NAV Director Hans Christian Holte believes it is time to assess whether the maintenance premium rules should be changed. He admits that the desire to increase child support may be a motive for parents who sabotage the contact of the other parent.
Parents who sabotage contact between their children and the other parent often receive more maintenance if they so request.
The reason is that NAV does not take into account what has been established in the visitation judgments.
Over the past six months, TV 2 has drawn attention to the controversial practice of NAV, which is also criticized by many politicians in the Storting.
- Seems unreasonable
- I see that from the point of view of parents who have been prevented from being with their child, it seems irrational. At the same time, it is true that financial support for a child is the general rule that is applied here, says NAV director Hans Christian Holte for TV 2.
- Do you currently view the contribution rules so that there is a financial incentive for social sabotage?
- In some cases, these rules can also act as a financial incentive to prevent contact with the other side of the relationship, Holte confirms.
NAV only lasts days
When NAV calculates child benefit, only counts the number of days the child lives with his or her parents. NAV completely ignores visitation agreements or judgments, even though they state that the child must live with both parents.
Parents - men and women - from all over the country told TV 2 how they believed that child support payments were a major cause of social sabotage. And they express frustration at NAV's practice of not caring for children. Preventing being together, but on the other hand, it often ensures that the saboteur receives increased alimony.
Parents say they experience double punishment. First, they are prevented from being with their children. The consequence is then that they are financially burdened with greater alimony, and many of them also lose the so-called Inspection deduction.
– Economics is a motive
In a recent TV 2 survey, 154 lawyers dealing with conflicts between parents answered questions about obstruction of contact. Three out of four lawyers respond that often or sporadically "financial incentives" are the reason they want to increase their participation in contacts with children.
Five percent disagree and state that, according to their experience, "financial incentives" are never an option. Five percent chose not to answer this question.
Regarding TV 2, many parents also stated that increased child support payments were often a motive for social sabotage.
- An important point to investigate
- Do you understand that many believe that the current practice of NAV is in some way contrary to the general perception of the law, and what many consider to be reasonable and correct?
- I think TV 2 has drawn attention to the main dilemmas and difficulties in these areas through these matters.
Holte believes that serious family conflicts should be dealt with through the family protection offices or the court system.
- NAV's role is to ensure the proper management of contributions, I also see that it may prove irrational for those who have lost touch.
Parents have complained about the irrational rules for years, but to this day NAV has never publicly admitted that the contribution rules may be unreasonable.
On the other hand, NAV director Hans Christian Holte does not hide that it is problematic.
- I think this is an important point that needs to be looked at. I am not very familiar with the discussions that have been going on inside NAV or at all, but at least I think they have been well exposed in recent months. Holte replies that there are problematic aspects and very complex problems for which we must constantly look for good solutions.
NAV is awaiting an explanation from the court
Currently, the new law on children is under consultation. Holte believes it is worth taking a closer look at the rules on contributions on this occasion.
- Should you look at the intention of the law and the form of the law?
- I think it is worth taking a closer look at this legislation. I welcome this, I think it has been well revealed in recent months that this is a very difficult area. I think it makes sense to see if there are even better solutions to balance the issues, says Holte.
