Lisa Young

Institutional processes and the production of gender inequalities: The case of Australian child support research and administration

This article analyses the administrative and research capture of child support data as a case study of how institutional data collection processes are performative in perpetuating gendered inequalities. We compare interviews with 19 low-income single mothers and their longitudinal survey responses from the same research to reveal how low-income women strategically or inadvertently ‘smoothed’ their experiences when responding to data collection processes. This directly resulted in material and symbolic costs in the form of reduced welfare benefits and limited evidence with which to lobby for policy reform. These processes in turn provided benefits to fathers and the state in the form of reduced child support liabilities and enforcement action, and welfare outlays, respectively. We conclude that current administrative and research data collection practices provide a limited and gendered evidence base for administrative justice and policy reform.

Reforming child support laws: Breaking the cycle

Australias Federal Government has recently struck a Taskforce to consider specific matters relating to child support. This article considers this move in the context of what is argued to be a typical and cyclical pattern of family law reform. It traces the genesis of the Taskforce and looks at how a cyclical pattern of law reform has shaped its Terms of Reference. The author discusses what might be driving this pattern of reform and the implications it has for users of the family law system. Finally, the article identifies some opportunities afforded to the Taskforce by the Terms of Reference to reconsider the direction of child support reform.