Valuing Freedom: An Analysis of Parents' Freedom of Choice to Work and Care under New Zealand's Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach

AuthorMichelle (Li-Jui) Liu
PositionBachelor of Laws (Honours) student at the University of Canterbury
Pages91-123
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 91
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
VALUING FREEDOM: AN ANALYSIS OF
PARENTS’ FREEDOM OF CHOICE TO WORK
AND CARE UNDER NEW ZEALAND’S
CHILDCARE-RELATED FAMILY POLICIES
USING THE CAPABILITY APPROACH
M (L-J) L *
Abstract
In the past, New Zealand’s f‌inancially-focused childcare-related family policies
have been evaluated through feminist equality models such as equality-as-sameness,
equality-as-dierences and dual-earner carer frameworks. Nonetheless, none of these
models alone i s fully representativ e. is article tak es a dierent approach b y focusing on
people’s freedom of c hoice based on Sen’s capabilit y approach. e paper f‌ind s that New
Zealand’s current f‌inancially-focused childcare-related policies fail to give sucient
freedom to singl e parents to prov ide care full-t ime for their chi ldren full-ti me. Parents
in two-parent medium-income households also have limited freedom to work full-time
until their ch ildren turn three.
I. Introduction
Family p olicies are pu blic policies t hat dire ctly aec t fami lies wit h dependent
children .1 The majorit y of the fami ly policies targ et issues relatin g to childcar e. This
is because ch ildcare arra ngement is the main fact or aecting female pa rticipation
in the labou r market after chi ldbirth, gender equa lity and childr en’s wellbeing. I n
New Zeala nd, concerns over f‌i nancia lly focu sed childca re-relate d fami ly policies
(hereaf ter, “childcare p olicies”), have increas ed over recent years. In D ecember 2017,
the new Labou r and New Zea land Fi rst Coal ition Govern ment intro duced a new
set of childca re policies, the “Fami lies Packag e”, costing $5 .53 billion, i n place of a
proposed tax cut.2
1 Rense Nieuwen huis an d Wim Van La ncker “Fam ily Polic ies” (27 Septem ber 2017) Oxford
Bibliographies .
2 New Zeala nd Labour P arty “A Fam ilies Pac kage that del ivers” (11 Jul y 2017) Labour
org. nz>.
* Bachelor of Laws (Honour s) student at the Univer sity of Canterbu ry. Email: ljl50 @uclive.ac.n z.
I am grat eful to Professor A nnick Masselot for he r invaluable sug gestions duri ng the draft ing
process of th is articl e.
92 [Vol 26, 2020]
In the past , the merits of New Zeala nd’s childcar e policies have bee n analy sed
based on femin ist gender equ alit y framework s.3 In those stud ies, the pol icies are
evaluate d based on how well they emancip ate women from the tradit ional gender-
based labou r divisions, namel y, the male breadw inner and female ca rer model.4 In
other words, bas ed on these analyse s, a policy is deemed as desir able if it increases
women’s employment rates aft er motherhood.5
However, an inherent t ension that i s dicu lt to reconcil e withi n these studies
is the para dox between the opp osing the ories on equa lity: e qualit y-as-sam eness,
equali ty-as-di erence and t he dual-ea rner car er approach.6 The equa lit y-as-
sameness fr amework perceive s women as equa lly capable of f ull pa rticipat ion in
the labour m arket and argue s that policies shou ld remove women’s obstacles to fu lly
partic ipate in the lab our market.7 In c ontrast, t he equalit y-as-dierence f ramework
emphasises m ale and female d ierences and per ceives careg iving as a u nique female
charact erist ic. It argues th at policies shou ld value and pr ovide compensa tion for
women’s unpaid chi ldcare work at home.8
Altern atively, the dual-ea rner-carer approa ch has been proposed as a pre ferred
framework .9 It presumes t hat childc are respon sibilit ies should be sh ared equa lly
between spou ses and argues that po licies should enable both s pouses to partic ipate
in the labou r market. Never theless, t his model overlooks t he fact that even when b oth
parents work , females often sti ll take on a larger s hare of childca re responsibilit ies
and work fewer hours or pa rt-time.10 Potent ially, the dua l-earner-car er model does
not achieve gender equa lit y as a modif‌ie d tradit ional ma le-breadwi nner labou r
division c ould sti ll be implic itly embedded w ithi n it. Ins tead of ema ncipating
women, this mo del risks t urni ng women into “sl aves” to both work a nd childca re,
regard less of their views on equ ality.11
The conventiona l analy ses of childca re policies are often bas ed on only one of
the above equa lity mo dels alone. These a naly ses evaluat e the merit s of childca re
3 Annick Ma sselot “The Rig hts and Real ities of Bala ncing Work and Fam ily Life in New Ze aland”
in Nicole Busb y and Grace James (eds) Families, Caregiving and Paid Work: Challenging Labour
Law in the 21st Ce ntury (Ed ward Elg ar Publ ishin g, Chelten ham, 2 011) 69; and E lla Ka hu and
Mandy Morg an “A Critical Discou rse Analysis of Ne w Zealand Govern ment Policy: Women as
Mothers and Wor kers” (2007) 30 Women’s Stud I nt Forum 134.
4 Annick Ma sselot “Conceptua lising Ca re” (forthcom ing).
5 Maureen Ba ker “Gendered fami lies, academic work a nd the ‘motherhood pe nalty’” (2012) 2 6(1)
Women’s Studies Jou rnal 11.
6 Masselot, above n 4 .
7 Masselot , above n 4.
8 Masselot, above n 4 .
9 F Wi lson and J Stocks “T he Meaning of Breadw inning in Du al-Earner Couples” i n J Stocks, C
Díaz and B H alleröd (e ds) Modern Couples Sharing Money, Sharing Life (Palgrave Macmillan,
London, 2007).
10 Masselot , above n 4.
11 Kahu and Morga n, above n 3.
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 93
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
policies base d on a chosen assu mption of what socie ty would cons ider as gender
equali ty. However, they do not addres s the issues that, in re ality, none of the above
models is fu lly representative, a s society and women them selves have diverse views
on e qua lit y.12
To compensate for the s hortcom ings descr ibed above, t his ar ticle does not
make assu mptions on what parent s or society would cons ider gender equalit y to be.
Rather it adopt s Amart ya Sen’s capabilit y approach and focuse s on parents’ freedom
to work or provide ca re for their child ren full-time a fter childbi rth.13 The capabi lity
approach measu res a person’s wellbei ng based on ca pabilit y: one’s freedom t o
utili se the resour ces or benef‌its g iven to them to do a nd be what the y consider to
be valuable.14 Under t his framework, a pol icy would be considered to be des irable if
it expands t he freedom of a deprived group i n society by givin g them the necessar y
positive resou rces to ena ble them to ma ke choices that m atter to t hem.15 Id ea ll y,
dierent gr oups in societ y should have the same capabi lity and degree of fre edom
to do what they c onsider to be valuable.
The capabil ity approach i s a suita ble framework for a nalysi ng how well New
Zeala nd’s childcare pol icies achieve socia l justice and e qualit y by giving pa rents real
freedom in ma king childcare a nd work arr angement choices t hat ali gn with w hat
parents va lue doing and being. The ca pability approach ha s the advantage of bei ng
able to encapsu late people’s di verse values on eq ualit y. Furt hermore, it accou nts
for the fact th at people make ada ptive work-childc are choices due t o economic
consideration s and constrai nts rather tha n based on their rea l preferences. Final ly,
this appro ach allows t he cross-comparison of di erent groups of int erest, such as
parents w ith dierent socioecon omic status, couples a nd single parent s.
For the purpos e of this paper, a childc are-related pol icy is def‌ined as any b enef‌it
availa ble only to parents w ith dependent childr en. New Zealand’s chi ldcare policies
cater to pa rents in va rious circ umst ances. However, the focu s of this pap er is on
childca re policies t hat are releva nt to full-age (16 year s old and above) two-p arent
and sing le-parent fa milie s with onl y one biological c hild who is hea lthy, non-
disabled a nd is under the age of f‌ive. T he scope of this paper do es not include parent s
who are st udying a fter ch ildbirt h, hence the relevant chi ldcare polic ies under the
12 Ella R Ka hu and Ma ndy Morgan “ Makin g Choices: Cont radict ions and Co mmonal ities in
the Valui ng of Caring and Worki ng by Government Policy a nd First Time Mother s” (2008) 11
NZIREC E 1.
13 Ma sselot, above n 4; Mar tha C Nussbaum “C apabilities a s Fundamenta l Entitlements: S en and
Social Ju stice” in A Kau fman (ed) Capabilities Equality (Rout ledge, London, 2 006); Kaushi k Basu,
Lòpez-Ca lva and F Lui s “Functio nings an d Capabili ties” in Kenne th J Arrow, A mart ya K Sen and
Kotaro Su zumura (eds) Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare (North-Holla nd, Oxford, 201 1) vol
2, 153; and S abina Alk ire “Why the C apabilit y Approach?” (2005) 6 Hu m Dev 115.
14 Alkire , above n 15, at 117.
15 At 117.
94 [Vol 26, 2020]
Student Al lowance Scheme a re not discu ssed. It al so assume s that parent s have
been working for at le ast 10 hours a we ek for at least a yea r immedi ately prior to
childbir th so they qual ify for parenta l leave. Each famil y is also assumed t o have an
income above the i ncome threshold for any soc ial securit y benef‌its.
