Amounts should relate to spend on children, not wealth

What?

Even if it is felt desirable for children to share in the wealth of their parents, sharing can't be done just by the NRP handing over lots of money to the PWC. It won't all be spent directly & fully on the children, for example as pocket money, food, clothes, etc. Research shows that children in better off households don't get such a large amount extra directly spent on them. The better off parents spend on average perhaps 20% more than the poorer parents. The advantage children get isn't mainly from the easy to measure direct expenditures such as these.

Why?

First, get back to basics. There is no universal or logical principle that a father (or for that matter a mother) must support his children. This is simply something that a society, at some point in time, may decide should happen. Western societies have so chosen, for various reasons. I think it is useful - others don't (always).

This doesn't say to what extent they should support the children. It is up to a society to decide whether children should share in the wealth of their parents. (It is also up to a society to decide whether this means social parents or bio-parents or some other sorts of parents).

The UK is moving from a "liability to maintain" model to a "share in the wealth" model, and changing quite a few laws & throwing away previous arrangements to do so. I don't have a hang up about this (I'm not affected!) but I do believe that the way it is being done is badly thought out. There are too many implications that are not being questioned properly.

How?

For some of the advantages, the only fair way that children can share in them is to spend part of their time living with each parent. They can eat caviar when the wealthy parent does, swim in the pool, ride in the Roller, etc. And in this way, "child support" is more than money.

If the NRP doesn't want to share care, then the NRP will have to pay lots of money anyway instead!

If the children don't want to spend part of their time with an NRP willing to share their care, then the NRP has satisfied the requirements by making the offer. The payment can then be close to the "Small Fortunes" amount. The children have a responsibility to cooperate in having wealth shared with them - and if they don't, so be it. (The PWC also has a responsibility to create an environment where the children are willing to share in the wealth this way).

For other advantage, perhaps some of the money beyond the "Small Fortunes" amount should be placed in savings accounts & trust funds for the children to use later. It is probably very useful for the child support to be awarded to the children rather than to the PWC.

References