The issue of alimony has been talked about a lot lately. Recently the State Duma approved the creation of an open registry for permanent defaulters. And from June 1, child benefits will be calculated in a new way, with a tighter link to alimony. It looks like they took the problem seriously. But it just looks. Unfortunately, there is much to point out that the emphasis is still on populism, on the imitation of powerful activities.
For example, the situation in this registry is this. What good is this without rethinking the concept of bad faith? Nowadays, a malicious debtor to his children is considered a person who evades parental obligations to the point of being brought to administrative or criminal liability or put on the wanted list. And if you do not pay alimony for several months in a row, deliberately understate your income, or do not hide your place of residence and work, you may become a defendant in an administrative or criminal case. The one who gives a thousand rubles to children every three months due to poverty, sits exactly on the fifth point, does not work, does not prepare, does not run away – he is not a criminal, just a very incompetent, stupid living person. Therefore, this “board of shame” will not be included in the registry.
Without changing the maliciousness criteria in the blacklist can take about 140 thousand Russians. And these are such cadres, such marginal people that public slander does not threaten them in any way.
Moreover, today you can find out about the dubious debts of these comrades without a separate registration, since meaningful information about them is quite accessible through the services of the FSSP. (Federal Enforcement Administration). Or you may not recognize them: Usually everything is written on their face, everything is clear from their lifestyle. Normal employers won’t risk coming into contact with such characters anyway; They won’t be given a loan from a good bank anyway. But there is no tragedy; They don’t have any special requests. It’s like closing the borders: If you don’t even have money to go to the neighboring region, what difference does it make if they don’t let you go?
But here’s the problem. In addition to 140 thousand completely hopeless debtors, an even larger number in Russia who are irregular and pay only pennies (a third of children) can be classified as conditionally problematic. to obtain alimony less than 5,000 rubles). But most will have no problem with any moral condemnation, restrictions on obtaining loans or the pursuit of greater personal happiness, whose functions, according to the MPs, should be performed by the “list of shame”. This means that they can deceive the minds of new victims who fall under their spell, condemning newborn children to orphanhood and poverty, mockingly throwing three kopecks at those slightly older than themselves.
Speaking of pennies. There is no official minimum alimony amount set in the country. Such a bill was put forward but rejected earlier this year. Moreover, it could not even exceed the ridiculous amount of half of the minimum subsistence amount. It is a mystery why the figure below 8 thousand rubles frightens the MPs so much. And here is another paradox: nowadays it is easier to get these 8 thousand from an ordinary working person, because then there is a basis for demanding alimony not as a percentage of the salary, but as a fixed amount of money. However, you cannot charge more than 5 thousand from a gray zone employee who goes to an office for the minimum wage officially determined in the contract. Unbelievable! It’s kind of like a mirror.
However, in this case, it is not surprising that many people who have the right to receive alimony choose not to apply for alimony. False pride meets true shame.
The injured party is sometimes so reluctant to get into the role of extorting help from his ex-spouse that he is even ready to sacrifice his ex-spouse’s financial interests, especially if the ex-spouse has to be searched almost with dogs, always kicking the bailiffs. child. And even in conditions of extreme poverty. Fortunately, those in need can receive support from the state in the form of unified child support instead of alimony. At least the state does not run away and eventually accuses the applicant of commercialism.
But tired – what a surprise! – and the state. And starting from June this year, alimony will definitely be taken into account when determining a family’s needs and establishing the right to benefit from universal benefits. There is now a strange provision that alimony income is taken into account only in cases where there is a relevant court decision. Starting from the summer, they will be guided by a different logic. Those who have not officially applied for child support will automatically be included among those receiving assistance from the second parent, by verbal agreement. No one will be able to figure out whether there is actually any income: at least a quarter of the minimum wage will be taken into account for each child. If that’s enough to make you think a single-parent family is too rich and refuse benefits, that’s a family problem.
The changes described above are likely to lead to an increase in cases regarding the allocation of alimony. And this is generally good. If a person applies for state assistance, that is, he hopes for the redistribution of taxpayers’ funds in his favor, then, of course, all his monetary receipts must be transparent, and a proud refusal of alimony in this case is unaffordable. luxury.
The worst part is that the state offers nothing other than increasing citizens’ personal responsibility. In fact, it does not even guarantee the execution of court decisions. Some government officials openly state that there is nothing to trust in the state. For example, State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin in the spring advised Russian women to choose fathers for their children more carefully, so that their deputies would not have to think about how to legally receive alimony from them after a divorce.
But if you try hard, you can find advantages in the current situation. Maybe it’s a good thing the debate over alimony isn’t over. Anyone who participates in it or becomes an involuntary observer from the outside can draw conclusions about the current state of the family institution and, based on this, take a more comprehensive approach to planning the reproductive future. As in there? If you don’t have an aunt… Anyway, you get the idea. Many have already adopted this effective strategy and refuse to pass on the genes of damn selfish people to future generations. However, for some reason, the state does not like this type of cinema.
The author expresses his personal opinion, which may not coincide with the position of the editors.
What are you thinking?
Source: Gazeta

Dolores Johnson is a voice of reason at “Social Bites”. As an opinion writer, she provides her readers with insightful commentary on the most pressing issues of the day. With her well-informed perspectives and clear writing style, Dolores helps readers navigate the complex world of news and politics, providing a balanced and thoughtful view on the most important topics of the moment.