Before launchi ng into the act ual analys is, Section I f‌irs t examines the c apability
approach in gr eater deta il. Thi s is necessa ry to under stand t he rationa le and the
design of the met hodology adopted to compare t he degree of freedom betwee n the
dierent gr oups of interests. Next , Section II exam ines the capabil ity approach as a
theoretic al framework. S ection III then lay s out the relevant chi ldcare policies. W ith
an underst anding of the capabi lities appr oach and the re levant chi ldcare pol icies,
Section I V then sets t he paramet ers, scope and assumpt ions for the ana lysis. This
section al so explains t he methodology that w ill be applied in t he analysis . Following
this, Se ction V then ca rries out t he ana lysis of par ents’ capabi lity to wor k and
provide car e based on par ameters a nd methodology a lready d iscussed . Fina lly,
Section V I concludes by summar ising the f‌indi ngs.
II. The Capability Approach
Sen’s capabilit y approach as a me tric for socia l justic e and equa lity ha s been
explored and appl ied by many sch olars in d ierent disc iplines.16 The t wo key concepts
under thi s framework a re “fun ctionin gs” and capa bilit y. Functioni ngs are t hings
people value doin g.17 For example, a pa rent migh t value car ing for thei r childr en
full-t ime. Capabilit y is an indiv idual’s freedom to act ually do what t hey value doing.
As alre ady mentioned, the ca pability appr oach proposes that t o achieve equal ity and
social ju stice, dierent groups i n society should have t he same capabilit y or degree
of freedom to do wh at they consider to be va luable.
However, in realit y, individu als’ capa bilit y is conf‌ined b y two factor s:
commodit ies and personal cha racteristics .18 Commodities are res ources that could
enable an ind ividua l to achieve wh at he/she thin ks is va luable. For thi s anal ysis,
these resour ces would include c hildca re subsidies , dierent ta x credit s and
parenta l leave entitlements. Cer tai n personal ch aracter istics could a lso inf‌luence
individu als’ fre edom to achieve wh at they consider t o be valua ble. The relevant
personal ity cha racter istic in ou r case is a per son’s earnin g capacit y, that is, their
potentia l salary or wa ges.
16 In grid Robe yns “The C apabilit y Approach” ( 3 October 2 016) Stan ford Encyclope dia of Phil osophy
.
17 Basu, Lòp ez-Calva and L uis, above n 14 , at 153.
18 At 154 .
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 95
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
A person’s capabil ity to ach ieve what he/she th inks is v aluable is t hen the
combined resu lt of resource s availa ble and his/ her personal c haract eristic s.
For example, the de gree of free dom a single pa rent has to pr ovide care f ull-ti me
to his/her ch ild under t hree would depend on t he amount of f‌i nancia l assist ance
availa ble from the government i f he/she does not work and receives no ot her income.
Simila rly, the degre e of freedom the sa me parent h as to work fu ll-time wou ld
depend on whether hi s/her salary would b e sucient to aord ful l-time childcare ,
taki ng into account any ch ildcare subsidie s and tax credit s available. In th is sense,
an indiv idual’s capa bilit y or the degree of f reedom can a lso be thou ght of as the
number of rea l options an indiv idual has based on h is/her circumst ances.
This ana lysis compares the deg ree of freedom, or t he number of real options
single-c hild (under t he age of f‌ive) parent s have in choosi ng to work or provide
care fu ll-time. The c omparis on is between couple s and sing le-parents a s well as
parents of a h igh, medi um and low-income level . The purpose of t his an alyt ical
exercise is to f‌i rst identify whet her there is any ineq uality in t he parents’ capabil ity
between di erent income levels and bet ween couples and single-p arents. Secondly,
if inequa lity ex ists, t o recogn ise what the con stra ining f actors a re and exam ine
whether they a re the results of gover nment policy.
However, before we can launch i nto the act ual analysis, it i s necessar y to f‌irst
exami ne the releva nt resources ava ilable to parents, t hat is, the f‌i nancia l-focused
childca re policies in New Zeal and for children under t he age of f‌ive.
III. Childcare-Related Family Policies
As previous ly mentioned, the focus of t his paper is on compa ring the capa bilities
of two-parent a nd single-pa rent fami lies, who are f ull-age a nd either work ful l-time
or part-t ime with income above t he welfare benef‌its t hresholds prior to chi ldbirth,
with hea lthy and non-di sabled biological c hildren under t he age of f‌ive. The relevant
New Zeala nd childcare p olicies for children u nder f‌ive are parent al leave provision s,
the Working for Fa milies Tax Cred it Package (WF FTC), Childcar e Subsidy, 30 hours
of general subs idy, 20 hours of free early ch ildhood education (E CE) and Sole Parent
Support.
There are al so other social secu rity benef‌its tha t include provisions for fam ilies
with dependent chi ldren, such as Job seeker Support, Young Pa rent Payment,
Supported L iving P ayment and St udent Allow ance. Fu rtherm ore, there ar e also
benef‌its for fam ilies cari ng for non-biological ch ildren, includi ng Orphan’s Benef‌its
or the Unsuppor ted Chi ld’s Benef‌it and the Fos ter Care A llowance . However, as
these are be yond the scope of this paper, t hey will not be disc ussed.
96 [Vol 26, 2020]
A. Parental Leave
The main st atute governi ng parental leave i n New Zealand is t he Parental Leave
and Employment P rotection Act 1 987.19 In recent years, m any amendment s have been
made.20 The stat ute provide s childca re benef‌its t o parents i n the forms of lab our
market regu lations on pa rental le ave and income ma inten ance thr ough paren tal
leave payments.
1. Parental leave: primar y carer leave and extended leave
Under the curr ent law, an eligible perma nent primary c arer of a child under si x
is entitled t o 22 weeks of primary c arer leave and up to 52 weeks of ex tended leave
(which includes t he 22 weeks of primar y carer leave).21 The primar y carer leave and
the extende d leave entitlement can be sha red between part ners.22 To be eligible for
the ful l 12 months of lea ve, both par tners must h ave worked at least 10 hou rs on
average per week for the s ame employer for the past 12 mont hs immediat ely prior to
the child’s due dat e.23 If both part ners only satisf y the criteri a for the past 6 months,
they would onl y be entitled to 22 week s of primary ca rer leave and up to 26 weeks of
extended leave, t otalling 6 mon ths. If only one par tner meets the 12-month c riteria
while the ot her meets the 6-month crit eria, they would be enti tled to 12 months of
leave in tota l. However, the partner who on ly meets the 6-month cr iteria would not
be able to ta ke more than 6 months of le ave out of the 12-month tota l.24
2. Parental leave payments
To supplement and ma intai n income for parent s who are on pa rental le ave, a
permanent pr imar y caregiver might a lso be entit led to 22 weeks of p arenta l leave
payments from t he government.25 This is an i ncrease from the 18-week ent itlement
prior to 1 July 201 8 and wil l be increa sed aga in to 26 week s in 2020.26 Before, t he
eligibi lity te st for parenta l leave payments was the sa me test as for parental le ave.
However, the quali fying test w as made less strin gent in 2016. Now, to be eligible for
parenta l leave payments, a pr imary ca regiver needs t o have been employed, wheth er
19 Par ental Leave a nd Employment Pr otection Act 19 87.
20 Parental L eave and Empl oyment Prot ection A mendment Act 2 014; Par ental Le ave and
Employment P rotection Am endment Act 2016; and P arental Le ave and Employment P rotection
Amendment Act 2017.
21 Par ental Leave a nd Employment Pr otection Act , ss 9(1) and 26.
22 Section 28 .
23 Sectio ns 2BA, 7, 8 and 11 .
24 S ection 26(2)(c).
25 Parent al Leave and Employment Prote ction Amendment Act 2017.
26 P arental L eave and Employm ent Protecti on Act, ss 2BA and 7 1CA–71CB .
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 97
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
by the same employer or not , and has worked for at least 1 0 hours a week on average
for any of the 26 week s out of the 52 weeks immedia tely before the baby’s due date.
The amended elig ibility test eect ively expa nds entitlement s to seasonal workers,
casua l workers, people with severa l f‌ixed-term or tempora ry jobs and parents who
have change d jobs recently. As t he qual ifyi ng test for pa rental lea ve and parent al
leave payments a re dierent, some parents m ight be eligible for the paymen ts but
not for the prima ry ca rer leave. In such c ases, it is pos sible to disc uss wit h one’s
employer to take a ne gotiated c arer leave so one ca n receive the gover nment
payments.27
Technica lly, Parent al Leave Pay ments can b e claimed by a ny eligi ble parent
if they ar e the perma nent carer of a ch ild under si x. However, parents u suall y
take pa rental lea ve and clai m parenta l leave payment s with in the f‌ir st year af ter
childbir th. Sim ilar t o parenta l leave, parent al leave paymen ts can al so be tran sferred
to one’s eligible pa rtner. The amount one i s entitled to is one’s ord inary g ross weekly
pay or $564.38 (adjust ed on 1 July 2018 to account for a ny increase in average week ly
earni ngs in New Ze aland), w hichever is the le ast.28 The pay ment wil l stop if one
goes back to work before t he end of the 22-week per iod. However, aft er the chi ld
is four weeks old, it i s possible to go bac k to work for up to 52 hour s for skill s and
train ing upkeep (called keep -in-touch days) during t he 22-week period without t he
payments bei ng stopped. 29
B. The Working for Family Tax Credit Package
The WFFT C Package is a nother childcare benef‌it s cheme that seek s to support
and mai ntain i ncome for fami lies wit h dependent chi ldren th rough ta xation an d
cas h tr an sfer. 30 Simi lar to t he parent al leave st atute, t he scheme has under gone
many cha nges recentl y, making t he tax cr edits more gener ous. There are fou r
dierent ta x credits availabl e: The Best Sta rt tax credit (he reaft er Best Sta rt), the
Family t ax credit (F TC), the In-Work tax cred it (IWTC) an d the Minimu m Family ta x
credit (MF TC). In general, parent s must be 16 years old or over and ca re for a child
on a permanent b asis. Each specif‌ic t ax credit has it s own eligibil ity requirement s.
27 Section 30A .
28 P arental L eave and Employm ent Protecti on Act, s 71M(1) (a).
29 Parenta l Leave and Employ ment Protect ion Act, s 71CE .
30 Inc ome Tax 2007, pt MC 4 an d pt M.
98 [Vol 26, 2020]
1. Best Start ta x credit
Best Sta rt was i ntroduced on 1 Ju ly 2018, replaci ng Parent al ta x credit .31 There
are two t ypes of entitlements wh ich are available i n two stages. Fir stly, all fami lies
with dependent ch ildren b orn on or aft er 1 July 2018 ar e entitled t o $60 per week
from the chi ld’s birth u ntil the child’s f‌irst bi rthday.32 Secondly, for families w ith a
combined gro ss income lower than $79,0 00 a year, the payments cont inue until the
child tu rns three. For fa milies with a com bined gross income above $79 ,000 a year,
the payment is r educed by 21 cents for every dolla r earned over the th reshold.33 One
is not entitled t o Best Star t while receivin g parental leave pay ments.
2. Family tax credit
The FTC is anot her income-tested income suppo rt to fa milies w ith f‌inanciall y
dependent child ren up to the age of 18. From 1 Ju ly 2018, famil ies’ entitlements have
been increa sed to $113.04 per week for the f‌i rst child and $91. 25 for each subsequent
child.34 Once a fam ily ear ns above the t hreshold of $4 2,700 (pre viously $36,350) a
year or $821 a week, t he payment star ts to reduce.35
3. In-Work tax credit
Unlike Be st Star t and FT C, to become el igible for IW TC, par ents are req uired
to be in paid wor k for at least 20 hour s each week as a si ngle paren t or 30 hours
per week as a couple combi ned. Parent s on an income-t ested benef‌i t, a Student
Allowa nce, or Child ren’s Pension are not el igible. A fa mily’s ent itlement depends
on the tota l number of children a nd income. A famil y with up to three c hildren can
receive a max imum of $72.50 a week a nd an additiona l $15 for each subsequent child .
The entitlement is a bated once a fami ly’s income goes above a cer tain th reshold. The
abatement th reshold is currentl y at an annual i ncome of $65,000.36
4. Minimum Family tax cre dit
Final ly, MFTC tops up a f amily’s net wages to $503 a we ek or $26,156 a year (for
2018–2019 ta x year). The 20 and 3 0 working hou rs’ rule a lso applies t o the MFTC .
Furt hermore, parents who a re on an income-test ed benef‌it are not eligible .37
31 Fa milies Pack age (Income Ta x and Benef‌its) Act 2 017, s 17.
32 Section 2 2.
33 Income Ta x, s MG3.
34 Section MD3 .
35 Sec tion MD13.
36 Income Tax Act , s MD4–MD10.
37 Sect ion ME1.
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 99
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
C. Sole-Parent Support
Sole-Parent Supp ort is a need-ba sed, income-t ested benef‌it for s ingle-pa rents
with dependent ch ildren under t he age of 14, who ar e not receiving f‌i nancial supp ort
from their sep arated part ners.38
The current m aximum entit lement for Sole-Parent Support is $334 .05 per week.
To be eligible, one’s gr oss income must b e below $635.00 p er week or $32,987 per
yea r.39 Parents whose you ngest chi ld is under th ree years of a ge are not requ ired
to work but may be req uired to a ttend tr aini ng arra nged by Work and In come in
preparation for f uture work. Pa rents whose youngest ch ild is more than t hree years
of age are requ ired to look for par t-time jobs and work for at lea st 20 hours a week. 40
D. Childcare assistance
In New Zeal and, ECE prov iders are su bsidised by t he government to he lp to
keep the chi ldcare cost dow n for parents. Th is is achieve d by 30 hours of Gener al
Subsidy and 20 f ree hours of EC E. In addit ion, eligi ble low-income parent s might
be entitled t o Childcare Subsid y to help with the al ready subsidised ch ildcare cost.
These childc are benef‌its wil l be discussed in det ail below.
1. Free 20 hours of Early Child hood Education
The free 20 hour s of ECE is a uni versal ECE f unding a vaila ble to all ch ildren
between th ree to f‌ive yea rs old, rega rdless of t heir fam ily income, i mmig ration
status or a ny other factors. 41 For each child who att ends a particip ating ECE serv ice,
the government f unds the fu ll average cost of prov iding ECE to the s ervice provider s
for up to six hour s a day and 20 hours per week. However, the s ervice providers ca n
still c harge optional ch arges for additiona l activities or for h aving more tha n 80 per
cent of certif‌ied t eachers.
2. 30-hours general subsidy
The 30-hours G eneral Subsidy is pa id to all ECE prov iders for attendi ng children
between zero t o six years old. However, child ren who are on the free 20 -hours ECE
can only cl aim up to 10 h ours of thi s subsidy. The exact a mount of fund ing each
provider receives d iers depend ing on thei r types a nd percenta ge of certi f‌ied
38 Social Sec urity Act 2 018, s 29.
39 Social Se curity Re gulation 2018, s ch 6.
40 Sect ion 104.
41 Hon St eve Mahar ey “Frequent ly asked quest ions about 20 Hou rs Free ECE” (2 J uly 2007) Beeh ive
beehive.govt.nz>.
100 [Vol 26, 2020]
teachers. The f undin g is also h igher for chil dren under t wo than for ch ildren
between two t o six years old. 42 This subsidy requ ires no application b y parents but is
usual ly ref‌lected in the fees E CE providers charge.
3. Childcare Subs idy
Childca re Subsidy is a ne ed-based pay ment that helps pa rents wit h childca re
cost for pre-schooler s (usually chil dren under the age of f‌ive).43 For eli gible parents,
the payment is m ade directly to reg istered ECE providers. 44 To be eligible, pa rents
must be the ma in caregi ver of the child wit h low to medium household i ncome.45 For
a one-child fa mily with a week ly gross income under $8 00, the subsidy rate is $5 .13
per h our.46 The entit lement reduces as the fam ily’s income increas es, with a weekly
gross income of $1 ,400 as the cut-o  point for a one-child fam ily.
The number of hour s each fami ly is entit led varie s. Parents w ho satisf‌ied t he
income requi rements ar e entitled t o nine hour s a week.47 Pa rents engag ing in
approved activ ities, such a s working , or study ing are ent itled to up t o 50 hours a
week for the time when n either careg iver is avail able to care for t he child.48 Ch ildcare
Subsidy is an a dditiona l subsidy th at assist s parents w ith the a lready s ubsidised
childca re cost under the 30 hou rs general subs idy. Childcare Sub sidy cannot be us ed
for the same 20 hou rs of free ECE.
The above f‌ina nciall y focused chi ldcare pol icies are th e potentia lly avai lable
resources wh ich inf‌luence and con strain pa rents’ freedom to work a nd provide care
full-t ime. Arme d with t his backg round, th is paper wi ll now disc uss how parent s’
capabil ity wi ll be assess ed and compa red. In spec if‌ics, how par ents’ ear ning
capacities a re categorised by inc ome-levels, the scope, assumpt ions and analy tical
method adopted for t his analys is.
IV. Applying the Capability Approach
Before we can an alyse pa rents’ capabi lity t o work and ca re full-t ime af ter
childbir th, it is necessa ry to f‌irst lay dow n the paramet ers, scope, assumpt ions and
methodology for the analysis.
42 “The 30-Hou rs Genera l Subsidy Pai d to all ECE S ervices for Ch ildren (0– 6 yrs)” (10 Janu ary 2019)
My ECE .
43 Socia l Securit y Regulatio ns, s 30.
44 Se ction 37.
45 Sect ions 77 and 42 4.
46 S chedule 2.
47 Sect ion 35.
48 Se ctions 32 and 3 3.
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 101
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
A, Scope of the Analysis
To reemphasise , this ana lysis will comp are the capabil ity of single- child (under
the age of f‌ive) parent s (couples and sin gle-parent) w ith hi gh, mediu m and low
household pre-chi ldbirth income.
