This post is an interpretation of a  policy paper  that was written in 2011. It was the second of five papers to be prepared by drummond street for the Family & Child Support Policy Branch of the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) under its Child Support Policy – Community Strategy.

This blog was written by Rebecca Harris based on a policy paper  written by Jessica Black, with input from Reima Pryor, Kristie Dunn, Daniela Zimmermann, Paula Westhead and Karen Field of drummond street services.

The research conducted by drummond street services really highlighted the difficulty the current child support system has in responding to the needs of the wide range of circumstances that exist for stepfamilies.

By definition stepfamilies are made up of two adults at least one of whom has children from a previous relationship. It may be that each adult has children, and it may be that ex-partners have also re-partnered. The new partnership may also have an ‘ours child’. The child support agency makes a clear distinction between parents and step-parents in terms of who has financial responsibility for a child. A child is considered the responsibility of its primary parents. A child is not considered the financial responsibility of its step-parent. Step children and spouses are, in nearly all cases, not considered in cases of child support – for either the paying parent or the receiving parent.  This is the case even where an ex-partner is not paying child support, and where a step-parent is contributing substantially to their step-child’s care costs. So, in a nutshell, child support payments are decided on the incomes of the two primary parents, and the amount of time the child lives with each parent. This might seem straightforward, but imagine this scenario:

The child lives primarily with a parent A  who thus receives child support payments from parent B. Parent A is re-partnered with person X who has no children, earns a very high income, they live in a big house, drive a nice car, and live very comfortably. Parent B has a low-mid level income and has re-partnered with person Y who has three children, they live in a small house, share one car and struggle to pay bills (with the ex-partner of Y paying minimal child support). Parent B is required to pay a significant portion of their income to Parent A for the care of the child. No consideration is currently able to be given by the Child Support Agency (CSA) to step-parenting responsibilities.

This is a scenario that shows that regardless of the make-up of a household, or the household income, child support payments are made from the one family to the other based solely on the two parents’ income and percentage of time the child is with each parent. 

Although the theory that the duty to support a child lies with the primary parents of the child makes sense, in reality the facts are that many step-parents do financially support their step-children and their spouses. This can lead to a great deal of financial pressure being placed on many stepfamilies.

It should be noted that there are opportunities within the current system to contest amounts of child support paid based on being financially responsible for a new spouse or step child in ‘special circumstances’. An example of this might be where the disability of the child, or the spouse, means that the spouse is not able to be in the paid workforce and therefore the step-parent has an obligation to contribute to their care financially.

Keeping this in mind, we can imagine a second scenario where a paying parent, parent A, has been able to reduce their payments based on their step-parenting responsibilities. In this case let’s say that the receiving parent, parent B, has not re-partnered, and is living on a low income. Now having CSA payments reduced, parent B has increased financial hardship as a result of the CSA recognising parent A’s step-parenting responsibilities.  

Clearly for some families the levels of financial distress are high, and the system is not working for them. It would be interesting to discover how many families are in the various situations described above.

The difficulty with altering the system to make things easier for some families is that of course, things become harder, or seem unfair, to other families. There are no easy answers in the area of stepfamilies and the child support system. drummond street, in this paper, highlights the need for the CSA to take into account the relative income of each household, and perhaps more importantly, the level of financial hardship being experienced by either parent in their decision-making rather than taking a one-size fits all approach. This may help make the system fairer for step-families, while at the same time not disadvantaging other groups like single parents.

The CSA does not currently collect data about family structures, ‘household’ incomes or levels of financial hardship. drummond street is also suggesting having this information available would also assist the CSA in their policy decisions.

Wednesdays 16th, 23rd and 30th May 2012  from 6-7:30pm

A popular 3 week group for couples run by an experienced couples’ counsellor that explores the basics of happy relationships – and helps couples work towards strengthening their bond, communicating better and putting a stop to the same old conflicts. This is a group which requires couples to work together in their pairs and at times report back to the main group- but much of the work will just be between the two of you

 COST: $35 per person or FREE with Health Care Card

WHERE: drummond street services - 195 Drummond Street, Carlton, 3053

Bookings essential to book or for more information call Sarah on 9663 6733

Thursday 24th May 2012  from 6-7:30pm

Does your child experience anxiety at levels that interfere with their life, and impacts your family? If so come along to this FREE seminar to help you better understand anxiety and generate some healthier responses to their behaviour. From here find out if further help is needed and where to go

 COST: FREE

WHERE: drummond street services - 195 Drummond Street, Carlton

Bookings essential to book or for more information call Sarah on 9663 6733

Wednesdays 6^th, 13^th and 20th June 2012 from 6-7:30pm

Come along for some sensible advice, discussion and assistance – plan for what’s likely to keep kids on track as they navigate the complexities of adolescence. Most of them experiment with drugs and alcohol at some stage – learn how to minimize harm and get through these “exciting’ (some might say stressful) years with the minimum of fuss. This 3 week group will assist you to develop a strong and supportive relationship and help you guide your teenager in the right direction. Topics include:

• Communication and the relationship
• Increasing independence and boundaries
• Managing problems

  COST: $35 per person or FREE with Health Care Card

WHERE: drummond street services - 195 Drummond Street, Carlton

Bookings essential to book or for more information call Sarah on 9663 6733

Thursday 14th June 2012 from 6-7:30pm

For those who are in a relationship with someone who experiences depression.

