Beyond the £12,570 Figure: Why Child Maintenance Must Reflect Modern Family Finances
- Deanna Newell
- 6 hours ago
- 5 min read
By Deanna Newell,
Founder of DN Family Law
Child maintenance exists for one fundamental reason: children should continue to receive financial support from both parents after separation.
The principle is simple. The reality for many families is not.
The Child Maintenance Service was created at a time when many financial circumstances were more straightforward.
For many families, income was primarily employment-based, with parents paid through PAYE, making earnings easier to identify and assess.
However, family finances have changed significantly. Today, more parents are:-
Self-employed
Business owners
Sole shareholders
Directors of limited companies
Managing complex income structures
Holding retained profits within companies
Receiving income through different financial arrangements
This means that assessing child maintenance based on a single declared income figure may not always provide a complete picture of the financial resources available to support children.
This is not about assuming wrongdoing or criticising parents who run businesses.
Many business owners work hard, take financial risks and contribute significantly to their children’s lives.
The issue is whether the current system is modern enough to recognise the complexity of today’s financial landscape.
The question we must ask is:-
Can a modern child maintenance system be fair if it only looks at one financial figure?
My experience is why I am calling for reform
I am Deanna Newell, Founder of DN Family Law. I am an autistic parent, and both of my children are autistic. I am also a survivor of coercive control, financial abuse and economic abuse.
My lived experience of the family justice system has shaped my campaign for change.
I currently receive £167 per month in child maintenance for my two children, an amount that has remained unchanged since April 2021.
In my case, the paying parent has self-employed income, is a business owner and sole shareholder, which has highlighted wider questions about whether self-employed income, company structures and available financial resources are fully reflected within child maintenance assessments.
This raises important questions about whether a modern assessment should consider the wider financial picture, including how income is structured, where profits are retained, and what resources may ultimately be available to support children.
This is not about criticising paying parents or receiving parents. It is about asking whether the system is equipped for the realities of modern families.
A blended family perspective: fairness for all children
My campaign is also shaped by my experience as part of a blended family.
My husband pays £825 per month in child maintenance for his two children. We understand the importance of fairness for all children and all parents.
Our experience has shown that families can have very different financial circumstances after separation.
In my own situation, I left the relationship without a family home or savings.
Within our blended family, my husband’s experience involved voluntarily transferring significant assets, including a mortgage-free home, shares and savings, as part of his financial arrangements following separation.
This highlights an important question for reform: Should child maintenance and family financial assessments, where appropriate, consider the wider financial circumstances and resources available to support children, alongside statutory payments?
A modern system should recognise that families may provide support in different ways, including through maintenance payments, housing, education costs, assets or other child-related contributions.
The focus must always remain on children’s welfare and ensuring fairness for all families.
The challenge of the £12,570 declared income figure
The use of a declared income figure, such as £12,570, within child maintenance calculations raises important questions about whether this figure always reflects the full financial resources available to support children.
For some parents, a lower declared income may accurately reflect their circumstances.
However, in more complex financial situations a single income figure may not always provide the complete picture, particularly those involving:-
Self-employment
Limited companies
Sole shareholders
Retained profits
Dividends
Business interests
Other financial arrangements
Good financial advice and legitimate accounting structures can support businesses and families. However, a fair child maintenance system must also ensure that children benefit from the resources genuinely available to support them.
A modern system should be capable of considering wider financial circumstances where appropriate, while recognising fairness for both paying and receiving parents.
Separation does not always create equal starting points
When parents separate, they do not always begin again from the same financial position. In some family circumstances, one parent may have access to significant financial resources, including:-
Property
Pensions
Savings
Investments
Business interests
At the same time, another parent may become the primary carer and experience financial hardship, debt, insecure housing or reduced financial security while raising children.
Some receiving parents have experienced situations where they are left without housing, savings or financial stability while caring for their children.
This highlights the importance of ensuring child maintenance assessments, where appropriate, consider the wider financial circumstances of both parents alongside the needs and welfare of children.
Equally, fairness must apply in both directions.
Some paying parents make significant contributions beyond statutory child maintenance, including-:
Paying school fees
Providing housing or mortgage-free accommodation
Continuing mortgage payments
Paying childcare costs
Covering medical, educational or extracurricular expenses
Other paying parents may experience genuine financial hardship while still meeting their maintenance obligations, including where payments are calculated through PAYE and deducted directly from earnings.
A fair system must recognise both responsibility and affordability.
A proposed solution: A Mandatory Three-Tier Family Justice and Child Maintenance Triage System
DN Family Law is calling for a national framework that identifies cases according to complexity and risk.
Tier 1 — Standard Cases
Straightforward cases where income, child arrangements and circumstances are clear.
Tier 2 — Enhanced Assessment Cases
Cases requiring a deeper financial review, including:-
Self-employed parents
Limited companies
Sole shareholders
Retained profits
Dividends and complex income structures
Significant assets
Disputed financial information
Substantial voluntary contributions
Tier 3 — Court and Multi-Agency Safeguarding Review Cases
Cases involving:-
Domestic abuse
Coercive control
Financial abuse
Economic abuse
Safeguarding concerns
Complex family circumstances
Reform must put children first
Child maintenance reform should not become a conflict between paying parents and receiving parents. The focus must remain where it belongs:
On the children.
Every child deserves the benefit of the financial resources genuinely available to support them.
Every parent deserves a system that is fair, transparent and proportionate.
The system must evolve to reflect modern families.
Because behind every assessment is not just a calculation.
There is a child.
Children First. Fairness. Transparency. Accountability. Evidence.
Disclaimer: This article reflects my personal experience and views on family justice reform. It does not seek to comment on, identify or make allegations about any individual. The purpose is to highlight areas for potential policy improvement and encourage evidence-based reform.
DN FAMILY LAW
Deanna Newell | Founder | DN Family Law
Advocacy for truth-tellers, survivors, and the children who deserve better
