header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
27 April 2018 / David Burrows
Issue: 7790 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Going separate ways

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7790_burrows_carousel

David Burrows laments the unnecessary & harmful complexities of the child support scheme

  • Why a child support scheme and how has it developed over the years?
  • Assessment of child support maintenance by a formula, developed by departure (now variation) directions.
  • What of the rights of the child for whom payments are made?

On 3 April 1993 the Child Support Agency opened its doors for business. 25 years later, it has undergone three major amendments of the original Child Support Act 1991(CSA 1991), namely in 1995, 2000 and 2008. It has had various shifts of name and nominal administrator (under the Child Maintenance and Other Payments Act 2008 the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission took over from the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, only to cede the work back to the Secretary of State, who has since then worked through Child Support Agency (again) and now Child Maintenance Service).

It remains technically and legislatively as dense a scheme as ever. Most parents are unrepresented, legal aid is rare (eg for the occasional judicial review case) and few lawyers deal with

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll