Open Letter: A Call for Fair, Transparent and Modern Reform of the Child Maintenance System
- Deanna Newell
- May 12
- 4 min read
To the UK Government, Members of Parliament, and the Child Maintenance Service,
Child maintenance exists for one essential purpose: to ensure that children are properly supported after separation. That principle is not in dispute.
What is increasingly being questioned, however, is whether the current system fully reflects the financial realities of modern family life, or whether aspects of it unintentionally create hardship, mistrust, and ongoing conflict between parents who are both trying to support their children.
This letter is not written to blame either parent. It is written to highlight structural concerns experienced by many families across the UK and to call for a more balanced, transparent, and realistic approach to child maintenance reform.
1. A System That Does Not Always Reflect Real Financial Life
Current child maintenance calculations are largely based on declared income. While income must remain central to any assessment, many families feel the system does not always reflect genuine affordability or wider financial obligations.
Many paying parents are also managing:-
Mortgage or rental costs
Pension contributions and long-term financial planning
Debt accumulated during or after separation
Variable or unpredictable income, particularly in self-employment or business ownership
These are not luxuries. They are fundamental financial responsibilities that can significantly affect day-to-day affordability.
As a result, some parents feel the system assesses income in isolation rather than considering overall financial reality.
2. The Complexity of Self-Employment and Business Income
One of the greatest modern challenges in child maintenance assessment is the treatment of self-employed individuals, company directors, and small business owners.
Unlike standard PAYE employment, income in these circumstances may:-
Fluctuate significantly from year to year
Be affected by legitimate business reinvestment and operating costs
Be structured through salary, dividends, or retained profits
Involve complex but lawful accounting arrangements
Authorities understandably rely on declared taxable profits, salary, dividends, company accounts, and allowable expenses. However, disputes still frequently arise over what represents true disposable income.
This does not automatically imply wrongdoing.
However, the complexity itself can create mistrust, with some paying parents feeling their genuine financial limitations are not recognised, while some receiving parents feel declared income may not reflect actual lifestyle or resources.
3. Housing, Assets, and Post-Separation Financial Reality
Separation does not simply divide income, it divides homes, assets, financial security, and long-term stability.
In some situations, one parent may remain in a mortgage-free property or retain greater financial stability, while the other continues to carry significant housing costs or reduced financial resilience.
These wider financial realities are rarely reflected within child maintenance assessments, despite having a major impact on affordability and quality of life for both households.
4. Pressure Exists on Both Sides
It is important to acknowledge that financial pressure exists for both receiving and paying parents.
Receiving parents often carry the majority of day-to-day childcare costs, which continue to rise significantly.
Paying parents may also be contributing financially while simultaneously managing their own housing and living costs.
In many cases, both households are struggling, simply in different ways.
A fair system should recognise this shared financial pressure without undermining support for children.
5. When the System Increases Conflict Instead of Reducing It
The purpose of child maintenance should be to reduce conflict by creating clarity, consistency, and trust however, many families report:-
Confusion around how calculations are determined
Disputes involving self-employment and complex income structures
A lack of transparency in decision-making
Ongoing tension where financial obligations overlap with co-parenting arrangements
When systems are not clearly understood or trusted, they risk increasing conflict rather than resolving it.
6. Financial Abuse and the Need for Evidence-Based Assessment
Financial and economic abuse are serious issues that must always be recognised and addressed appropriately.
Some survivors of domestic abuse experience long-term financial hardship, housing insecurity, or economic dependency following separation.
At the same time, post-separation disputes can involve competing interpretations of financial behaviour and intent.
Allegations of financial control, hidden income, or manipulation must therefore always be assessed carefully and based on evidence rather than assumption.
Similarly, suggestions that child arrangements are being influenced primarily by financial motives should only be considered where there is clear supporting evidence.
Balanced and evidence-led decision-making is essential for maintaining trust in the system.
7. A System That Must Adapt to Modern Family Life
The UK’s financial landscape has changed dramatically.
Self-employment, shared parenting, variable income, blended families, and rising housing costs are now common realities.
A modern child maintenance system should better reflect this by:-
Taking a fuller view of disposable income and genuine affordability
Improving transparency in assessments and reviews
Better addressing complex income structures and business ownership
Recognising significant housing and pension obligations
Providing clearer guidance for both parents
8. A Call for Fairness, Transparency, and Reform
This is not a call to reduce support for children.
It is a call for a system that is fair, sustainable, transparent, and reflective of modern financial reality for both households.
A system that places excessive or disproportionate pressure on either household risks undermining long-term stability for everyone involved, including the child it is designed to support.
Fairness is not about choosing one parent over another. It is about ensuring that children are properly supported while both households remain financially sustainable.
Conclusion
Child maintenance should promote stability, reduce conflict, and reflect real-life financial circumstances.
For many families, the current system does not consistently achieve that balance.
We therefore urge policymakers, Members of Parliament, and the Child Maintenance Service to review how assessments are made and consider reforms that better reflect the complexity of modern family life.
A fair system is not simply one that works on paper, it is one that works fairly in practice.
Yours faithfully,
Deanna Newell
Deanna Newell Family Law
Advocacy for truth-tellers, survivors, and the children who deserve better