This FREE seminar will cover the latest info on depression and explore some good techniques for improving relationships and managing through the ups and downs.

COST: FREE

WHERE: drummond street services - 195 Drummond Street, Carlton

Bookings essential to book or for more information call Sarah on 9663 6733

Young Adult Children and the Child Support System

This post is an interpretation of a paper that was written in 2011. It was the third of five papers to be prepared by drummond Street for the Family & Child Support Policy Branch of the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) under its Child Support Policy – Community Strategy. You can read the complete paper HERE. 

This piece was prepared by Rebecca Harris, and is an interpretation of a complete paper written by Jessica Black and Reima Pryor, with helpful information and resources supplied by Child Support Policy Research Project Reference Group member Maria Vnuk, input from drummond street staff Paula Westhead and CEO Karen Field, along with additional information sourced from the people who completed our online surveys, from the Child Support Agency and from Centrelink.

There are some curious anomalies in the Australian legal system when it comes to the financial obligation of the government to young people, and of parents to their children. These anomalies affect families with young adults for whom child support has been or is being paid, primarily single parents and their children.

Firstly, parents in Australia are legally obliged to financially support their children until their children turn eighteen. This means that in most cases where child support is paid for a child, when that person legally becomes an adult the payments will stop. This law appears to make the assumption that when an Australian hits 18, they are in the workforce, possibly living away from their parents, and are for all intents and purposes living as an independent adult in our society.

However, when it comes to government support of these young adults, the assumptions are quite different. Centrelink questions the independence of young adults, and generally sees young adults living in the family home and studying to be dependent on their parents.

For young adults of single parents who are still completing their education, and thus dependent on parental support, an 18^th birthday can mean an instant and frequently significant reduction in family income as the non-resident parent ceases child support payments, and therefore a reduction in the capacity of the resident parent to support the child financially.

drummond street researchers undertook surveys of both young people and parents in relation to child support payments ending for eighteen year olds. Responses in the surveys indicated that there is a significant financial strain on the resident parent when payments cease and the young person is still living at home. The surveys also made clear that the children in these families were often very aware of the financial strain and the ‘sacrifices’ made by resident parents.

In some cases parents negotiated to continue to share the cost of parenting, but non-resident parents are not legally obliged to do this. A case can be made for payments to continue when a child is in full time post secondary education, but this avenue can involve the young person taking their non-resident parent to court, and is often not known as an option.  

It seems clear that there are a number of changes to this system that are required to make sure that pursuing education, or apprenticeships (where initial wages are very low) is an option for all young adults. Recommendations as a result of this research from drummond street include: a better system for letting families know that there are options regarding child support and children over 18; that the Child Support Agency take a pro active role in supporting private arrangements; that there is consideration for making it a legal liability for non-resident paying parents to maintain support of over 18s enrolled in post-secondary education or training.Given the encouragement, importance, and benefit to having young people in post secondary education it is the case that young people whose financial wellbeing is reliant on child support are significantly disadvantaged when this support ceases. Independence is not something that happens at a particular age, it is a transition, incorporating many factors and there should be recognition of this in the law and the way young people are supported through this transition.

This program seeks to holistically support local African Australian Families. Four years ago this agency had a desire to ensure our Family programs and services were relevant and responsive to the complex needs of a much marginalised and vulnerable group within our local community – our African Australian Families who have settled in Australia. So often funding requires us to fit people in to programs, but we need programs like this one that allow us to wrap programs around people – based on their needs and aspirations for their families. Four years ago this project was funded for two years – and this initial funding has been extended each year until this year, when we received the amazing news of a three year commitment by FaHCSIA through the Community Investment Program.

Most of us who have been around know that the words ‘partnership’ and ‘collaboration’ are bandied around so much in the world of welfare and government without a real definition of what it means to partner. In our case we felt that we can go some way to defining these terms and what they mean to us.