The scope of the an alysis is conf‌i ned to households that ha ve only one biological
child, who i s healthy and under f‌i ve years old. Therefore, chi ldcare policies relat ing
to adopted, fos tered and d isabled ch ildren ar e beyond the scope of t his an alysis. 49
Furt hermore, child sup port is also beyond t he scope of this a nalysis so a re not taken
into accoun t in the sit uation of sing le parent s because of the v ary ing amou nts of
child suppor t that could be involved i n each case.50
The analy sis is also lim ited to health y parents who have been worki ng full-time
before childbi rth (not on any Work and Inc ome benef‌its) and are able t o do so if they
choose to. To ca rry out the ana lysis, certa in parameters , such as household income
levels must f‌ir st be set below.
B. Dening High, Medium and Low-Income Levels
High, med ium and low income-levels ar e not def‌ined in statute s. Therefore, we
must f‌irst de f‌ine the amou nt of income a two-parent and si ngle-parent household
require d to be cal led a high, medium or low-income hou sehold for the purp ose of
this analysis.
This ana lysis sets the h igh, medium a nd low-income levels based on the W FFTC
income cut-o poi nts. For the purpose of t his analys is, low-income is def‌ined as a n
annua l household income between $ 0 to $42,700 before t ax. That is bas ed on the fact
that only hou seholds wit h an income below $ 42,700 receive the max imum amou nt
of FTC.51 Medium i ncome is def‌ined as an annu al household i ncome above $42 ,700
and up to $80, 000 before ta x. This is b ased on the fac t that IW TC is not avai lable
for single-ch ild households with an a nnual i ncome above $80,0 00. Simi larly, Best
Star t and FTC h ave abatement income t hreshold s at $79,000 a nd $42,700 a ye ar
49 For more infor mation on fost ered chi ldren, se e the Oran ga Tama riki A ct 1989. For adop ted
childr en: orphan’s benef‌it a nd unsuppor ted child bene f‌it, see Socia l Securit y Act 2018, s 45. For
disabled c hildren: ch ild disabi lity all owance, see Soc ial Securi ty Act 2018.
50 The exac t amount of child suppor t payable diers cas e by case depending on va rious factors
such as the a mount of care the chi ld is in each pa rent’ care and the l iving ex penses of each
parent. A lso, chi ld support is not a pplicable i n situation s where a paren t has been in pr ison for 13
consecut ive weeks or more a nd earns no i ncome while in p rison; where a pa rent has been i n the
hospita l for 13 weeks or more; or where a mot her does not disclose t he child’s father. See C hild
Support Act 1 991, ss 89A–89 ZE.
51 “Working for Fa milies Ta x Credits works heet 2019”(Ju ne 2018) Inlan d Revenue
nz>.
102 [Vol 26, 2020]
respectively.52 High-income is then def‌ine d as an annual h ousehold income of above
$80,000 before t ax.
The above income-level s refer to the pre-ch ildbir th income of a hou sehold.
Therefore, a medium-i ncome household, for exa mple, could pot ential ly have an
income of as a low-income hou sehold after childbi rth if one of the pare nts stopped
working.
For the purpos e of this a nalysi s, three f‌i xed amounts will b e used to represe nt
the pre- chi ldbirt h annua l incomes for hig h, mediu m and low-income sin gle-
parent and t wo-parent households. The f‌ixed a mounts are $35,000 for low-incom e
households, $75 ,000 for medium-income hou seholds and $120,000 for hi gh-income
households.
C. Assumptions
In addition t o the above pa rameter s, the followi ng assu mptions must a lso be
applied for as a bas eline for the a nalysi s to be workable. F irstly, it is assumed t hat
all of the pa rents ar e assumed t o have no savi ngs. Second ly, it is assumed t hat a
household’s entire inc ome is spent on consu mption. Thi rdly, a household’s non-
childca re related ex penditu re before chi ldbirt h is assumed t o remai n the same
post-chi ldbirt h. Fourt hly, a household’s expendit ure overal l post-ch ildbirt h is
assumed t o have increased due t o childcare-rel ated costs. Fi fthly, it is assu med that
parents’ have e qual earni ng capacity in a t wo-parent household.
However, some of the assumpt ions might not be as val id or realistic for cer tain
households as it m ight be for other s. For example, it m ight not be as re alis tic to
assume th at parents i n a two-pa rent household have equ al ear ning ca pacity, or
that al l high-inc ome household would have no s avings . Therefore, the va lidit y of
the above ass umptions is a ssessed before f‌i nal conclu sions are dr awn on parent s’
capabil ity to work or prov ide care. More details a re discussed in the met hodology
section below.
D. Methodology
Based on the a bove parame ters and a ssumption s, this a nalysi s will a ssess the
capabil ity of parent s, in two -parent and si ngle-pa rent households, t o work and
provide car e full-time by goin g through the follow ing steps.
(1) S tep One: compar ison of the pre- a nd post-chi ldbirt h incomes of a household .
To determi ne the parents’ capabil ity to provide care or work f ull-time, it is
f‌irst neces sary to compa re parents’ pre- childbir th annua l household income
52 Above n 66 .
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 103
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
with thei r post-childbi rth annua l household income, ta king into accou nt all
applicable f‌in ancial childc are-related polic ies.
Based on the f‌inancial childcare policies entitlements, comparisons are to be made
for three dierent stages: f‌irstly, the f‌irst year after childbirth; secondly, when the child
is between one to three years old; thirdly, when the child is between three to f‌ive years old.
(a) Capabilit y to provide care f ull-time
The pre-childbi rth and p ost-chi ldbirt h household incomes of a t wo-parent
household are compa red on the basis that one of the p arents st opped workin g
after ch ildbir th and st ayed home to prov ide care fu ll-time . The compari son
is to be made for low, mediu m and hig h-income fam ilies res pectively. Bas ed
on the assu mption that t he two parent s have equa l earn ing abil ity, a two-
parent household’s inc ome from work post- childbi rth would b e half of t he
pre-child birth i ncome from work. For a si ngle-par ent household, when a
parent decides t o provide ca re full-t ime af ter childbi rth , its post-c hildbir th
income from work bec omes nil. Nevertheless, i n both situations, t he household
income mig ht be supplemented by t he relevant f‌i nancia l childca re policies.
Prima facie, a household would h ave the capacity to have one pa rent providing
care fu ll-time i f its post- childbir th income w ith onl y one parent worki ng is
higher th an its pre- childbi rth inc ome. This is ba sed on the assu mptions t hat
post-chi ldbirth expendit ure would be g reater due to t he additional childc are-
related cos ts, whilst ever y other cost remain s the same.
(b) Capabil ity to work full-t ime post-child birth
Simila rly, to determi ne parents’ c apabili ty to work fu ll-time , a household’s
post-chi ldbirth income must b e greater than its pr e-childbirth i ncome. Again,
this is ba sed on the assumpt ions that the hous ehold’s expenses increa sed overall
after ch ildbir th due to t he additiona l childc are-relat ed costs wh ile all ot her
non-childca re expenses rema ined the same af ter childbirt h. Also, it is ass umed
the fam ily have no savings a nd all of their inc ome is spent on consumption .
However, as both parents would b e working in this ca se, the household annual
income from work for a ll famil ies would be the same a s before. In addition, t here
would also be f urt her income suppor ts from the G overnment , includin g the
FTC, BSTC a nd IWTC.
Nevert heless, for it to be actu ally feas ible for parents to work i nstead of prov iding
care fu ll-time, t he additional income suppor t and relevant childca re subsidies
must be enough t o cover the cost s of preschool or nur sery. In other words, t o
104 [Vol 26, 2020]
determi ne parents’ capabil ity to work full-ti me after childbi rth, the ana lysis is
require d to compare the t otal amount of i ncome support and c hildcare su bsidies
availa ble with the tota l costs of sending t he child to nurser y or preschool.
Prima facie, a household would have the c apability for pa rents to work full-t ime
if the tot al of its inc ome support a nd childca re subsidie s exceeds the cos ts of
preschool or nurse ry.
Again, t his comparison i s required to be done for th ree distinct s tages: the f‌irst
year af ter childbir th, when the chi ld is one to three yea rs old and when the chi ld
is three t o f‌ive years old.
The above compar ison results would g ive us the prelimi nary result s on parents’
capabil ity to work or provide ca re full-time. Howe ver, to reach a conclusion that
is more ref‌lect ive of the real ity, the va lidity of t he assump tions applied a bove
would need to be a ssessed next.
(2) Step T wo: evaluating t he validity of a ssumptions.
Based on the prel iminar y results obta ined from the above st eps, the validi ty
of the relevant a ssumpt ions applied is ex amined . For example, it m ight be
unrea listic t o assume t hat all of t he incomes a re spent on consu mption or
that al l households have not sav ings. To more accurately r ef‌lect the rea lity
faced by New Zea land fam ilies, t he assum ptions are a ssessed ag ainst
empirica l studies . The analy sis resul ts on parent s’ capabil ity to work or
provide car e full-time ar e then adjusted or qua lif‌ied accordin gly .
Parents’ ca pabilit y to provide c are or work fu ll-time w ill now be a nalyse d
based upon the a bove methodology.
V. Analysis of Parents’ Capability to Provide
Care Full-time Post-Childbirth
This sect ion anal yses parent s’ capabil ity to work or prov ide care f ull-ti me in
two-parent a nd single-parent hou seholds with an income of $35 ,000 (low-income),
$75,000 (me dium-income) and $120,0 00 (high-income).
