Linda Seaborn
When the Whitlam Labor government introduced the single mother's benefit in 1973, it brought hope to women trapped in violent and abusive relationships. What had formed the steel in their trap was the poverty that is a consequence of single mothers having to take individual responsibility for primary parenting. The federal Coalition government is now dismantling the very modest steps taken to give single mothers a reasonable income.
Masters of wedge politics, the Coalition government has done it again. Angry fathers' groups have been pitted against single mothers. It serves a triple agenda for PM John Howard. Firstly, ex-spouses fight each other for the financial means to raise children, rather than demanding that government provide free education, free health-care, affordable housing and food. Secondly, it advances the right-wing's ideological agenda about the role of women. Thirdly, it creates a pool of desperate, impoverished women, which exerts a downward pressure on the wages of all workers — always good for employers.
The current proposed changes to the child support system are one example of this. The government taskforce on child support released its recommendations on June 14. It proposes that the income of both parents be assessed when determining child support payment. That sounds fair, but what it ignores is the likelihood that the resident parent will pay for shoes and clothing that move with the child or children, pick up expenses like educational costs and sacrifice hours of paid work in order to provide (unpaid) time to care for the child or children. Ninety per cent of resident parents are women.
The taskforce's proposals, applauded by strong sole-father lobby groups, will mean that about two-thirds of estranged fathers pay less child support. As it is, 60% of resident single-parent families receive nothing or next to nothing, as many fathers refuse to pay.
Where non-custodial parents have chosen to leave well-paid jobs and/or hide their real incomes, the government's Child Support Agency relies on the custodial parent to "dob" them in, thus creating huge stresses on what are already strained family relationships.
It's also a system that inflames the pathology of men with severe control issues and gives them support for criminal, violent behaviour towards their former partners and their children. Some take a proprietorial attitude to their children, arguing, "If I can't have them, I won't give them anything". These men are getting the green light from Howard for their misogynistic behaviour.
For those who have work, child support is affordable, according to the findings of the 2005 study the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling (at the University of Canberra), "The Financial Impact of Divorce".
But some people are desperate. Non-resident parents who are unemployed are struggling to survive and unable to support their children.
There are much better solutions to these problems than those recommended by the government's taskforce. As a first step, the personal conflict element should be removed from child support by having the tax department collect all payments. This is done in New Zealand, where the children receive the payments, whether the non-resident parent pays or not.
This, of course, sets up two tiers of payments — those coming from rich dads, and those coming from poor. Therefore, a more fundamental solution would be to have the government ensure that all children have their needs met, through the provision of a full-time "wage" for parenting. After all, our children are not our own, they are the society's future, and everyone in society benefits when all children are able to grow into happy, healthy adults.
A campaign for such a solution would allow feminists to open up a discussion about all issues involved in parenting, since it's not just about financial contributions but, possibly more importantly, about the time and energy contributed to parenting. It would also enable a real examination to be made of how parenting impoverishes working-class mothers, and what this impoverishment does to the developmental chances of the children they are raising.
Having a well-adjusted, caring and responsible son or daughter is taken for granted. But this does not happen just because you want it to. You have to work to make it happen.
From 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly, June 29, 2005.
Visit the