Over 3,000 men are imprisoned each year in Great Britain for maintenance default. About 300 men in prison for this offense at any one time. Although maintenance defaulters are not a homogeneous group, a large number of them have financial difficulties. The amount in arrears varies substantially, and severity of sentences do not seem to bear any relationship to the amount owed. The two main categories of maintenance defaulters include 'social inadequates,' who are irresponsible, unemployed, and may have drinking and gambling problems; and men who feel they have a legal grievance against maintenance arrangements that are unfair or biased in favor of women. The case for imprisonment is justified mainly on grounds of deterrence: research indicates that enforcement of child support is more effective when the last resort of imprisonment is available. Other arguments for imprisonment are that court orders should not be flouted with impunity, public law obligations stemming from marriage are important to maintain, and abolition of imprisonment for maintenance default would not have much impact on the prison population. On the other hand, imprisonment of maintenance defaulters does not get the families the money they need. Among the social costs of imprisonment are its effects on family relationships. Also, the administration of imprisonment for maintenance default is burdensome for magistrates' clerks and corrections personnel. It is concluded that the arguments for retention of imprisonment for maintenance default are weak, and Parliament should concur with the recommendations of two committees in the past decade and abolish this penalty. Twenty-three notes and 22 references are provided.