Findings from the first of the two-stage ‘Transforming Child Maintenance’ project by One Parent Families Scotland, IPPR Scotland and Fife Gingerbread, funded by The Robertson Trust, reveal:
- The Child Maintenance System (CMS), intended to improve satisfaction among separated parents, has instead led to widespread dissatisfaction.
- Financial penalties, especially with 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 system further undermine children’s financial security.
- Outdated calculations and inflexibility can be weaponized by parents in conflict, creating a hostile environment.
The research draws on quantitative and qualitative research, including focus groups with paying and receiving parents, public polling, expert consultations and statistical analysis.
It aims 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 for children.
The second stage of the project 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.
One single mother recounted experiences of abusive behaviour by her ex-partner: She said, ‘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.’
Many paying parents felt that the CMS prioritises picking a 'winner' and a 'loser' above achieving fair outcomes,one explained, ‘[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.'
'Where domestic abuse has impacted the household, the system offers little relief.'
Laura Millar, strategic manager of Fife Gingerbread, commented, ‘Child Maintenance has the potential to play a much greater role in tackling child poverty and is an overlooked part of the solution.
‘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.’
