Press release: UK Child Maintenance Service ‘fails children’, fuels conflict and perpetuates gender inequality

16/09/2024

News

“The UK Child Maintenance Service (CMS) is failing children, overlooking domestic abuse survivors, exacerbating parental conflict, and perpetuating society’s gendered ‘breadwinner’ model of household finances.”

New ground-breaking research by One Parent Families Scotland, IPPR Scotland and Fife Gingerbread, Child Maintenance and its impact on child poverty and financial security for single parent families,” presents findings from the first of the two-stage ‘Transforming Child Maintenance’ project, funded by The Robertson Trust. Its aims are to drive systemic change in the UK child maintenance system, explore options for devolving more powers to the Scottish Government, and to develop and test new approaches to child maintenance by working with families to enable an increase in the successful receipt of child maintenance for children. The second stage will offer policy recommendations to all levels of government, aimed at transforming the child maintenance system and ensuring children’s rights are at the centre.

The report draws on a mix of quantitative and qualitative research, including focus groups with ‘paying’ and ‘receiving parents’, public polling, expert consultations, and statistical analysis.  It reveals the current child maintenance system, intended to improve satisfaction among separated parents, has instead led to widespread dissatisfaction. Financial penalties, especially in the ‘Collect and Pay’ arrangement, add stress and create barriers to ensuring children receive the financial support they are entitled to. The system often forces parents to monitor each other’s finances, jeopardizing safety, particularly for domestic abuse survivors. Issues such as long waits and inconsistent enforcement by the CMS further undermine children’s financial security, while outdated calculations and inflexibility can be weaponised by parents in conflict, creating a ‘hostile environment’.

Download Child Maintenance and its impact on child poverty and financial security
With a lot of support, I managed to contact the CMS and say that I haven't been paid for so many months. They said because [it was Direct Pay] they cannot backdate the claim or anything so that money is lost.

- Single mother, Resident parent

One single mother recounted experiences of abusive behaviour by her ex-partner:
“He stopped paying and I was scared to reach out to the CMS to change it [to Collect and Pay] because he was annoyed to start with that, I went through the CMS to ask him for money, and he would have to pay extra fees [for using the Collect and Pay service]. He’s been so abusive. I had to see him because he had visitation with my daughter, and I was terrified. With a lot of support, I managed to contact the CMS and say that I haven’t been paid for so many months. They said because [it was Direct Pay] they cannot backdate the claim or anything so that money is lost.”

Another parent shared her thoughts on how the system could be improved:
“Instead of the other parent getting harassed there’s an in-between person, a neutral person that can say ‘this is what you need to pay’. There’s no causing extra grief between the parents and the kid being stuck in the middle – you have this person to deal with it all.”

I believe the system would be much fairer, much better, if they stopped putting the paying parent into poverty.

- Father, Non-resident parent

Many ‘paying parents’ felt that the CMS prioritises picking a ‘winner’ and a ‘loser’ above achieving fair outcomes, with one parent saying:
“[The current system is] set up to have winners and losers, conflict from very beginning – it’s not about getting to the crux of the very basis of the problem and trying to find a solution and evidence of it.”

There was a perception that the current system doesn’t adequately consider the financial security and capability of paying parents:

“I ended up paying money when I couldn’t afford to pay money, got myself into a little bit of debt – the fact that they base it only on your gross salary and don’t take any affordability into consideration is absolutely criminal. I believe the system would be much fairer, much better, if they stopped putting the paying parent into poverty.”

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) states that every child has the right to an adequate standard of living. The CMS is crucial in enforcing this by ensuring non-resident parents contribute financially to their children's upbringing.

- Satwat Rehman, OPFS Chief Executive

Satwat Rehman, Chief Executive of One Parent Families Scotland said:

“In Scotland, 40% of children in poverty live in single-parent households, but only half of separated families receive any child maintenance, and only a third receive full payments.

“The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) states that every child has the right to an adequate standard of living. The CMS is crucial in enforcing this by ensuring non-resident parents contribute financially to their children’s upbringing. However, it is falling short, with over a million separated families lacking any maintenance arrangement, up from 600,000 in 2011/12.

“This research shows that current Child Maintenance Service is based around the UK’s outdated male “breadwinner” model of household finances, which disadvantages single mothers and contributes to higher child poverty rates. After separation, mothers, who usually become the primary caregivers, continue to face income barriers, which are not adequately addressed by the social security system. Child maintenance is one of the few state-involved systems that can help alleviate these structural disadvantages for single parent families.”

Laura Millar, Strategic Manager of Fife Gingerbread said:

“Child Maintenance has the potential to play a much greater role in tackling child poverty and is an overlooked part of the solution. Fife Gingerbread believes children have the right to fair financial support from both parents, wherever possible. Through this project, we have been able to test a new role and service for families in Fife, with a dedicated Child Maintenance Project Coordinator. This has been an incredibly steep learning curve, as the existing system is incredibly complex, frustrating and bureaucratic. And is not designed to support families.

“For some of the families we engage, there is simple advice and signposting required to empower them. However, for too many families the system is so onerous that without support from a dedicated worker, they would have given up. Where domestic abuse has impacted the household, the system offers little relief and can exacerbate existing trauma and conflict. This means that children are going without fair financial support and are being failed by a system that should be promoting their rights.”

The idea was families instead would make their own arrangements. But the experiment has failed catastrophically – for every additional family-based arrangement since 2012, two separated families ended up with no arrangement at all, bringing the total now to over a million.

- Casey Smith, Researcher, IPPR Scotland

Casey Smith, Researcher from IPPR Scotland said:

“We know that when child maintenance is paid, it can have a transformative impact on children’s financial security, reducing the child poverty rate from 40 to 30 per cent. However, too many separated families fail to sustain child maintenance arrangements, and a significant reason for this is the shortcomings of the Child Maintenance Service.

“This is because the UK government reformed the child maintenance system in 2012 in an attempt to reduce caseloads at the Department for Work and Pensions. The idea was families instead would make their own arrangements. But the experiment has failed catastrophically – for every additional family-based arrangement since 2012, two separated families ended up with no arrangement at all, bringing the total now to over a million.

“The reforms introduced a mixture of fees, deductions and bureaucratic hurdles to accessing help with child maintenance. These are barriers that many separated parents struggle to overcome, and which deter them from pursuing help. What is more, the maintenance system can end up heightening conflict between parents, damaging relationships and undermining financial security of children. Clearly, the construction of a “hostile environment” around child maintenance services has failed and it’s time for a new, more compassionate approach.”