Firstly – it is a partnership between our programs, services and staff. With African workers and the African community and the broader community learning from each other and co-developing programs which share cultural understandings and experiences , and thus developing ways and models of working that have a real chance of supporting African families towards health and wellbeing.  Our family support worker,  Sahra and I have been on this journey together for past four years – through this time I am sure she will agree we have learned so much from each other and I cannot thank her enough for sharing her religious and cultural knowledge, her settlement experience in both New Zealand and Australia, and her journey as a worker, mother and grandmother. This funding I know represents far more than just a program for her community, to her it personally represents financial security for her family which is a rarely acknowledged benefit of recurrent longer term funding .

Secondly – with regard to our program partners – this program has been able to achieve what so many organisations and governments find very difficult to achieve,  it joins all the dots,  it brings health and wellbeing programs, employment programs, education programs and literacy programs together. All the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle that need to be addressed in order to support African families reach their goals of physical, mental and emotional, social, economic and cultural health. It reflects the mobilisation of energy and goodwill in a local community – it requires us to  understand each other’s frameworks, share ideas, knowledge and skills and more importantly bring our financial and human resources to partner with the community and plan our programs and work together in meaningful ways.

The last part of the partnership– and it is often not recognised or acknowledged,  is the partnership drummond street has enjoyed at the local level with our funding contact staff for this program at the state office of FaHSCIA- they have been part of and at times great supporters of  the learnings of this program, they have been flexible to program changes that so often are required in community development work, they have engaged with us on so many levels in order to understand the challenges of this work and been incredibly encouraging – I want to collectively thank them for their efforts and support throughout the last four years and look forward to our future learning together.  For a non-profit to have such a relationship with government is a testament to the people involved, and to a shared vision and desire to support this community.

Karen Field

CEO

drummond street services

FIFA 12 Tournament

Tuesday 10th January 2012 – 11am to 3pm

$5 per person

Championship play-off followed by a BBQ lunch

Horse Riding

Thursday 12th January – 10am to 5pm

$20 per person

Meet at the drum Youth Services and spend the day horse riding in Mornington with a BBQ lunch provided. LIMITED PLACES so please book call Jerome on 9663 6733

Beach Day

Monday 16th January – 9:30am to 3:30pm

$10 per person

Meet at the drum Youth Services for a day of fun in the sun at the beach in Geelong. Lunch provided. Bring bather/wetsuit, sunscreen, a bottle of water, shorts, t-shirt of a long sleeved shirt. LIMITED PLEASE so please call Jerome on 9663 6733 to book

Girls day

Tuesday 17th January 11am-4pm

$5 per person

Running at the drum Youth Services come along for cooking, tie-dying and a soccer game

Back to School BBQ

Friday 20th January – 11am to 2pm

$2 per person

Come on down to the underground at the drum Youth Services for a family BBQ. Bring a hat and sunscreen.

For more details on all of the activities run by the drum check out our website at www.thedrum.org.au, call Jerome on 9663 6733 or email youthservices@ds.org.au

A case study and the recommendations to FaHCSIA will follow.

This piece was prepared by Rebecca Harris, the complete paper was written by Kristie Dunn, with input from drummond street staff Jess Black, Reima Pryor, Zoe Stafford and CEO Karen Field, along with additional information sourced from the Child Support Agency, and independent family law practitioners.

In 2008 there was a big package of reforms covering 84 Commonwealth acts relating to the laws affecting same-sex couples, and their children. In most cases this meant that same-sex de facto couples had the same rights and entitlements as their opposite-sex counterparts.  There are some notable exceptions to this principle, namely the prohibition on same-sex marriage and adoption.

This reform package included changes to the acts relevant to child support. Before these same-sex reforms, non-biological parents in same-sex relationships were not recognised as parents by the Child Support Agency (CSA), the folk who administer child support payments. So while previously excluded, same-sex separated couples are now able to access the CSA, and access child support payments, or be liable to make payments.

The research undertaken by us here at drummond street included conversations with the CSA, and with family law practitioners, and anecdotal evidence from the queer community. All evidence suggests that very few queer families actually access the child support system. Primary research with parents would be the next logical step to really find out why, but a number of reasons did come to light, based on information gathered:

• The reforms are relatively recent (they did not come in to effect until July 2009) and queer parents used to existing outside the law may not even be aware that they are entitled to access
• There is a lot of confusion about when a parent is a parent under the law. For example sometimes a parent is legally recognised federally, but not by their State’s law. A parent might be recognised with a parenting order obtained in the Family Court, but this may not be reflected in the Family Law Act
• Under the law children cannot have more than two parents, but this does not reflect the reality for many queer families.
• There is a culture of private arrangements within queer families with respect to financial arrangement about children.
• As our research clearly indicated (see Case Study in our companion piece) the staff at the CSA have a serious lack of understanding about same-sex applications and may be giving contradictory or incorrect advice to people making contact

Feedback from the CSA Customer Review and Quality Improvement area tells us that they have no means of identifying same-sex ex-couples on their database. There was a comment that there was some concern within the CSA that asking queer clients about the nature of their relationship could be seen as offensive.

