Things are worse in Canada. Orders for support are made on income that does not exist purely because a woman asked for it. Judges "strike pleadings" declare fathers vexatious litigants ("Power orders" & Sheffield orders) that are destined to indefinitely incarcerate a father to prevent any litigation re a child's best interests. Those orders for support cannot be varied regardless of change in circumstances. www.OttawaMensCentre.com

What gets me is that I've heard the IRD has an unofficial internal policy to NOT go after deadbeat moms (yes, they exist). Supposedly the idea is that if a non-custodial mother doesn't pay, it's prima facie evidence that she is unable to pay, resulting in a child support modification. Yet for some reason men are almost NEVER granted modifications. What a crock.

Here's an idea, instead of going after a victim of a crime why not go after the hooligans who put him in the coma in the first place.

Why is it that people blame the IRD for the amount charged? It's charged by a set formula by law. And if the other parent is on a benefit the money goes to the government, not to any government department.

At least he was paying whist he was capable, what about all the other deadbeat dads who owe $$$$'s and refuse to pay but are more than capable. Instead beat on the guy in a coma for $461. IRD - Its our job to be fair! - Yeah Right!

It's interesting that most of you think the because he is a father, he should have a back up plan, like an automatic payment, to make sure his child is looked after if he falls sick. Father's are always targeted. Shouldn't the mother have a back up plan too? Sure none of us actually know the full storey here, but there are two sides. Both sides should have a back up plan, or even some savings put away, even if it is a few bucks a week. And what if this guy actually died from his attack? His child wouldn't get anything then.

I think what many people here don't realise is that the IRD are there to collect money and do so as stated by LAW. If you have issues with the law then its not the IRD that you should be complaining about, it's the government in general.

I agree that compassion is needed but realistically IRD are there to collect money. If they don't collect it, the government has less money and therefore the taxpayer pays for the losses associated with this undercollection. I'd rather that they were more 'cut throat' and collect the money that by law people are supposed to pay, than be 'more leniant' and not collect a whole heap of money.

And in this case, having an accident does not mean you can stop paying your child support. Do you think coupled parents stop paying for their kids when one of them has an accident?

Everyone is very quick to say he should have paid child support while in a coma because it's his obligation. What if that child lived with him? He couldn't provide for the child whether it lived with him or not - he was in a coma. It's hard to meet your obligations when you're unconscious! And the amount he was paying is irrelevant to discussions - it's based on how much he earns and for all we know could have been a fair whack of that.

Mr Hareb should be able to claim the $461 back from the punks that dealt to him as part of victim compensation. IRD & ACC are just following the laws they're bound to. The real people responsible are his attackers. While Mr Hareb will get compensation for his injuries & probably, loss of earnings, via ACC... it's things like child support, etc that the attackers should be forced to recompense as consequence for their actions.

Oh wait, let me guess, they'll be allowed to pay him back at 15c per week over the next 25 years

Who does the new Mrs Hareb expect to pay for her husband's children? Sorry, but the guy is only paying $28 a week.