(WITHDRAWN) â₀™Letã¢â‚€â„¢s Bring It into the 21st Centuryã¢â‚€â„¢: Perceptions of Fairness in Child Support

Background: Child support can be an important economic resource for many families. Yet, many parents eligible for child support services do not participate, and fewer than half of custodial parent families with orders receive all the support due to them. Prior research has identified that many parents experience child support processes as confusing, opaque, or unfair. As child support has started to shift towards a more family-centered program, some child support agencies have started to incorporate procedural justice approaches (i.e., premised on the notion that perceptions of process fairness affect an individual’s response) into their practice, and previous empirical work supports suggests that perceptions of fairness can influence parents’ child support behavior. However, much remains to be learned about what fairness means to families involved in child support. This study explores how custodial parents and obligors perceive fairness in child support policies and processes. It examines parents’ beliefs and experiences interacting with child support broadly; perspectives on fairness at key process junctures; and views on what a more fair system might look like.

Data and Methods: Data come from in-depth semi-structured interviews with parents who owe and are owed child support in two Wisconsin counties (n=26). Interviews were conducted virtually and lasted 1.5-2 hours. Data were coded in NVivo Pro and analyzed thematically.

Results: Study participants broadly believed that child support should help to ensure children are cared for, though parent perceptions on when program involvement is appropriate in, what “caring for” children means, and what steps agencies should take to facilitate parental involvement varied. While study participants generally perceived child support as fair in theory, most also reported experiencing unfair aspects of child support on their own cases. Parent perceptions centered around processes and policies, rather than individual actors, as the underlying source of unfairness. Parents highlighted concerns about lack of fairness in policies and processes at key junctures within child support cases, including order establishment (particularly cooperation requirements due to receipt of public benefits), order modification (especially access difficulties), and enforcement (particularly when compliance tools are ineffective or compound compliance problems). Informational gaps, communication challenges, and limited resources for helping them to navigate processes exacerbated perceptions of unfairness. Broadly, parents conceptualize a fairer system as one that allows for parent voice at every step; provides clearer information and more frequent communication; and accounts for the needs of parents and children.

Conclusions and Implications: These findings suggest that “fairness” in child support is a complex, multifaceted concept and perceptions of multiple stakeholders must be considered. Findings also emphasize that perceptions of treatment by individual system actors are only one component contributing to perceptions of fairness; perceptions of fairness of policies, processes, and practices —separate from actions taken by individual actors—drive parents’ perceptions of fairness in child support. Therefore, efforts to improve perceptions of and realities with fairness must address changes to policies that govern how child support interacts with families and investment in resources to facilitate transparency and family engagement.