Abstract
This article explores the question ‘Why do fathers resist paying child support?’ through interviews with 26 separated or divorced non-residential fathers in Australia. Drawing on Zelizer’s typology we argue that the men in this study attempt to define child support as a gift — a payment that emphasizes the power and beneficence of the payer and the obligation of the receiver — but struggle to do so in legal and bureaucratic structures that position its receipt as an entitlement. The tension between child support as a gift and child support as entitlement is informed by gendered power over money, a key element of fathering in traditional and non-traditional family structures.The payment and non-payment of child support is used to reinforce the economic dimensions of fathering identities and define family relationships in remarkably traditional ways.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
