This week, more than 50,000 letters have been sent out by the Department for Work and Pensions to parents in England, Scotland and Wales who currently pay and receive child maintenance through the old Child Support Agency (CSA).
Attempting to sum up the changes in a nutshell is difficult; there are acronyms aplenty and percentages at every corner - but here goes:
The CSA is no more, and is being replaced by the Child Maintenance Service (CMS). Around one million cases will be transferred to the new arrangements, with the government saying that this scheme will offer greater efficiencies and - whisper it - a 90 million pound saving for the tax payer.
The major difference is that fees are set to be introduced – to both parents – under the new scheme. Parents will be asked to make their own private agreements and if that proves impossible, the parent with care (PWC) - usually the mother - can pay £20 to apply for a new maintenance order.
If the non resident parent (NRP) – most of whom are men – misses payments, the PWC can apply for payments to be taken automatically from their ex’s gross salary - but the government will charge them 4% of their child support for doing so.
There seems to be a growing feeling amongst taxpayers that they should not have to fund the messy divorces of warring couples. As one half of a warring (ex) couple, it feels like the message from the government is: you've made your bed, now lie in it.
They assume that it's a choice - a wilful act, to be on terrible terms with the father of your children. And one that a woman can reverse by just trying a bit harder. Of course it's not a choice - as Caroline Criado-Perez argues, one third of new applicants only turned to the CSA because private arrangements had failed - 45% had experienced violence or abuse from their ex, and 30% had no contact with them at all.
Even if your separation has been relatively amicable, coming to a private agreement is immensely difficult. I did it – eventually - preferring not to approach the CSA for all sorts of reasons, but it was incredibly stressful. When you're in the middle of a divorce, seeing your ex across the street is hard, never mind sitting down and having a rational conversation about handing over money. It us took 18 months of hard-wrangling and sly game-playing (on both sides) - with a predictable negative impact on my health and therefore my ability to look after my children.
There are people who can help, but they are inordinately expensive; when you have the choice of paying a solicitor at £200 per hour, or a £20 fee to the CMS it's a no-brainer. But women shouldn't have to choose between one fee and another – at this particular time in their lives, they need a service that is free to use.
Because, at the heart of all this blather are not the parents, but the children. The government seem to have lost sight of the fact that Child Support is there, as the phrase suggests, to support our children. It's the children who will miss out on that 4%.
When I was younger, I assumed that the people who made Laws and Rules were highly educated civil servants with brains the size of planets; all sitting at individual desks in oak panelled rooms, wrestling with the problems of the nation and coming to conclusions that are best for us all.
Now that I'm older and fustier, I now see that these rule-makers are just people like you and me, and they make cock-ups. In this case, they have certainly done so.