The Australian child support reforms: A critical evaluation

The Australian Child Support Scheme aims to ensure that children continue to be supported financially should their parents separate or never live together. Sweeping changes to the Australian Child Support Scheme were introduced between 2006 and 2008, featuring a dramatically different system for the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Australian journal of social issues 2015-03, Vol.50 (3), p.217-232
Hauptverfasser: Smyth, Bruce, Rodgers, Bryan, Son, Vu, Vnuk, Maria
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 232
container_issue 3
container_start_page 217
container_title The Australian journal of social issues
container_volume 50
creator Smyth, Bruce
Rodgers, Bryan
Son, Vu
Vnuk, Maria
description The Australian Child Support Scheme aims to ensure that children continue to be supported financially should their parents separate or never live together. Sweeping changes to the Australian Child Support Scheme were introduced between 2006 and 2008, featuring a dramatically different system for the calculation of child support and a more rigorous enforcement regime. The reforms were intended to respond to ongoing concerns about equity, and to changes in social expectations and practices in gender, work, and parenting. In this article we summarise key findings from a large cross-sequential study of the child support reforms. Although the new formula initially led to lower child support payments, and an increase in the proportion of separated mothers experiencing income disadvantage, payments two years later had increased slightly. More broadly, the new scheme appears to have resulted in little change in separated parents' policy knowledge, parenting arrangements, perceptions of fairness, and child support compliance. Taken together, these findings suggest that Australia may not have made as much progress as it would have liked in this thorny area of social policy - especially in relation to compliance and perceptions of fairness.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/j.1839-4655.2015.tb00347.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_gale_incontextgauss_8GL_A431531622</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A431531622</galeid><informt_id>10.3316/ielapa.494430022752068</informt_id><sourcerecordid>A431531622</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c8657-8ebeec6bd9b1fc44658de224af4c7b94400f7395cab4d6e6ed4658a588e046423</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkl1v0zAUhiMEEmXwHyK4gYsGO3YSZ1xFFWwdFUPa4NZynJPWlRt3tgPdv8dpy6BQ0KZcOPJ5zns-_EbRS4wSjFD6dplgRsoxzbMsSRHOEl8jRGiRbB5Fo7vQ42gUYsU4Jyl-Gj1zbokQYrgko-jd9QLiqnfeCq1EF8uF0k3s-vXaWB9baI1dudO4iqVVXkmhY_gmdC-8Mt3z6EkrtIMX-_Mk-vLh_fXkfDy7PJtOqtlYsjxUZVADyLxuyhq3koaGWANpSkVLZVGXlCLUFqTMpKhpk0MOzYCIjDFANKcpOYle73TX1tz04DxfKSdBa9GB6R3HRV6QtCwICeirP9Cl6W0XugsUZqxkLKO_qLnQwFXXmjC-HER5RQnOCM7Toez4CDWHDsKuTAetCtcHfHKED18DKyWPJrw5SAiMh42fi945_vHz9N7s9OrTvVl2NvvfkHtWGq1hDjy84-TykD_d8dIa54I_-NqqlbC3HCM-WJIv-eA7PviOD5bke0vyTUiudsnfwyZuH5DJq4sruv0PGl93GnalPN_2KQczuqXwjjsQVi62y9_GjZ3zxiguajeUIWEIrkCLteA0OI-EsmmRpShnQfjiN-FAtP6fcndSPwN_i50_XOx4Xz8ASloxjA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1718898854</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Australian child support reforms: A critical evaluation</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Smyth, Bruce ; Rodgers, Bryan ; Son, Vu ; Vnuk, Maria</creator><creatorcontrib>Smyth, Bruce ; Rodgers, Bryan ; Son, Vu ; Vnuk, Maria</creatorcontrib><description>The Australian Child Support Scheme aims to ensure that children continue to be supported financially should their parents separate or never live together. Sweeping changes to the Australian Child Support Scheme were introduced between 2006 and 2008, featuring a dramatically different system for the calculation of child support and a more rigorous enforcement regime. The reforms were intended to respond to ongoing concerns about equity, and to changes in social expectations and practices in gender, work, and parenting. In this article we summarise key findings from a large cross-sequential study of the child support reforms. Although the new formula initially led to lower child support payments, and an increase in the proportion of separated mothers experiencing income disadvantage, payments two years later had increased slightly. More broadly, the new scheme appears to have resulted in little change in separated parents' policy knowledge, parenting arrangements, perceptions of fairness, and child support compliance. Taken together, these findings suggest that Australia may not have made as much progress as it would have liked in this thorny area of social policy - especially in relation to compliance and perceptions of fairness.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0157-6321</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1839-4655</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/j.1839-4655.2015.tb00347.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AJSIBA</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Sydney: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Analysis ; Australia ; child maintenance ; Child poverty ; Child Support ; Child Support Scheme (Australia) ; Childrearing Practices ; children ; Children &amp; youth ; Compliance ; Costs ; divorce ; Economic aspects ; Equity ; Families &amp; family life ; Government regulation ; Law and legislation ; Laws, regulations and rules ; Legislation ; Mothers ; Nonresidents ; Parents ; Parents &amp; parenting ; Payments ; policy evaluation ; Reform ; Reforms ; Social Policy ; Social reform</subject><ispartof>The Australian journal of social issues, 2015-03, Vol.50 (3), p.217-232</ispartof><rights>Australian Social Policy Association</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Australian Social Policy Association 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c8657-8ebeec6bd9b1fc44658de224af4c7b94400f7395cab4d6e6ed4658a588e046423</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c8657-8ebeec6bd9b1fc44658de224af4c7b94400f7395cab4d6e6ed4658a588e046423</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fj.1839-4655.2015.tb00347.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fj.1839-4655.2015.tb00347.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27344,27924,27925,33774,33775,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Smyth, Bruce</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodgers, Bryan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Son, Vu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vnuk, Maria</creatorcontrib><title>The Australian child support reforms: A critical evaluation</title><title>The Australian journal of social issues</title><addtitle>Australian Journal of Social Issues</addtitle><description>The Australian Child Support Scheme aims to ensure that children continue to be supported financially should their parents separate or never live together. Sweeping changes to the Australian Child Support Scheme were introduced between 2006 and 2008, featuring a dramatically different system for the calculation of child support and a more rigorous enforcement regime. The reforms were intended to respond to ongoing concerns about equity, and to changes in social expectations and practices in gender, work, and parenting. In this article we summarise key findings from a large cross-sequential study of the child support reforms. Although the new formula initially led to lower child support payments, and an increase in the proportion of separated mothers experiencing income disadvantage, payments two years later had increased slightly. More broadly, the new scheme appears to have resulted in little change in separated parents' policy knowledge, parenting arrangements, perceptions of fairness, and child support compliance. Taken together, these findings suggest that Australia may not have made as much progress as it would have liked in this thorny area of social policy - especially in relation to compliance and perceptions of fairness.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Australia</subject><subject>child maintenance</subject><subject>Child poverty</subject><subject>Child Support</subject><subject>Child Support Scheme (Australia)</subject><subject>Childrearing Practices</subject><subject>children</subject><subject>Children &amp; youth</subject><subject>Compliance</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>divorce</subject><subject>Economic aspects</subject><subject>Equity</subject><subject>Families &amp; family life</subject><subject>Government regulation</subject><subject>Law and legislation</subject><subject>Laws, regulations and rules</subject><subject>Legislation</subject><subject>Mothers</subject><subject>Nonresidents</subject><subject>Parents</subject><subject>Parents &amp; parenting</subject><subject>Payments</subject><subject>policy evaluation</subject><subject>Reform</subject><subject>Reforms</subject><subject>Social Policy</subject><subject>Social reform</subject><issn>0157-6321</issn><issn>1839-4655</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>KPI</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkl1v0zAUhiMEEmXwHyK4gYsGO3YSZ1xFFWwdFUPa4NZynJPWlRt3tgPdv8dpy6BQ0KZcOPJ5zns-_EbRS4wSjFD6dplgRsoxzbMsSRHOEl8jRGiRbB5Fo7vQ42gUYsU4Jyl-Gj1zbokQYrgko-jd9QLiqnfeCq1EF8uF0k3s-vXaWB9baI1dudO4iqVVXkmhY_gmdC-8Mt3z6EkrtIMX-_Mk-vLh_fXkfDy7PJtOqtlYsjxUZVADyLxuyhq3koaGWANpSkVLZVGXlCLUFqTMpKhpk0MOzYCIjDFANKcpOYle73TX1tz04DxfKSdBa9GB6R3HRV6QtCwICeirP9Cl6W0XugsUZqxkLKO_qLnQwFXXmjC-HER5RQnOCM7Toez4CDWHDsKuTAetCtcHfHKED18DKyWPJrw5SAiMh42fi945_vHz9N7s9OrTvVl2NvvfkHtWGq1hDjy84-TykD_d8dIa54I_-NqqlbC3HCM-WJIv-eA7PviOD5bke0vyTUiudsnfwyZuH5DJq4sruv0PGl93GnalPN_2KQczuqXwjjsQVi62y9_GjZ3zxiguajeUIWEIrkCLteA0OI-EsmmRpShnQfjiN-FAtP6fcndSPwN_i50_XOx4Xz8ASloxjA</recordid><startdate>20150322</startdate><enddate>20150322</enddate><creator>Smyth, Bruce</creator><creator>Rodgers, Bryan</creator><creator>Son, Vu</creator><creator>Vnuk, Maria</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>KPI</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>7RO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7U3</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8AI</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>AXJJW</scope><scope>AYAGU</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FREBS</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150322</creationdate><title>The Australian child support reforms: A critical evaluation</title><author>Smyth, Bruce ; Rodgers, Bryan ; Son, Vu ; Vnuk, Maria</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c8657-8ebeec6bd9b1fc44658de224af4c7b94400f7395cab4d6e6ed4658a588e046423</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Australia</topic><topic>child maintenance</topic><topic>Child poverty</topic><topic>Child Support</topic><topic>Child Support Scheme (Australia)</topic><topic>Childrearing Practices</topic><topic>children</topic><topic>Children &amp; youth</topic><topic>Compliance</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>divorce</topic><topic>Economic aspects</topic><topic>Equity</topic><topic>Families &amp; family life</topic><topic>Government regulation</topic><topic>Law and legislation</topic><topic>Laws, regulations and rules</topic><topic>Legislation</topic><topic>Mothers</topic><topic>Nonresidents</topic><topic>Parents</topic><topic>Parents &amp; parenting</topic><topic>Payments</topic><topic>policy evaluation</topic><topic>Reform</topic><topic>Reforms</topic><topic>Social Policy</topic><topic>Social reform</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Smyth, Bruce</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodgers, Bryan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Son, Vu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vnuk, Maria</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Global Issues</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>Asian Business Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Social Services Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Asian Business Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>Asian &amp; European Business Collection</collection><collection>Australia &amp; New Zealand Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Asian &amp; European Business Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>The Australian journal of social issues</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Smyth, Bruce</au><au>Rodgers, Bryan</au><au>Son, Vu</au><au>Vnuk, Maria</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Australian child support reforms: A critical evaluation</atitle><jtitle>The Australian journal of social issues</jtitle><addtitle>Australian Journal of Social Issues</addtitle><date>2015-03-22</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>217</spage><epage>232</epage><pages>217-232</pages><issn>0157-6321</issn><eissn>1839-4655</eissn><coden>AJSIBA</coden><abstract>The Australian Child Support Scheme aims to ensure that children continue to be supported financially should their parents separate or never live together. Sweeping changes to the Australian Child Support Scheme were introduced between 2006 and 2008, featuring a dramatically different system for the calculation of child support and a more rigorous enforcement regime. The reforms were intended to respond to ongoing concerns about equity, and to changes in social expectations and practices in gender, work, and parenting. In this article we summarise key findings from a large cross-sequential study of the child support reforms. Although the new formula initially led to lower child support payments, and an increase in the proportion of separated mothers experiencing income disadvantage, payments two years later had increased slightly. More broadly, the new scheme appears to have resulted in little change in separated parents' policy knowledge, parenting arrangements, perceptions of fairness, and child support compliance. Taken together, these findings suggest that Australia may not have made as much progress as it would have liked in this thorny area of social policy - especially in relation to compliance and perceptions of fairness.</abstract><cop>Sydney</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/j.1839-4655.2015.tb00347.x</doi><tpages>16</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0157-6321
ispartof The Australian journal of social issues, 2015-03, Vol.50 (3), p.217-232
issn 0157-6321
1839-4655
language eng
recordid cdi_gale_incontextgauss_8GL_A431531622
source Sociological Abstracts; Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects Analysis
Australia
child maintenance
Child poverty
Child Support
Child Support Scheme (Australia)
Childrearing Practices
children
Children & youth
Compliance
Costs
divorce
Economic aspects
Equity
Families & family life
Government regulation
Law and legislation
Laws, regulations and rules
Legislation
Mothers
Nonresidents
Parents
Parents & parenting
Payments
policy evaluation
Reform
Reforms
Social Policy
Social reform
title The Australian child support reforms: A critical evaluation
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T21%3A00%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Australian%20child%20support%20reforms:%20A%20critical%20evaluation&rft.jtitle=The%20Australian%20journal%20of%20social%20issues&rft.au=Smyth,%20Bruce&rft.date=2015-03-22&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=217&rft.epage=232&rft.pages=217-232&rft.issn=0157-6321&rft.eissn=1839-4655&rft.coden=AJSIBA&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/j.1839-4655.2015.tb00347.x&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA431531622%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1718898854&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A431531622&rft_informt_id=10.3316/ielapa.494430022752068&rfr_iscdi=true