As noted before, a hou sehold’s capability is a nalysed in t hree stages ba sed on its
entitlements t o the relevant f‌i nancial ch ildcare subsid ies: f‌irst year a fter child birth;
when the chi ld is one to three yea rs old and when the child i s three to f‌ive yea rs old.
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 105
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
A. Step One: Comparison of the Pre- and Post-
childbirth Incomes of a Household.
1. Parents’ Capa bility to provide care full-time
For a two-parent f amily, prima facie it wou ld be f‌inanciall y feasible to have one
parent ca ring for the child at home fu ll-time if the household i ncome is more than
its pre-chi ldbirth income as it is a ssumed that overall , the household expenditu re
increase d due to the additiona l childcare-relat ed costs.
(a) First year after childbir th
Durin g the f‌irst yea r after chi ldbirth , the relevant f‌i nancial ch ildcare pol icies for
two-parent h ouseholds are parenta l leave payments, BSTC, F TC, IWTC and MF TC.
All pa rents in th is ana lysis would b e entitled t o parenta l leave payment s based
on the assu mption that pa rents have be en working f ull-time prior to chi ldbirt h.
The maxi mum amount of p arenta l leave payment a n individ ual on Pr imar y Carer
Leave can cl aim is a g ross payment of $56 4.38 for 26 weeks or a tot al of $14 ,673.88 .
BSTC can not be claimed simu ltaneously w ith parenta l leave payments. Therefore, i f
famil ies claim parent al leave payments, they a re entitled to $60 p er week or a total
of $1,560 of BSTC for 26 week s when parenta l leave payments end, reg ardless of thei r
famil y income.
For a low-income two-pa rent household wit h a pre-chi ldbirt h income of
$35,000, the p ost-chi ldbirt h income from t he working pa rent would be $17,500.
This is bas ed on the assu mption that t he parent s have equal e arni ng capacit y. In
balanc e, its post- childbir th income wou ld tota l $43,355.9 6. This inclu des parenta l
leave payments of $1 4,673.88, Be st Start pay ments of $1,560 a year, FTC of $5, 876 per
year ($113 per week) a nd IWTC of $72 per week or $3 ,744 per year.53
For a medium-income t wo-parent hou sehold with a pr e-childbi rth i ncome of
$75,000 , the post-chi ldbirth income w ith only one worki ng parent would be $37,500.
In bala nce, the tot al income for t he medium-inc ome household post-c hildbir th
would be $63,353 .88. Thi s includes an i ncome of $37,500 from work, pa renta l leave
payments of $14 ,673. 88, Best St art pay ment of $1,560, F TC of $5,876 a nd IW TC of
$3,744.
For a high-income t wo-parent hou sehold with a pr e-childbi rth i ncome of
$120,000, t he post-ch ildbirt h income wi th only one work ing parent wou ld be
$60,000. It wou ld be entitled t o parent al leave payment s of $14,6 73.88, B est Sta rt
53 See Se ction VI, Tabl e 1.
106 [Vol 26, 2020]
payments of $1,56 0 ($60 per week), FTC of $1,404 a ye ar ($27 per week) and IWT C of
$3,744 ($72 per week). I n balance, its pos t-childbirt h income would tota l $81,381.88.
For single-pa rent households, r egard less of their i ncome level pre-chi ldbirt h,
they wil l have no income from work if they wa nt to provide care for thei r children
full-t ime after child birth. Neither would t hey be entitled to an y IWTC. However, in
addition to pa rental leave payment s, Best Start a nd FTC, single pa rents would also
be eligible for Sole P arent Support at $334.0 5 per week or $17,370.60 per year.
In bala nce, for single -parent household s, regar dless of thei r pre-child birth
incomes, would h ave a post-chi ldbirth income of $39, 480.48 i f the parents provide
care fu ll-time. Th is includes Pa renta l Leave payment s of $14,67 3.88, Be st Star t
payments tot alling $1,5 60 a year and FTC of $5 ,876.
Based on the a bove calcu lations, pri ma facie, only par ents in the low-inc ome
two-parent or s ingle-pa rent households would have the capa bility t o provide care
full-t ime in the f‌irst ye ar after ch ildbirth a s their post-ch ildbirth i ncomes would be
more than t heir pre-childbi rth income.
(b) When the chid is between one to th ree years old.
When the chi ld is between one t o three years old, par ental leave pay ments are
no longer avail able. Best St art pay ments are n ow subject to ab atements when a
household’s income exceed s over the relevant i ncome threshold. FMTC m ight al so
availa ble for households with a gros s income less than $31,02 0.54
For a low-income two-pa rent household wit h a pre-chi ldbirt h income of
$35,000, its p ost-childbi rth income when t he child is one to t hree years old wou ld be
$41,4 20 a year. This includes an incom e of $17,500 from the work ing parent, FTC of
$5,876 ($113 /week), IWTC of $3,744 ($72/we ek), BSTC of $3,120 ($60/week) and F MTC
of $11,180 ($215/we ek).
For a medium-income t wo-parent hou sehold with a pr e-childbi rth i ncome of
$75,000 , its post-c hildbir th income wou ld be $48,6 80 per year. This i ncludes an
income of $37,500 from t he working parent , FTC of $5,876 ($1 13/week), IWTC of $3,74 4
($72/week) a nd BSTC of $3,120 ($60/week).
For a high-income t wo-parent hou sehold with a pr e-childbi rth i ncome of
$120,000, it s post-ch ildbir th income would b e $66,708 per yea r. This includes a n
income of $60,00 0 from the work ing parent , BSTC of $1,56 0 ($60/week), FTC of
$1404 ($27/week) a nd IWTC of $3,744 ($72/ week).
For single-pa rent households, I WTC and FMTC are not av ailable . According ly,
for single pa rents who ar e providin g care fu ll-time, t heir an nual post -childbi rth
54 See Secti on VI, Table 2.
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 107
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
income duri ng this period would be $2 4,806. 60, rega rdless of thei r pre-childbirth
income. This i ncludes Sole Parent Support of $17,370.60 , FTC of $5,8 76 and BSTC of
$1,560.
Based on the a bove calcul ation, pri ma facie, par ents in low-income a nd
medium-income f amilies h ave the capabili ty to provide ca re full-ti me as their post-
childbir th household income would e xceed their pre-chi ldbirth inc ome at this sta ge
with govern mental i ncome support . For all si ngle-par ent households, the ir post-
childbir th income would fal l below their pre-childbi rth income, which pri ma facie
suggest s the single parents wou ld not have the capabilit y to provide care fu ll-time
when the chi ld is between one to thr ee years old.
(c) When the child is three to f‌i ve years old.
When the chi ld is between three t o f‌ive years old, BSTC ceases a ltogether. FTC,
IWTC a nd MFTC a re stil l relevant . For a low-income two-pa rent household wi th
a pre-child birth i ncome of $35,000, it s post-ch ildbir th an nual income wou ld be
$38,300. This i ncludes an income of $17,500 from the work ing parent; FTC of $5 ,876
($133 per week); IW TC of $3,744 ($72 per week) and FM TC of $11,180 ($215 per week).55
For a medium-income t wo-parent hou sehold with a pr e-childbi rth i ncome of
$75,000 , its post-c hildbir th an nual income i n this p eriod would be $ 47,120. This
includes an i ncome of $37,500 from the working p arent; FTC of $5, 876 ($133 per week
and IW TC of $3,744 ($72 per week).
For a high-income t wo-parent hou sehold with a pr e-childbi rth i ncome of
$120,000, it s post-ch ildbir th annu al income wou ld be $65,1 48. This i ncludes an
income of $60,00 0 from the working pa rent; FTC of $1,4 04 ($27 per week) and IWT C
of $3,744 ($72 per week).
For parents in s ingle-pa rent households, t heir capabi lity t o provide ca re full-
time is form ally removed w hen the chi ld turned t hree. To rece ive Sole-Parent
Support, si ngle parents have t o work for at least 20 hours a week.
Based on the a bove calcu lations, pri ma facie, only pa rents in low-income t wo-
parent household s would have the capabil ity to provide care f ull-time as only t heir
post-chi ldbirt h income would be mor e than t heir pre-ch ildbir th income at th is
stage. For si ngle par ents, their c apabili ty to prov ide care fu ll-time i s completely
removed when their ch ild turns t hree.
55 Se e Section VI, Ta ble 3.
108 [Vol 26, 2020]
2. Parents’ capabi lity to work full-time after childbirth
As alre ady stat ed in the met hodology sect ion, to deter mine par ents’ capabi lity
to work ful l-time af ter chi ldbirt h, the ana lysis is r equired t o compare t he total
amount of income s upport and childca re subsidies availa ble with the total co sts of
sending t he child to nurser y or preschool.
To do this, it is f‌i rst necessar y to determine t he cost of nursery or prescho ol. As
childca re costs dier great ly in New Zealand, it is d icult to f‌ind a represent ative
average cost . For analy sis purposes, the commu nity users’ rates for th e Ilam Ea rly
Learn ing Centre wil l be used. This is appropr iate as the childca re centre caters for
new-borns as wel l as toddlers. It a lso caters for par ents from a wide ra nge of income
levels, includ ing cur rent univers ity stude nts, professors a nd other commu nity
members. It is as sumed that the child ren would require to spen d nine hours a day
(full-d ay) at the childcare cent re, f‌ive days a week, as the pa rents are working f ull-
time.
