment


    • #3
      I don't agree with your stance that single parents, on social assistance, should no longer be forced to go after the other parent for CS.

      The point of social assistance is to provide for people who lack the ability to provide for themselves. People abuse this, but that's the nature of life. If you apply to social assistance and claim a child(s) that you support, as a single parent, then it's reasonable for them to ask what the NCP is paying in terms of support. If nothing, then you should seek support. Otherwise, Canadian society foots the bill.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Teenwolf View Post
        I don't agree with your stance that single parents, on social assistance, should no longer be forced to go after the other parent for CS.

        The point of social assistance is to provide for people who lack the ability to provide for themselves. People abuse this, but that's the nature of life. If you apply to social assistance and claim a child(s) that you support, as a single parent, then it's reasonable for them to ask what the NCP is paying in terms of support. If nothing, then you should seek support. Otherwise, Canadian society foots the bill.
        Cost may be relative:
        -parent forced to legal aid his/her way to court to get support costs lots of money for taxpayer anyway.
        -if a deadbeat parent wants not to pay they will pull out of the legitimate workforce and go/stay on welfare to avoid paying.Which costs more money .
        -if deadbeat wasn't avoiding support they could be part of the tax contributing society.Putting money in rather than taking money out.
        -sometimes going after other parent puts CP in danger .Some things are best left alone and it costs the government less to have the children with a parent then as wards of the state or providing a spot in prison if the other parent has severe anger issues.That really costs money.
        -Canadian society is always going to foot the bill when low incomes split up,the case is how much?

        Comment

        Our Divorce Forums
        Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
        Working...
        X