1 / 19

Single parent families

Low-income single mothers’ evaluation of their child support arrangements reflecting the ‘best interests of the child(ren)’ Hayley McKenzie. Single parent families.

gerry
Download Presentation

Single parent families

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Low-income single mothers’ evaluation of their child support arrangements reflecting the ‘best interests of the child(ren)’ Hayley McKenzie

  2. Single parent families Single parent families are an increasingly prevalent family type, currently making up approximately 20% of family types in Australia • 85% of single parent families are headed by mothers Research has shown that women and children experience a greater economic loss after partnership dissolution than men Women post separation are more likely than men to be exposed to financial stress, low incomes, economic strain, poverty and deprivation. Children in single mother households report poorer economic resources compared to children in two parent families

  3. Australian child support scheme The Australian Child Support Scheme was established in 1988 as a means of ensuring adequate financial support for children of separated parents The scheme applies to all parents with dependent children, regardless of the length or type of their relationship Currently 1.5 million separated parents and 1.1 million children are involved in the Scheme.

  4. Australian child support scheme Aims of the current scheme: Parents share in the costs of supporting their children in line with their capacity to do so Adequate child support is available to all children not living with both parents Commonwealth involvement and expenditure is limited to the minimum necessary to ensure that children’s needs are met

  5. Australian child support scheme Aims continued 4) Work incentives for both parents to participate in the labour force are not impaired 5) That the overall arrangements for parents are non-intrusive to personal privacy, and are simple, flexible and efficient 6) The level of financial support should be determined in accordance with the costs of the children

  6. Background literature The majority of Australian research explores the financial outcomes of child support • Problematic child support receipt and arrears accrued Factors affecting payment • Payer parents’ income • Parents’ relationship • Contact between parents and children • Meanings attached to child support payments

  7. Methodological framework Epistemological orientation • Critical feminism • Qualitative research • Symbolic interactionism • Grounded theory • Situational analysis Data collection • In-depth interviews • Sample: 20 low-income single mothers entitled to child support payments

  8. Payee mothers’ position as mothers Aim to work in the best interest of their children • Prioritising children's needs • Providing stability for children • Seeking community support

  9. Child support arrangements and the Best interests of the child Position 1 – Received amounts do not match assessed amounts which were of meaningful financial benefit Position 3 – Received amounts reflect assessed amounts and were of meaningful financial benefit Assessed amounts of Child Support Position 2 – Low assessed amounts not received, or no child support arrangement Position 4 – Small amounts received which were not perceived to be of meaningful financial benefit Received amounts of Child Support

  10. Position 1 – received amounts do not match assessed amounts which were of meaningful financial benefit “I have been finding it pretty tough without child support. And when I do get child support it’s just the minimum amount. It’s not exact and it’s pretty unpredictable” “The payments for some reason were quite, you know, were quite wildly different at times. And it was really frustrating” “I’m still going to fight for child support. He [payer father] needs to pay child support. It doesn’t matter if we don’t need it anymore, which we still do. But I will still fight for it until she is 18 at least”

  11. Position 2 – low assessed amounts not received, or no child support arrangement Low assessed amounts • Payer father receiving government income support payments • Payer father not declaring entire income for child support assessment “Well I have done everything I can to try and follow it [child support] up. It’s basically because [payer father’s] not declaring his money. But look I can’t force that, and I’m not going to get legal people involved or that. Cause I just, you know, I don’t have the energy for that. I’d rather not get the money and save, or conserve that energy and try and focus on what I can do to raise my boys”

  12. Position 3 – received amounts reflect assessed amounts and were of meaningful financial benefit “[Child support is] for the kids one day if they need something. Or maybe if they want to go to a private school or save it for stuff like that. It’s definitely for them, stuff that will benefit their life in fairly major ways” Payee mothers maintained that this should be the experience of all payee mothers • “There is equal responsibility on the part of both parents to, you know , look after that child. And so they have everything they need to be happy and, you know, support them” • “He [payer father] should step up and take responsibility. But I don’t know he’s really aware of it”

  13. Position 4 – small amounts received which were not of meaningful financial benefit Low assessed amounts due to payer parents receiving government income support, or not declaring their entire income Child support payments that payee mothers didn’t receive, but perceived would be of meaningful financial benefit: • “I think they [payer fathers] should have to pay, I don’t know, $50 a week [in child support] per child support. Absolute minimum” • “To me it [child support] should be at least $50 a week per child. Because that’s what it would cost to just feed them, let alone clothe them and everything”

  14. Financial implications of erratic and inadequate child support payments “It [child support] provides one glass of milk per day that’s what, I actually worked it out” “[The role of child support] is to look after children, to make sure that children are looked after properly by both parents financially. But, you know, it doesn’t work. No, it doesn’t take into account the real cost of raising a child” “That [child support amount] wouldn’t even feed them [children] for the month”

  15. conclusions Payee mothers aimed to work in the best interests of their children Child support arrangements differed for the payee mothers, with many experiencing erratic and/or low child support payments Child support payments need to be of meaningful financial benefit and represent joint parental responsibility

  16. references Ahnquist, J. Fredlund, P. & Wamala, S. (2007). Is cumulative to economic hardship more hazardous to women’s health than men’s? Journal of Epidemiology Community Health, 61, 331-336. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2007). Australian social trends 2007; One parent families, Cat. 4102.0. Canberra: ABS. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2010). Family, community and social cohesion – family structure. Retrieved 12th July 2011, http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/1370.0~2010~Chapter~Family%20structure%20(4.5.6.1). Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2011). Family characteristics, Australia 2009-10, Cat. 4442.0. Canberra: ABS. Branigan, E. (2004). His money or our money? Financial abuse of women in intimate partner relationships. The Coburg Brunswick Community Legal and Financial Counselling Centre Inc: Melbourne. Branigan, E. (2007). Who pays in the end? The personal and political implications of financial abuse of women in intimate partner relationships. Just Policy, 44, 31-36.

  17. references Branigan, E. & Keebaugh, S. (2005). A feminist family agenda: Putting the mother back into sole parenting. Just Policy, 38, 6-11. Cass, B. (1996). A family policy 1983-1995. Just Policy, 6, 16-25. Child Support Agency, CSA. (2008a). Child Support Scheme Facts and Figures 2006-2007, Commonwealth of Australia. Cook, Davis, E. & Davies, B. (2008). Discrepancy between expected and actual child support payments: Predicting the health and health-related quality of life of children living in low-income, single parent families. Child: Care, Health and Development, 34(2), 267-275. Cook, K., McKenzie, H. & Knight, T. (2011). Child support research in Australia: A critical review, Journal of Family Studies, 17(2), 110-125. Fehlberg, B., Millward, C. & Campo, M. (2010). Post-separation parenting arrangements, child support and property settlement: Exploring the connections. Australian Journal of Family Law, 24, 214-241.

  18. references Fritzell, S. & Burstrom, B. (2006). Economic strain and self-rated health among lone and coupled mothers in Sweden in the 1990s compared to the 1980s. Health Policy, 79, 253-264. Gray, M. & Chapman, B. (2007). Relationship breakdown and the economic welfare of Australian mothers and their children. Australian Journal of Labour Economics, 10(4), 253-277. Johnson, R. & Favreault, M. (2004). Economic status in later life among women who raised children outside of marriage. Journal of Gerontology, 59(6), 315-323. Loxton, D. (2005). What future? The long term implications of sole motherhood for economic wellbeing. Just Policy, 35, 39-44. Loxton, D., Mooney, R. & Young, A. (2006). The psychological health of sole mother’s in Australia. Medical Journal of Australia, 184(6), 265-268. McKenzie, H. & Cook, K. (2007). The influence of child support and welfare on single parent families. Just Policy, 45, 13-19. Ridge, T. & Millar, J. (2011). Following families: Working lone-mother families and their children. Social Policy and Administration, 45(1), 85-97. Saunders, P., Naidoo, Y. & Griffiths, M. (2007). Towards indicators of disadvantage: Deprivation and social exclusion in Australia. Sydney, NSW: Social Policy Research Centre.

  19. References Silvey, J. & Birrell, B. (2004). Financial outcomes for parents after separation. People and Place, 12(1), 45-56. Smyth, B. & Weston, R. (2005a). Attitudes to child support in Australia. Family Matters, 71, 46-57. Smyth, B. & Weston, R. (2005b). A snapshot of contemporary attitudes to child support. Research Report 13. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies. Walter, M. (2002). Private collection of child support: Back to the future? Just Policy, 26, 18-27. Weston, R. & Smyth, B. (2000). Financial living standards after divorce. Family Matters, 55, 10-15. Wolffs, T. & Shallcross, L. (2000). Low income parents paying child support: Evaluation of the introduction of a $260 minimum child support assessment. Family Matters, 57, 26-33.

More Related