From a child perspective, this assumption is often justified on the basis that assuming that children obtain an equal share of available household resources charts a middle road between the deprivation they may be subject to if parents consume a disproportionate share and the extra protection they might receive if parents make sacrifices to ensure children do not go without (Corak, 2005[86i). However, differences in parenting behaviour across households may lead to children living in poverty in non-poor households and vice-versa. If, for instance, intra-household allocation patterns are determined by bargaining between different parties, we would expect the income pooling restriction not to hold.