Maintenance as Financial Abuse and Economic Abuse

He was ordered by a court to pay, but he does not pay, and there are no consequences. This is not only an administrative failure, it is abuse.

Maintenance default is the most normalised form of post-separation abuse in South Africa. It is so common that it has become background noise in our courts, in our legislation, in our social narrative. Women are advised to "take him back to court." As though the court produced a result the first time. As though the barrier is paperwork and not power.

What maintenance default actually is.

Maintenance as financial abuse: Financial abuse is the direct deprivation, manipulation, or weaponisation of money and assets.

Maintenance default is financial abuse when:

▶️ He earns, he has income, and he chooses not to pay; he has money, but he redirects it away from you.

▶️He pays partially, inconsistently, or late, creating just enough uncertainty to keep you unstable.

▶️He uses arrears as leverage, offering to pay what he owes in exchange for something you would never otherwise agree to.

▶️He hides income, changes employment, operates in cash, or structures his finances to defeat a maintenance order.

▶️He gifts the children publicly and visibly while defaulting on the order, performing generosity while enforcing deprivation.

▶️He uses every enforcement attempt as an opportunity to litigate, delay, and cost you money you do not have.

In every one of these scenarios, he is repeatedly and deliberately making a financial decision. The court order exists, but he chooses not to honour it. This is not administrative failure; it is the weaponisation of a legal entitlement against the person it was designed to protect.

Maintenance as economic abuse: Economic abuse is the systematic erosion of your capacity to build and sustain an independent economic life.

Maintenance default is economic abuse when:

▶️The shortfall forces you to choose between your rent and your child's school fees, month after month.

▶️You cannot accept a job because you cannot guarantee school transport or aftercare without the maintenance contribution.

▶️You drain your savings, your retirement fund, your emergency reserves, covering his legal obligation, and you never recover them.

▶️You cannot plan, you cannot save, you cannot stabilise and recover because the income you are legally entitled to is withheld as a matter of ongoing strategy.

▶️Your credit rating deteriorates because you are servicing debt created by his default.

▶️You remain financially tethered to a man you left not by choice, but by his deliberate refusal to release you into independence.

▶️Your children's needs go unmet, and you carry the shame of that, while he faces no consequence.

This is not bad luck, nor is it a difficult economy; this is one person's sustained decision to keep another person economically destabilised using the maintenance system as the instrument.

‼️The system that enables it.

Maintenance default would not function as an abuse tool if the system did not allow it to. Enforcement in South Africa is slow, inconsistent, under-resourced, and frequently indifferent.

Defaulters face minimal consequences while recipients face repeated court appearances, legal costs, lost working hours, and the emotional toll of pursuing what they are already legally owed.

The system does not just fail survivors; in its current form, it actively assists abusers. Every postponement, every withdrawn warrant, every unanswered inquiry is a message to the defaulter that his choice carries no real cost. This is not a neutral administrative outcome; it is structural complicity.

What this means for how we talk about it: ️When a woman says "he doesn't pay maintenance", she is not describing a financial inconvenience. She is describing a direct and deliberate deprivation of legally entitled resources, which is financial abuse. A sustained strategy that prevents her economic recovery and independence is economic abuse; it is a pattern enabled and prolonged by systemic failure, which is institutional abuse. All three simultaneously and often for years, sometimes for decades.

Mothers deserve language that matches the reality of what is being done to her and a system that responds to that reality with the seriousness it demands.

The next time you are in court, use all of this and don't let them shut you up; keep talking; they need to be educated.

Share this and tag somebody you know who should read this.

#economicabuse

#financialabuse

#childmaintenance

#postseperationabuse

#sabotage

Failure to implement blacklisting of maintenance defaulters is an insult to the most vulnerable

Blacklisting of maintenance defaulters was promulgated in January 2018, it is June 2023 and it has still not been enacted.

Blacklisting was on the agenda at the Maintenance Session in Jhb hosted by the DWYPD in November 2021. The CEO of the National Credit Regulator was a speaker at this event, he said the NCR was not included in the drafting of the legislation to be able to enforce blacklisting. The major problem, the legislation is not in place.

The South African Law Commission in its Maintenance Amendment Act discussion paper of 2022, was concerned about the blacklisting of respondents and the negative effect it would have on defaulters. Concern mostly for men as they are in the majority defaults.

Many primary parents, the majority of women, are blacklisted for not meeting their financial obligations due to not getting child maintenance or getting sporadic amounts at unpredictable times despite a court order instructing them how much to pay and when to pay.

There is not the same consideration expressed for primary parents in the majority of women.

• How many women have been blacklisted in the same period?

• What policies are in place in Government and Corporate to prevent economic abuse?

• What policies are in place to protect victims of economic and financial abuse?

• What policies are in place to assist victims in recovering from economic and financial abuse?

The Old Mutual Savings and Investment Monitor 2021 shows that 72% of women who earn a minimum of R8,000 pm were not getting maintenance or only now and then. What would the data show if one were to drop the cohort baseline?

In the overwhelming majority, women are burdened with the financial responsibilities of raising children with little to no systemic, structural, or social support, yet the concern is about blacklisting, in the majority, men.

Men who are failing their moral and constitutional obligation to support children who have been court-ordered to pay a specific amount on a specific date. Men who play the justice and social system like an accomplished musician playing his fiddle.

Blacklisting was meant to discourage defaulters, the threat of possible blacklisting has not changed the trajectory of men not supporting their children, and the threat of serving time in an overcrowded prison does not even deter them.

The failure to implement Blacklisting defaulters is an insult to the most vulnerable of society, to victims of financial and economic abuse and domestic violence as defined in our Act, as they continue to be blacklisted while the person meant to be financially supporting their children can continue getting credit.

Not only are women blacklisted, which prevents them from accessing credit, but it has a further impact on the possibility of economic security by upskilling themselves and getting better-paying jobs due to being blacklisted.

It impacts women and children trying to secure shelter due to negative credit ratings.

Men, on the other hand, are not paying maintenance, not getting blacklisted, and continue to increase their economic security by acquiring more assets and moving up the corporate ladder unimpeded by their failure to financially support their children.

This has contributed widely to the economic inequality and vulnerability of women and children and continues to prop up a patriarchal society.

During the hearing of this bill in Parliament, this is what was said;

ANC MP Mathole Motshekga, who also chaired the justice portfolio committee, said "There was a view that blacklisting would limit the creditworthiness of defaulters and hinder them from paying maintenance even more."

EFF MP Hlengiwe Maxon said, "The party opposed the proposal to blacklist defaulters because this not only disadvantages the person that is unable to pay maintenance but further disadvantages the child and other dependents”.

Women should be very mindful of their political parties' prejudices and biases toward men and hold them accountable.

Women have no financial resilience and until there is a fair and just Maintenance Act that is enforced without fear or favor women will be the face of poverty.

#EconomicInequality

#EconomicJustice

#EconomicAbuse

#FinancialAbuse

#ChildMaintenance

#GenderEquality

The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ & CD)