Prima facie, a household would have the capa bility for pa rents to work f ull-
time if t he total of its income suppor t and childcare sub sidies exceeds the costs of
preschool or nurse ry.
Again , the comparison i s to be carrie d out in three st ages based on the ch ildcare
subsidies and i ncome support entitlements.
(a) First year after childbirth
Durin g the f‌irst ye ar aft er childbirth, t he total weekly chi ldcare costs for each
household would be $255 or $13 ,260 a year.56 BSTC, FTC , IWTC and C hildcare Subs idy
might be ava ilable to elig ible households to assis t with that cost .
For a low-income, sing le-parent or two -parent household , with a n annua l
income of $35,000 , the tota l amount of f‌i nancia l support t hey would receive is
$13,260 a yea r. This includes BS TC of $3,120; FTC of $5,876 ($1 13 per week); IWTC of
$3,477 ($7 2 per week) and Chil dcare Subsidy of $12 ,215.80 ($5.22 p er hour and $255 per
week).57
For a medium-income, s ingle-parent or two-pa rent household, with an a nnual
income of $75, 000, the tota l amount of f‌ina ncial suppor t they would receive i s $4,524.
This includes B STC of $3,120 a nd IWT C of $1,404 . The medium-in come household
would not be elig ible for FTC and Childc are Subsidy.
For a high-income , single-pa rent or two-pa rent household, w ith an a nnual
income of $120,00 0, the tot al amount of f‌i nancia l support t hey would recei ve is
56 “Ilam Ea rly Learni ng Centre” (12 Janu ary 2019) Univer sity of Canterbu ry Students’ A ssociation
.
57 Se e Section VI, Ta ble 4.
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 109
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
$3,120. Thi s consists of only the BST C of $3,120. The h igh-income household would
not be eligible for F TC, IWTC or Ch ildcare Subsidy.
Based on the a bove calcul ation, pri ma facie, only the low-income t wo-parent
and sing le-parent house holds would have the c apabili ty to work fu ll-time d uring
the f‌irst ye ar after child birth. As the t otal amount of f‌ina ncial support low-income
households would re ceive exceeds the t otal ch ildcar e cost, it cou ld aord to plac e
the child i n full-time ch ildcare.
(b) When the child is between one to th ree years old
When the chi ld is between one t o three ye ars old, the t otal ch ildcar e costs for
each household rema ins $13,260 a year. However, fa milies BSTC entit lements might
dier dependi ng on the annua l household incomes.
For a low-income, sing le-parent or two -parent household , with a n annua l
income of $35,000 , the tota l amount of f‌i nancia l support it wou ld receive rema ins
$13,260 a yea r. This includes BS TC of $3,120; FTC of $5,876 ($1 13 per week); IWTC of
$3,477 ($7 2 per week) and Chil dcare Subsidy of $12 ,215.80 ($5.22 p er hour and $255 per
week).58
For a medium-income , single-parent or two-pa rent household, with an a nnual
income of $75, 000, the tot al amou nt of f‌inanc ial suppor t it would receive a lso
remain s $4,524 . This inclu des BSTC of $3,12 0 and IW TC of $1,404 . The medium-
income household wou ld not be eligible for FTC and C hildcare Subsidy.
For a high-income , single-pa rent or two-pa rent household, w ith an a nnual
income of $120,00 0, the total amou nt of f‌inancial supp ort it would receive becomes
nil. The h igh-income household would no longer be el igible for any BSTC payment ,
neither would it be ent itled to FTC, I WTC or Childca re Subsidy.
Again , based on the above ca lculations, prim a facie, only parent s in low-income
two-parent a nd sing le-parent househ olds would have the c apabili ty to work fu ll-
time as t he amount of f‌in ancia l support enable t hem to put the ch ild in f ull-ti me
childca re.
(c) When the child is betwee n three to f‌ive years old
When the chi ld is between t hree to f‌i ve years old, BST C stops al together.
However, all households wou ld now be eligible to 20 h ours of free ECE. Th is in turns
reduces the ch ildcare c ost to $170 a week or $8 ,840 a year.59 As Ch ildcare S ubsidy
cannot be cl aimed for th e same hours a s the free 20 h ours, elig ible parents would
58 See Secti on VI, Table 5.
59 Universi ty of Canterbu ry Student s’ Associatio n, above n 79.
110 [Vol 26, 2020]
now only be able to c laim 25 hours of Childc are Subsidy out of the tot al 45 hours of
childcare required.
For low-income, sing le-parent and t wo-parent hou seholds wit h an an nual
income of $35,000 , their tot al income supp ort duri ng this period becomes $16 ,139.
This includes F TC of $5,87 6 ($133 per week), IW TC of $3,47 7 ($72 per week) an d
Childca re Subsidy of $6,786 ($5.22 h ours for 25 hours). For medium-income, si ngle-
parent and t wo-parent hou seholds wit h an annu al income of $7 5,000, t he total
amount of f‌in ancial suppor t they would receive become s $1,404. Thi s includes IWTC
of $1,404 . For high-income , single-pa rent and t wo-parent house holds with a n
annua l income of $120,000, t he total amou nt of f‌inancia l support they would re ceive
becomes nil .60
Based on the a bove calculation s, prima facie , only parents in low-inc ome single-
parent and t wo-parent hou seholds would have t he capabil ity to work f ull-ti me as
the tota l amount of f‌i nancia l support t hey received from t he government wou ld
exceed the amou nt of total chi ldcare cost incur red at this sta ge.
The above compar isons give u s the prelim inar y result s of parents’ c apabili ty
to work or provide ca re ful l-time. In s umma ry, prima facie , on ly parent s in low-
income two-pa rent households have the capabi lity to provide ca re full-time in the
f‌irst yea r after chi ldbirth , when the child i s one to three yea rs old and when the ch ild
is three t o f‌ive years old. For sing le parents, pri ma facie, only par ents in low-income
households have t he capability to prov ide care full-ti me during the f‌irs t year after
birth . No single pa rents would h ave the capabi lity t o provide car e full-t ime when
the child i s between one to three. F urthermore, when t he child is between t hree to
f‌ive, single p arents’ capabilit y to provide care f ull-time is ocia lly removed if they
are on Sole Par ent Support.
However, the above preli minary resu lts might be adju sted or qualif‌i ed based on
the valid ity of the assump tions applied in each of the a bove situations. The a nalysis
will now move t o assess the val idity of the assu mptions applied.
B. Step Two: Assessment of the Validity of the
Assumptions
The key assumpt ions that cou ld potenti ally in f‌luence paren ts’ capabil ity to
provide car e or work full-t ime are f‌i rstly t he assumpt ion that par ents have no
saving s; secondly, the house hold’s entire income i s spent on consump tion. If the
above assump tions do not hold, then par ents’ who, prima facie , have no capabilit y to
work or provide ca re full-t ime, might potentia lly have the capabili ty to do so. A ny
60 See Sect ion VI, Table 6.
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 111
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
saving s, or amount of income not s pent on consumpt ion would enable the hou seholds
to fund t he costs of childca re required for pa rents to work. Sim ilarly, any savi ngs or
unspent inc ome could also meet other l iving costs th at would otherwise not be me t
due to the loss of a n income as a parent st ays at home and provides care f ull-time.
1. The assumption s of no savings.
Based on empir ical rese arch, the a mount of savings is posi tively relat ed to the
amount of income e arned. 61 The median s aving a mounts of household s between
the one to f‌ive inc ome deciles ar e close to zero. Therefore, t he assum ption of no
saving s is mostly va lid for low-income households ($30,000 in ou r case). However,
according t o the same s tudy, households in t he 6 to 10 income de ciles have
saving s averagin g between $10,0 00 and $50,0 00. Therefore, the a ssumption of
no saving s is not as valid for mediu m and high-income house holds.
2. The assumption that all income is spent on consumption.
Concernin g the assumption t hat all income is s pent on consumption, t his would
not be valid i f a household’s income exceed s its expens es. Result s from St ats NZ’s
General Su rvey showed that less th an 10 per cent of the households w ith an income
between $30,001 t o $70,000 were rep orted to h ave more tha n enough money.62
15.4 per cent of t he households wi th an inc ome between $70,0 01 to $100,000 wer e
reported t o have more tha n enough money, whi le one-thir d of the households
reported a s havin g not enough or just enou gh money. In contra st, close t o one-
third of t he households with an i ncome above $100,001 reporte d to have more than
enough, wh ile only around 20 p er cent of the household report ed having not enoug h
or just enough mone y. Accordingly, the assu mption that all of t he household income
is spent on consu mption is most l ikely to be va lid for low-income hous eholds.
The assumpt ion is also l ikely to be va lid for the ma jority of t he medium-incom e
households. However, the as sumption is le ss likely t o be valid for t he majorit y of
high-income hou seholds.
Nevertheless , it should be note d that al l of the households’ i ncomes would be
reduced by approxi mately hal f if one of the parents i s to provide care f ull-time. Thi s
means in ou r analysis al l of the households would become low-inco me households,
based on our def‌i nition, w ith an i ncome below $75, 000 if par ents were to prov ide
care fu ll-time (except for h igh-income t wo-parent house holds in thei r f‌irst yea r
after ch ildbir th). Accord ingly, for al l households, the a ssumption t hat the ent ire
61 Tri nh Le, Joh n Gibson and S teven Sti llma n Household Wealth and Saving in New Zealand:
Evidence from the Longitudinal Survey of Family, Income and Employment (Motu Economic and
Public Pol icy Researc h, Motu Working Pa per 10-06, Sep tember 2010), at 12 (T able b).
62 “2016 New Zeal and General S ocial Sur vey” Stat NZ , at Table 7.
112 [Vol 26, 2020]
income is spent on con sumption is most likely t o be valid if parents a re to provide
care fu ll-time a fter ch ildbir th, except for hig h-income two -parent household s in
the f‌irst ye ar after chi ldbirth.
3. The assumption that the level of non -childcare consumption is th e same
pre- and post-childbi rth.
Another rela ted assumption is t hat a household’s pre-childbir th, non-childca re
related cons umption rema ins th e same af ter child birth . If this c onsumption i s
not valid, t hen a household could r educe their ex penditu re to a level th at better
corresponds w ith its income level so the other p arent could h ave the capabi lity t o
provide car e full-time a fter chi ldbirth. Si milar, reduc tion in expendit ure might a lso
fund the re quired childc are costs so par ents would have the capa bility to work fu ll-
time.
This assu mption would be i nvalid i f households cou ld reduce their non-
essentia l costs an d are wil ling t o do this a s it might compr omise thei r quali ty of
life. The val idity of this as sumption is more dicu lt to assess because it i s dicult
to determ ine the avera ge amount of esse ntial cos ts for dierent f amil ies. High-
income households do not ne cessarily have a gr eater ability to me et their essential
costs as t hey are more likely t o be servicing a la rger mortgage. F urthermore, it a lso
dicul t to determ ine the deg ree a household is w illi ng to reduce it s spendin g by
compromisi ng its current li festyles or quali ty of life.
4. The assumptio n that parents within a ho usehold have equal earnin g
capacity.
If one of the pare nts earns more tha n the other spouse then he/she is le ss likely
to have the cap abilit y to provide c are ful l-time at home a s the household’s post-
childbir th income would suer more a s a result. This, however, is more of a n issue
concerni ng individu al parents’ c apabilit y to work or provide ca re withi n a household
and is beyond t he scope of this ana lysis.
5. Adjusted ndings on parents capability to work or provide care full-
time.
Based on the a bove assessment , the f‌indi ngs on pare nts’ capabi lity cou ld be
adjusted or q ualif‌ied as the fol lowing.
Concernin g parents’ c apabilit y to provide c are ful l-time af ter chi ldbirth , parents
in low-income two-p arent households have the cap ability to prov ide care full-ti me
in all t hree stages. Med ium-income and high-i ncome, two-parent or sin gle-parent
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 113
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
households would a lso have the capa bility to care for their ch ild full-t ime in all t hree
stages i f the households have sucient sav ings to do so. Fur thermore, parents i n a
medium or hi gh-income, two-parent f amilies could ha ve or extend their capabi lity
to provide ca re ful l-time wit hout havi ng sucient sav ings i f the household cou ld
reduce its cons umption level t o match its po st-chi ldbirt h income wit h only one
working pa rent. Alt hough, t his would be r ather di cult consider ing the fa ct that
the household inc ome would be approximatel y halved without a work ing parent.
For single pa rents, only parents i n low-income single-par ent households would
have the capabi lity to provide ca re during the f‌i rst year after t he childbirth . Single
parents w ith mediu m or high i ncomes before child birth m ight have the capabil ity
to do so if they h ave sucient sav ings or i f they could red uce their cons umption
level to match t heir post- childbi rth income s. When the ch ild is betwe en one to
three yea rs old, no sin gle parent s would have the ca pabilit y to provide c are fu ll-
time un less they have su cient savi ngs, which i s most unl ikely for paren ts with
low-income pre-chi ldbirt h. Nevert heless, parent s could obta in the cap abilit y to
provide car e by reducing con sumption t o match thei r post-ch ildbirt h income,
which would be at a me agre $24 ,806.6 0. When the chi ld is thre e to f‌ive years old ,
single pa rents’ capability t o provide care is ocial ly removed. Parents would onl y
have the capabi lity to provide ca re full-time i f they have savings of at le ast $24,000
to allow t hem to live withou t receiving Sole-Pa rent support. Th is would be very ra re
as it would only b e likely for parents w ith high-i ncome pre-childbir th. However, the
majorit y of single-parent househ olds are clustered a round the low-income level.63
Concernin g parents’ c apabilit y to work full-time, pa rents in low-income t wo-
parent and si ngle-parent hous eholds would have the capa bility to do so at a ll stages.
Parents i n medium and h igh income , two-parent a nd single p arent households wou ld
have the capabi lity to do so if they h ave sucient savings t o do. High-income two-
parent or sin gle-parent hou seholds are more l ikely than medium-i ncome families
to have the req uired sav ings of around $10,000. Pa rents might be able to f und the
childca re costs by re ducing thei r consumpt ion level. When the ch ild is bet ween
three to f‌i ve years old, the chi ldcare cost is a lmost halved . This means more pa rents
from medium-i ncome, two-parent and sin gle-parent hou seholds would be abl e to
fund the ch ildcare cost s required to work f ull-time either u sing previous sav ings or
by reducing thei r household consumptions .
63 Br yan Perry Household incomes in New Zealand: Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship
1982 to 2016 (M inistr y of Social Deve lopment, July 2017), at 3 3.
114 [Vol 26, 2020]
VI. Conclusion
In conclusion, New Z ealan d’s childcare -related pol icies give par ents in low-
income two-pa rent households t he greate st capabil ity to pr ovide care f ull-ti me
after ch ildbir th til l the chi ld is f‌ive years ol d. In general , parents i n high-inc ome
two-parent h ouseholds have the second g reatest capabi lity to provid e care based on
the high l ikelihoo d for them to have savi ngs and the p otential t o reduce consumpt ion
levels to bet ter match t heir post-c hildbir th income. T he capabil ity of parent s’ in
medium-income t wo-parent ho useholds is ra nked th ird as the y are less li kely to
have sucient sav ings or pot ential t o reduce consu mption level th an parent s in
high-income t wo-parent households.
Single pa rents with h igh and mediu m pre-childbi rth income have les s capabilit y
to provide ca re in comparison t o their two-parent hou seholds counterpar ts. Single
parents wou ld require m ore saving s and a great er reduction of c onsumption t o
obtain t he capability to prov ide care full-ti me as they do not have t he income of a
working pa rent. More sav ings ar e require d if the sin gle parent s want to ha ve the
capabil ity to provide car e full-time when t he child is between t hree to f‌ive as, to do
so, they would not be a ble to receive Sole Pa rent Support. Fina lly, arguably, sin gle
parents w ith low pre-ch ildbir th income have t he least ca pabilit y to provide c are
full-t ime. Alt hough they h ave the capabi lity t o provide car e durin g the f‌irst ye ar
after ch ildbirth, t hey do not have the capabilit y to do so when the child is bet ween
one to thre e years old un less they a re prepared t o limit t heir consu mption to a
mini mum level. Further more, when the child is be tween three to f‌ive, t he parents’’
capabil ity to prov ide care is com pletely removed if t he parent s are receiv ing Sole
Parent Suppor t. This is most li kely the case for low-income sin gle parents.
Concernin g parents’ capabil ity to work, parents i n low-income two-parent an d
single-pa rent households have the g reatest capabi lity to work fu ll-time at all s tages
as their ch ildcare c osts would be f ully covered by income support s and Childcare
Subsidies. Si mila r to the sit uation above, h igh-income t wo-parent a nd single -
parent household m ight have t he same capab ility t o do so if they a re able to f und
the childc are costs by sav ings or reducing t heir consumpt ion level. Medium-income
two-parent a nd sing le-parent househ olds have less capa bilit y as the govern ment
fundi ng mechanism s are insu cient to cover childca re costs and t hey are less like ly
to have the nece ssary savin gs or the potential t o reduce their consu mptions.
Compari ng the capabi lity of pa rents in si ngle an d two-parent h ouseholds in
the above sit uation, si ngle parent s actua lly have less c apabili ty tha n their t wo-
parent count erparts. Si ngle parents a re required to work mor e hours to reach thei r
income-level as t heir household income consist s only of the income of one worki ng
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 115
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
parent. F urthermore, as al ready stated, to b e eligible for IWTC, si ngle parents are
require d to work at least 20 hours per week a lone, while couples are only r equired
to work 30 hours a wee k combined.
It is apparent t hat sing le parents, e special ly those w ith low income- earni ng
capacity, are m ost disadv antage d under the cu rrent New Zea land f‌in ancial
childca re-related pol icies. These parent s have the least f reedom to choose t o work or
provide car e full-time tha n parents of other income-level or hou sehold types. This
indicate s potential issues of s ocial injustic e. Furthermore, m iddle-class par ents’ in
two-parent h ouseholds al so seem to have li mited freedom to choose t o work or to
provide car e full-time. This s hould be taken into con sideration by the Government
when designi ng f‌inancia l childcare-relat ed policies in the fut ure.
