Governments must make fiscal choices. But some choices are clearer than others. Investing in children is not a cost but a foundation for a stronger, safer, more prosperous Australia. Yet policies designed to support families and protect women are too often treated as optional extras, chipped away or dismissed as second-order concerns.
US President Donald Trump claimed that some forms of domestic violence are minor and should not count in crime statistics. For survivors and advocates, it was a chilling reminder of how easily harm is minimised. And while his rhetoric may feel extreme, the logic behind it, that some harms matter and others do not, is alive and well here.
We see the same mindset in the intersection of gender-based violence and economic policy. Two decades ago, Family Tax Benefit was a cornerstone of support for parents, especially single mothers. Today, it has been hollowed out: worth far less and harder to access. Eligibility thresholds have not kept pace with the cost of living, so fewer families qualify, and those who do receive support find it increasingly inadequate.
Reform debates collapse into a false hierarchy. Should support go to families in entrenched poverty, or to middle-income households struggling with rising rents, insecure jobs and childcare costs? The framing itself is corrosive. It echoes the same division embedded in the President’s remarks: some hardship is acknowledged, other hardship is written off as lesser.
Community attitudes about domestic violence also miss the way economic and safety policies collide. Leaving is not simply about courage or choice. It is about whether a woman can pay rent, whether her payments continue, whether her kids eat. Research by Anne Summers shows many single mothers are not just escaping violence, they are entering what she calls policy-induced poverty. The rules governing Family Tax Benefit, Parenting Payment and JobSeeker do not sit in isolation. Stacked together, they can strip women of options and make safety impossible.
This is how governments manage scarcity: by forcing women and families to argue over scraps. Instead of building a system that reflects today’s realities, they tinker. One payment is raised while another is clawed back. Eligibility narrows here, compliance rules tighten there. Each adjustment creates casualties. Remove supplements and poverty rises. Separate payments without fixing child-support compliance and thousands of families suddenly appear non-compliant, even though the system never delivered for them in the first place.
These are not neutral tweaks. They are choices. At one end of the spectrum lies wholesale reform that admits the system is broken and rebuilds it for today. At the other is endless tinkering that accepts families will keep falling through the cracks. What is missing is honesty: every decision involves trade-offs, and those trade-offs consistently fall hardest on the most vulnerable.
For families already in poverty, Family Tax Benefit can mean the difference between stability and eviction. For middle-income households, it can prevent a single unexpected bill from spiralling into debt. Neither hardship is trivial. Yet political debate pits one group against the other as though meeting both needs is impossible.
We have seen this logic before: in refugee policy that divides the deserving from the undeserving, and in violence prevention where survivors are judged against the stereotype of the perfect victim. Family policy is now caught in the same pattern. Each hierarchy legitimises neglect.
Investing in families and ensuring women’s safety are not competing priorities. They are the infrastructure of a fair society. Supporting parents stabilises households, reduces disadvantage and strengthens the economy. Confronting violence in all its forms saves lives, lowers costs and builds safer communities.
When leaders minimise violence or let family benefits wither, they send the same message: some lives and some struggles matter less. That message cannot stand. The cost of pretending certain harms are not serious is always paid by those with the least power: women, children, single parents, survivors. We cannot afford a politics of dismissal. Not for families. Not for safety. Not now.