Surely asking about whether a relationship is opposite-sex or same-sex is only offensive if same-sex relationships are considered offensive. This should not be used as an excuse or impediment to tracking same-sex couple applications, and ensuring they are receiving accurate and informed advice and assistance. The current incapacity of the CSA to collect any data on same-sex couples is a concern. A simple solution to any confusion or assumptions, for example in the case of gender-neutral names like Sam or Jo/e, could be an initial screening question for every applicant along the lines of ‘is your ex-partner male or female?’ This would identify same-sex couple applications quickly and easily. Here at drummond street, a mainstream family service agency, a standard intake question regarding sexuality of a client is well received and also serves to normalise and reduce stigma for this group in the broader community. Applicants within same-sex relationships are unlikely to find such a question offensive, and in fact are likely to appreciate that their relationship is being openly recognised by a public agency. Such a question will go a long way towards normalising same-sex relationships in the eyes of heterosexual applicants. This is one of the aims of the same-sex reforms.

While the same-sex reforms have gone some way towards recognising same-sex families and clarifying financial responsibility and child support liability, the question of who is a parent and what that means remains a confusing area.  The fact that those who work at the CSA are not able to give accurate and consistent advice has to be seen as a serious impediment to access.

Check out part two of Queer families and the child support system to read the case study presented to the CSA, and our recommendations to FaHCSIA based on our research. Or read the Complete Policy Paper here.

This is a case study, along with the recommendations presented to FaHCSIA, and is a companion piece to an overview of the whole paper.

The paper was written by Kristie Dunn, with input from drummond street staff Jess Black, Reima Pryor, Zoe Stafford and CEO Karen Field, along with additional information sourced from the Child Support Agency, and independent family law practitioners.

Case study scenario presented to CSA case manager – 25 November 2010

Kate and Helen

Partners for 12 years. Separated 12 Nov 2010.

Two kids – same known donor, self-insemination at home, birth mother for both is Kate, Helen on birth certificate for one year old but not for five year old (no second parent recorded).

Kids are staying full time with Kate, two nights per week with Helen.

Kate enquiring about whether Helen has liability under the Act.

Called up on 25 November 2010 and presented basic information. The case manager was polite and helpful and responded that she had never dealt with a same-sex application so would seek advice from the technical support team. She then conveyed the advice that because the conception of the children had taken place at home, they were not covered by the Act. When quizzed about this, she replied that she didn’t think that was correct either but that that was the advice she’d been given and that she would look into it and call back. She did so a few days later and said she didn’t have any further advice but asked for a copy of the parenting plan to show details of how the conception took place. In a further follow up conversation on 8 December 2010 the case manager confirmed that the technical support team would not provide any advice on eligibility without a parenting plan being produced.

The advice given to the case manager in this situation is clearly wrong and in conflict with other information provided on the CSA website (for example the CSA Guide clearly states that home insemination is covered by section 5). The requirement that a parenting plan be submitted is quite invasive and does not appear to be warranted as it does not prove any of the essential factors: namely, were the parties in a de facto relationship at the time of conception and did the co-parent consent. This experience was concerning as it suggested that staff, while doing their best, are not being provided with accurate information from the technical support team within the CSA and that this could lead to applicants potentially being discouraged from pursuing a child support application.

Recommendations:

That FaHCSIA implement the following measures within the CSA to remove impediments to access the CSA by same-sex families:

1. Introduce methods of tracking same-sex family applications within CSA databases to monitor any impediments to access

1. Clarify the evidentiary requirements for same-sex couples in relation to the definition of parent and provide that information on the website and in information materials

1. Improve agency understanding and communication of issues around separated same-sex couples’ access to the CSA by:
   1. Implementing specific training for CSA case managers by specialist LGBTI support agencies on the legal and evidentiary requirements and the cultural impact of the same-sex reforms
   2. Employing designated same-sex relationship advice team within technical support team, as below, to be accessed by CSA case managers on a needs basis

1. Improve community understanding of issues around separated same-sex couples’ access to the CSA by:
   1. Employing designated same-sex relationship advice team within technical support team of CSA until no longer required
   2. Producing targeted communication materials for the queer community in relation to child support

• Information brochures, web materials, talks, events advertised in queer and mainstream media and through community organisations, maternal child health centres, government agencies, family relationship centres, schools, doctors’ surgeries etc

1. 1. Employing queer community liaison officers within the CSA to inform and educate key community stakeholders about the changes to the Act and its extension to same-sex families

Check out part one of Queer families and the child support system for a general overview, or read the Complete Policy Paper here.