116 [Vol 26, 2020]
VII. Appendix
A. Tables of Comparison: Households’ Pre-childbirth
and Post-childbirth Incomes When One of the
Parents Provides Care Full-Time
Household
Type
Pre-
childbirth
income
Post-
childbirth
income
from work
Parenta l
Leave
Best Sta rt FTC IWTC Sole Par ent
Support
Total P ost-
childbirth
income
Two-parent
low-income
$35,000 $17,500 $14, 673.88 $1 ,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876
($133/wk)
$3,744
($72/wk)
NA $43355.96
Two- parent
medium-
income
$75,000 $37,500 $14 ,673. 88 $1,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876 ($133/
wk)
$3,744
($72/wk)
NA $63,353 .88
Two parent
high-income
$120,000 $60,000 $14,673. 88 $1,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$1,404 ($27/
wk)
$3,744 ($72/
wk)
NA $81,381.8 8
Single-
parent low-
income
$35,000 NA $14,673. 88 $1,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876
($133/wk)
$0 $17,370.6 0
($334.05/wk)
$39,480.48
Single paren t
medium
income
$75,000 NA $14,673 .88 $1,56 0
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876
($133/wk)
$0 $17,370.6 0
($334.05/wk)
$39,480.48
Single paren t
high-income
$120,000 NA $14,673. 88 $1,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876
($133/wk)
$0 $17,370.6 0
($334.05/wk)
$39,480.48
Table 1. First Year after Childbirth
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 117
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
Table 2. When the Child is One to Thre e Years Old
Household
Type
Pre-
childbirth
income
Post-
childbirth
income
from work
FMTC BSTC FTC IWTC Sole Par ent
Support
Total P ost-
childbirth
income
Two-parent
low-income
$35,000 $17,500 $11,180
($215/wk)
$1,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876
($133/wk)
$3,744
($72/wk)
NA $41,420
Two- parent
medium-
income
$75,000 $37,500 $0 $1,5 60
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876 ($133/
wk)
$3,744
($72/wk)
NA $48,680
Two-parent
high-income
$120,000 $60,000 $0 $1,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$1404 ($27/
wk)
$3,744 ($72/
wk)
NA $66,708
Single-
parent low-
income
$35,000 NA NA $1,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876
($133/wk)
NA $17,370.6 0
($334.05/wk)
$24,806.60
Single paren t
medium
income
$75,000 NA NA $1,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876
($133/wk)
NA $17,370.6 0
($334.05/wk)
$24,806.60
Single paren t
high-income
$120,000 NA NA $1,560
($60/wk for
26 wks)
$5,876
($133/wk)
NA $17,370. 60
($334.05/wk)
$24,806.60
118 [Vol 26, 2020]
Table 3. When the Child is Three to Five Years Old
Household
Type
Pre-
childbirth
income
Post-
childbirth
income from
work
FMTC BSTC FTC IW TC Sole Parent
Support
Total Post-
childbirth
income
Two-parent
low-income
$35,000 $17,500 $11,180
($215/ week)
NA $5 ,876
($133/week)
$3,744
($72/week)
NA $38,300
Two-parent
medium-
income
$75,000 $37,500 $0 NA $5,876 ($13 3/
week)
$3,744
($72/week)
NA $47,12 0
Two- parent
high-income
$120,000 $60,000 $0 NA $1404 ($27/
week)
$3,744 ($72/
week)
NA $65,148
Single-parent
low-income
$35,000 NA NA NA $5,876
($133/week)
NA $17,370.6 0
($334. 05/
week)
$23,246.6 0
Single-parent
medium-
income
$75,000 NA NA NA $5 ,876
($133/week)
NA $17,370.6 0
($334. 05/
week)
$23,246.6 0
Single-parent
high-income
$120,000 NA NA NA $5,876
($133/week)
NA $1 7,370.60
($334. 05/
week)
$23,246.6 0
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 119
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
B. Tables of Comparison: Households’ Total Financial
Supports Received and the Total Childcare Costs
When Parents Work Full-time
Table 4. First Year After Childbirth
Household
Types an d
Income
Levels
Annual
household
from work
BSTC FTC IWTC Childc are
Subsidy
annually
(45 hours per
week)
Total
Financi al
Support
Total
Childca re
Cost
Dierence
Low-income,
single or two -
parent
$35,000
($673.08/wk )
$3,120 ($60/
wk)
$5,876
($113/
wk)
$3,47 7
($72/wk)
$12,214.80
($234.90/wk)
($5.22 /hr)
$24,6 87.80 $13, 260
($255/wk)
$11,4 27.80
Medium
income, single
or two-pare nt
$75,000
($1,442/ wk)
$3,120
($60/wk)
$0
Not eligible
$1,404
($27/wk)
$0
Not eligible
$4,524 $13 ,260
($255/wk)
-$8,736
High income,
single or two -
parent
$120,000 $3,120/ year
($60/wk)
$0
Not eligible
$0
Not eligible
$0
Not eligible
$3,120 $13 ,260
($255/wk)
-$10,140
120 [Vol 26, 2020]
Household
Types an d
Income
Levels
Annual
household
from work
BSTC FTC IWTC Childc are
Subsidy
annually
(45 hours per
week)
Total
Financi al
Support
Total
Childca re
Cost
Dierence
Low-income,
single or two -
parent
$35,000
($673.08/wk )
$3,120 ($60/
wk)
$5,876
($113/
wk)
$3,47 7
($72/wk)
$12,214.80
($234.90/wk)
($5.22 /hr)
$24,6 87.80 $13, 260
($255/wk)
$11,4 27.80
Medium
income, single
or two-pare nt
$75,000
($1,442/ wk)
$3,120
($60/wk)
$0
Not eligible
$1,404
($27/wk)
$0
Not eligible
$4,524 $13 ,260
($255/wk)
-$8,736
High income,
single or two -
parent
$120,000 $0
Not eligible
$0
Not eligible
$0
Not eligible
$0
Not eligible
$0 $13,2 60
($255/wk)
-$10,140
Table 5. When the Child is between O ne to Three Years Old
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 121
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
Household
Types an d
Income
Levels
Annual
household
from work
BSTC FTC IWTC Childc are
Subsidy
annually
(25 hours per
week)
Total
Financi al
Support
Total
Childca re
Cost
Dierence
Low-income,
single or two -
parent
$35,000
($673.08/wk )
NA $5 ,876
($113/
wk)
$3,47 7
($72/wk)
$6,786
($130.5 0/wk)
($5.22 /hr)
$16,139 $8,840
($170/wk)
$7299
Medium
income, single
or two-pare nt
$75,000
($1,442/ wk)
NA $0
Not eligible
$1,404
($27/wk)
$0
Not eligible
$1,404 $8,840
($170/wk)
-$7,436
High income,
single or two -
parent
$120,000 NA $0
Not eligible
$0
Not eligible
$0
Not eligible
$0 $8,840
($170/wk)
-$8,840
Table 6. When the Child is between Three to Fi ve Years Old
122 [Vol 26, 2020]
C. Summary Table
Table 7. Preliminary Results of Parents’ Capa bility to Provide Care Full-time
Stages Households Pre-bi rth
income
Post-bi rth
income
Capability?
1st year a fter
birth
Low-income
two-par ent
$35,000 $43,355.9 6 Yes
Medium in come
two-parent
$75,000 $63,353 .88 No
High-income
two-par ent
$120,000 $81,381.88 No
Single-p arent All inc ome $39,480.48 Only low-income
1–3 years old Low-income
two-par ent
$35,000 $41,420.00 Yes
Medium in come
two-parent
$75,000 $48,680.00 No
High-income
two-par ent
$120,000 $66,708.00 No
Single-p arent All inc ome $24,806.60 No
3–5 years o ld Low-income
two-par ent
$35,000 $38,300.00 Yes
Medium in come
two-parent
$75,000 $47,12 0.00 No
High-income
two-par ent
$120,000 $65,148.00 No
Single-p arent All inc ome $23,246.6 0 No: ocial ly
removed
Valuing Freedom: An An alysis of Parents’ Freedom of Ch oice to Work and Care 123
under New Zealand’s Childcare-Related Family Policies using the Capability Approach
D. Summary Table
Table 8 Preliminary Results on Pare nts’ Capability to Work Full-time
Stages Households Childcare costs Total f‌inancial
support
Capability?
1st year a fter
birth
Low-income
two-par ent and
single-parent
$13,260
($255/wk)
$24,6 87.80 Yes
Medium in come
two-par ent and
single-parent
$13,260
($255/wk)
$4,524 .00 No
High-income
two-par ent and
single-parent
$13,260
($255/wk)
$3,120 .00 No
1–3 years old Low-income
two-par ent and
single-parent
$13,260
($255/wk)
$24,6 87.80 Yes
Medium in come
two-par ent and
single-parent
$13,260
($255/wk)
$4,524 .00 No
High-income
two-par ent and
single-parent
$13,260
($255/wk)
$0.00 No
3–5 years o ld Low-income
two-par ent and
single-parent
$8,840
($170/wk)
$16,139.00 Yes
Medium in come
two-par ent and
single-parent
$8,840
($170/wk)
$1,404.00 No
High-income
two-par ent and
single-parent
$8,840
($170/wk)
$0.00 No.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT