CMS — refuse late DNA test after years of non-payment and systemic abuse

From: [YOUR FULL NAME], parent with care of [CHILD'S NAME, DOB]

Safe contact address: [EMAIL / SAFE ADDRESS — your address should be withheld under the DA Service Type]

CMS reference: [CMS REFERENCE]

Previous court case: [COURT NAME, CASE NUMBER, DATE OF ORDER IF PARENTAGE WAS DETERMINED]

To: Child Maintenance Service (and copy to [PAYING PARENT'S SOLICITOR / PAYING PARENT])

Date: [DD / MM / YYYY]

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am the parent with care of [CHILD'S NAME], born [DOB]. [PAYING PARENT] has been recorded as [CHILD]'s parent since [DATE] and this parentage was accepted by: [select all that apply — named on the birth certificate; marriage at the time of conception or birth; voluntary payments made from [DATE] to [DATE]; a Child Maintenance Service calculation running since [DATE] without objection; contact and a parental relationship exercised throughout; a previous declaration or order of the Family Court on [DATE] in case number [CASE NUMBER]].

Despite that accepted parentage, [PAYING PARENT] has failed to pay child maintenance for a prolonged period. A schedule of arrears is attached. The total unpaid as at [DATE] is £[AMOUNT].

On [DATE], [PAYING PARENT]'s [solicitor / representative / the paying parent directly] wrote demanding a DNA test for the first time. This demand comes after years of accepted parentage, years of unpaid maintenance, and following [previous family court proceedings / a previous declaration of parentage / a long-standing CMS assessment].

The demand is not a genuine parentage dispute. It is the latest step in a pattern of post-separation abuse and institutional abuse through the child maintenance system. I have been subjected to: [summarise — e.g. withholding maintenance; repeatedly disputing the CMS calculation; making false complaints; forcing repeated reconsiderations; using court and agency processes to exhaust and control me].

This behaviour falls within the statutory definition of domestic abuse in section 1 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. In particular, the withholding of maintenance and the deliberate use of administrative and court processes to destabilise me and the child is economic abuse under section 1(4) of that Act and controlling or coercive behaviour under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015.

The European Court of Human Rights, in case law such as H.M. v. Switzerland (no. 39180/13), has recognised that the misuse of legal and administrative processes to continue control after separation can engage Article 8 ECHR. The Family Court has repeatedly warned against litigation abuse in domestic abuse cases: see Re H-N [2021] EWCA Civ 448 and Practice Direction 12J.

A DNA test demand made only after years of non-payment, and in the context of previous court proceedings, is not a good-faith request. It is a further attempt to use the system to punish, destabilise and maintain control.

Section 26 of the Child Support Act 1991 sets out the presumptions of parentage. [PAYING PARENT] falls within one or more of those presumptions. The presumption continues to apply unless displaced by a court declaration.

A paying parent who wishes to dispute parentage must apply to the court under section 27 of the Child Support Act 1991 (or, where appropriate, section 55A of the Family Law Act 1986) for a declaration of non-parentage. A DNA test can only be directed by the court under section 20 of the Family Law Reform Act 1969. I do not accept any unilateral or solicitor-arranged test.

Under section 21(3) of the Family Law Reform Act 1969, a sample may not be taken from a child under 16 without my consent as the person with care, unless the court is satisfied that it is in the child's best interests. I do not consent to any sample being taken outside a formal court direction.

The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration under section 1 of the Children Act 1989. A late, disputed paternity test after years of settled identity is not in the child's best interests.

[CHILD] is a victim of domestic abuse in their own right by section 3 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, and section 69 of that Act makes clear that a child who sees, hears or experiences the effects of abuse is a victim. The withholding of maintenance and the late paternity challenge are further abuse of [CHILD].

[CHILD] has rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998) to respect for private and family life, including a stable identity. The European Court of Human Rights has held that long-established parentage should not be displaced lightly: see Mikulić v Croatia [2002] 1 FCR 720 and Mizzi v Malta (2006) 46 EHRR 27.

[CHILD] also has rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Article 3 (best interests as a primary consideration); Article 7 (knowing and being cared for by parents); Article 8 (preserving identity without unlawful interference); and Article 27 (a standard of living adequate for development, with both parents financially responsible).

The late paternity challenge, made after years of accepted parentage and non-payment, threatens [CHILD]'s identity, emotional security and financial stability. Any application must be scrutinised by the court with these rights at the forefront.

To the Child Maintenance Service:

1. Continue the existing child maintenance calculation and collection. Do not suspend or reduce payments because of this unilateral DNA demand.

2. Treat the non-payment as a priority enforcement case and apply a deduction from earnings order, regular or lump-sum deductions from bank accounts, or other enforcement under the Child Support Act 1991.

3. Record this demand and the history of non-payment as part of the Domestic Abuse Service Type on the case file.

4. Confirm in writing that you will not require or facilitate a DNA test without a court direction under section 27 CSA 1991 / section 20 FLRA 1969.

To [PAYING PARENT / PAYING PARENT'S SOLICITOR]:

1. If you genuinely dispute parentage, issue the proper court application under section 27 CSA 1991 / section 55A FLA 1986 and seek a direction for a DNA test under section 20 FLRA 1969. Until then, the existing calculation remains payable in full.

2. Any private test, or any attempt to obtain a sample from the child without my consent or a court order, will be unlawful and will be reported to the police and the court.

Nothing in this letter is to be taken as agreement to any DNA test, or as an admission that the late demand is reasonable or in [CHILD]'s best interests. All my rights and [CHILD]'s rights are expressly reserved. This correspondence and the attached documents will be relied upon in any future CMS proceedings, family court proceedings, or complaint to the Independent Case Examiner / Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

Yours faithfully,

[SIGN AND PRINT NAME]