Child Maintenance Service (CMS)

Dear Lady Morris,

We are writing to you as Chair of the Public Services Committee as organisations working across the violence against women and girls (VAWG) sector to support the evidence submission made by Surviving Economic Abuse (SEA) and Gingerbread to the Committee’s inquiry into the Child Maintenance Service (CMS). This letter is coordinated by the Women’s Budget Group (WBG) and Surviving Economic Abuse (SEA) and is co-signed by 14 organisations working to support and advocate for victim-survivors of domestic abuse.

The Women’s Budget Group (WBG) is the UK’s leading feminist economics think tank. Our work analyses the gendered impact of economic and social policy and evidences the ways in which women – particularly single mothers, racially minoritised women, and Disabled women – are disproportionately affected by failures in the social security system, including the child maintenance framework. Our analysis has repeatedly highlighted the links between child maintenance non-payment, economic abuse, and the systemic drivers of women’s and children’s poverty.

We support the submissions made by SEA and Gingerbread, which sets out in detail the failures of the CMS to ensure that children receive the financial support they are entitled to, and that victim-survivors of domestic abuse are protected from further harm.

In particular, we support the submission’s key concerns:

1. CMS as a site of continued economic abuse

There is growing evidence that abusers are using the CMS to continue coercive control after separation. Research cited in the submissions show that one in ten UK mothers have experienced a partner or ex-partner obstructing access to child support ¹ . Black, Asian and ethnically minoritised women are more than twice as likely than White women to experience this tactic of economic abuse ¹ . These patterns reflect broader systemic inequalities, which the CMS does not currently address.

Evidence from Gingerbread’s submission reinforces these concerns. Their research shows that 77% of CMS receiving parents have experienced domestic abuse, and that for many, involvement with the CMS worsened their situation ² . Nearly half of those surveyed reported that the CMS had made the abuse worse, while more than a third said the abuse was ongoing.

The evidence also highlights how ineffective enforcement, weak procedural safeguards, and the use of Collect and Pay fees compound these harms. Research carried out by WBG outlines how the CMS contributes to poverty among women and children by failing to ensure timely and full payments, and by placing the burden of enforcement on the resident parent ^{3 4} .

2. Fees and enforcement

We support the recommendation to remove both the 4% fee on receiving parents and the 20% fee on paying parents using the Collect and Pay system. These fees are punitive in cases where the CMS is the only safe route to receiving child support. We also support proposals to strengthen enforcement, close known loopholes, and ensure that partial or late payments are not used to avoid consequences.

3. Specialist support and cross-departmental coordination

Victim-survivors should be supported by CMS staff with appropriate training in economic abuse and trauma-informed practice. We support the recommendation for a dedicated domestic abuse team within the CMS and for improved referral pathways from other public services. We also agree that the DWP should review how its own policies – such as debt deductions and the five-week wait for Universal Credit – interact with CMS failures to deepen economic harm for the same groups of parents. A named dedicated caseworker system should also be introduced, to prevent victim-survivors from having to repeatedly recount their experiences and to ensure continuity and follow-through on agreed actions.

4. Structural reform and integration into wider strategy

The CMS must be recognised as a key mechanism through which child poverty and violence against women and girls intersect. As our research demonstrates, economic insecurity among women is often shaped by multiple systems working at once – including failures in child maintenance enforcement ^{5 .} The CMS must be part of broader efforts to improve economic justice, tackle gender-based violence, and reduce child poverty.

We urge the Committee to seriously consider the evidence and recommendations submitted by Surviving Economic Abuse and Gingerbread, and to recognise that an effective Child Maintenance Service can be a key mechanism in achieving the Government’s stated aims of halving violence against women and girls and reducing child poverty.

Yours Sincerely,

Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson, Director Women’s Budget Group

Sarah Hill, CEO, Independent Domestic Abuse Services

Diana Nammi, CEO, IKWRO – Women’s Rights Organisation

Angie Herrera, Director, Latin American Women’s Aid

Maureen Connolly, CEO, Birmingham and Solihull Women’s Aid

Selma Taha, Executive Director, Southall Black Sisters (SBS)

Cherryl Henry-Leach, CEO, Standing Together Against Domestic Abuse

Liz Thompson, Director of External Relations, SafeLives

Susie McDonald, CEO, Tender Education and Arts

Estelle du Boulay, Director, Rights of Women

Ghadah Alnasseri, Executive Director, Imkaan

Farah Nazeer, CEO, Women’s Aid Federation of England (Women’s Aid)

Andrea Simon, Executive Director, End Violence Against Women Coalition

Sara Kirkpatrick, CEO, Welsh Women’s Aid

Gisela Valle, Director, Latin American Women’s Rights Service