I was talking to a divorced single father the other day. I know all the theory about the difficulties that single parents face (I lack the direct experience, being neither divorced nor separated) but being faced by the reality of a single case sometimes has more power than the theory. And I was really taken aback at the extremity of his difficulty.
This father looks after his son almost exactly 50% of the time – 3 nights and four days a week. He is wise enough to know that he must obey to the letter every agreement that has ever been made with the mother of his children. His case is a text-book study of good working arrangements emerging from an acrimonious divorce.
His income is uncertain from month to month – he runs his own business. He has to pay £200 child-support to the mother of his child each month. He knows that if he cannot pay that, she will immediately challenge the sharing arrangements and the child will not be delivered at the agreed time, and that will lead quite possibly to extended loss of any contact. A few months ago, one of his business invoices was paid late and the £200 was paid two days late; the mother had already threatened to refer the matter to her solicitor.
He has a mortgage on a flat that has a room for the child, and that too must be paid each month.
So, one hic-cup in his business and
- the child’s relationship with him is put at severe risk
- his occupancy of a house that enables him to care for the child is also put at severe risk
- he has no access to any kind of benefits to help him through the crisis because, as far as the state is concerned, he is not a parent at all
I know what it is like not to know where one’s income is coming from the next month – it is a constant worry with the costs of caring for children. But the consequences for me of even an extended period of no income are as nothing compared to the consequences for this single father.
The other single parent in this scenario has quite a different experience. She lives in a much larger house (she is now wealthier than he). If she loses her job, she gets additional benefits to care for the child and to secure her accommodation. And she gets £200 guaranteed income every month along with Child Benefit. Everything about her parenting role is supported.
In the UK, we argue that most children are not cared for 50/50 and that the “parent with care” is likely to be more needy and more likely to spend money they receive on the child. This is incontrovertible. But is it acceptable to place a minority of children in a highly vulnerable situation – as is the child in the case I here describe – for the benefit of other children? In other areas of separated family policy, much emphasis is placed on the idea that “every case is different” – why in this area is every family not treated as different but as within a certain limited range?
I was telling this story to a clinical psychologist who works in the community with adults with mental health difficulties. She reported that she sees fathers in this situation all the time: they live in constant fear of losing the connection with their child. They get no support or recognition for their role as parent and they are powerless. One foot wrong (and vulnerable adults are not always sure-footed), and the axe comes down on the relationship with their child. Meanwhile the other parent plays by a different set of rules, able to indulge in a very high degree of rule breaking before there is any challenge.
We never hear anything from these parents because keeping silent is a crucial part of their strategy to sustain their child’s relationship with them. They know they must face the situation without support; they develop quiet resilience instead. Many, however, fail, and there is no safety net.
Australia has a system that addresses all this, so no rocket science is needed. The state recognises that when parents split, two single parents are created – the UK system of regarding separation as a reduction of two parents to one parent is difficult to understand. Child support is fully flexed down to no payments at all from one parent to the other, depending on relative incomes and extent of sharing – in short, it recognises that every family is different and does not undermine those families less near the average than others.
All three main political parties are working on family policy just now and are seeking ways of improving things. Finding a way of making the tax, benefits and child support system robust without sacrificing the good of some children for the good of the majority would be one valuable part of reform.
