Some questions about maintenance and what you pay for(90 Posts)
When my ex left, he would only allow CSA to assess what he lays...and he lays the bare minimum that they have told him. He works full time, and has alot of lucrative self employed work on top...which he doesn't declare to CSA...until they re assess him at end of tax year....so lots of extra income.
As well as that his partner ( who he left me for after lengthy affair) also works full time and has additional self employed work.they live ins small house, tiny mortgage..having left me with both kids and only a part time job, in a large house, big mortgage and bills.
Is it unreasonable that he should be paying towards childcare?
Or do I...as he tells me regularly the money he pays me is all I'm getting, and I should use that to cover childcare costs...( it only just covers it, leaving me next to nothing towards any other costs for the kids, ie: , clothes etc)
He doesn't buy clothes for them or shoes.
Do you or do your exs or your partners who have ex's contribute towards childcare ON TOP of maintenance?
Oh please do one. I'm hardly an unwilling parent. Don't be so patronising. I'm pleased you've found some way of supporting your child with you alternative means of earning that doesn't involve doing what everyone else has to. Maybe you should write a book as you seem to have discovered something that the rest of us are clearly too stupid to see. Maybe it's just easier to manage a cupcake empire or Avon round or whatever it is when your ex is willing to take 50/50 care.. I don't know, but back in the real world, I'm not ending up with no pension or assets to leave my dd/ earn income on to put her through uni etc while her dad profits from the free care I would give. Nor was I wiling for dd and I to live on peanuts while, again, he had no childcare issues. It IS a women's rights issue. Woman are turned down for jobs often because if the assumption that childcare will fall on them, or that they'll be asking for 3/4 days a week once their feet are under the table.
Get your head out of your arse and start expecting more.
I really do think NADM has a good point there though. Often, courts award residency to the mother based on her wanting majority residency. If she felt she was unable to afford this and Therefore that responsibility would be more equitably achieved with day 50:50, then that ought to have been the goal rather than majority care. Now clearly if the father wants only minimal time with the children then that is a different issue. But a mother wanting majority care but also wanting to dictate how the father pays for this, whilst he really wanted more time with the children, does have a "wanting your cake and eating it" ring to it
I'm fairly sure I said a few times down the thread that he didn't want more than what he has as it didn't fit in with his work commitments.
The lioness, young well have, but this isn't actually your thread . I was addressing the generic point made by NADM
I thought you meant that she had a point in her argument with me... That's how it read.
But a mother wanting majority care but also wanting to dictate how the father pays for this, whilst he really wanted more time with the children, does have a wanting your cake and eating it ring to it.
I'll second that Petal. It is an excellent point.
get your head out of your arse and start expecting more
If financial security, assets and a pension are accompanied by such rude intolerance, you can keep it, thank you!
You've made your choice and I've made mine; but you clearly think that I'm somehow letting the sisterhood down by having such low aspirations, and that all single mothers should do it your way, and be supported by their DCs Dad
I no longer have the desire to pursue the things you refer to; I would prefer to give my DD other things in life - but whatever my choice is, I do not expect my DDs Dad to agree or support me to do it.
But we're not talking here about a woman who wants her cake and eat it too. It's a man who doesn't want more contact, and is able to earn as much or as little as he likes and he doesn't have to take into account the additional expense of childcare. Same as my ex - he can do whatever he likes and doesn't have to take into account what effect it will have on his children and how they are going to be cared for.
And even if there is a court order which means that by having majority care someone has effectively agreed to that additional "financial burden", it doesn't mean that you feel that having that additional expense is fair. It's still ok to say "yes, but this part of it is not right" - and it far from means that someone who thinks that way is an unwilling parent. The unwilling parent is the one who doesn't consider the childrens' needs and care while making their decisions.
"And even if there is a court order which means that by having majority care someone has effectively agreed to that additional "financial burden", it doesn't mean that you feel that having that additional expense is fair. It's still ok to say "yes, but this part of it is not right"
I really don't agree. With every decision comes consequences. Sometimes a great decision has some personal disadvantages - that's what decisions are about, weighing up the pros and cons. Not just expecting the pros and pros
That's a real shame notadisneymum, not least for your daughter.
thelioness I'm sure NADM's daughter does not need you to feel her mother's choices are a shame for her
How smug and self righteous to assume NADM's choices for her child are somehow inferior to your own
I agree thinkso, that isn't what I meant though. You can be fully aware of all the negatives of something you agree to. You "suck them up" because overall it's the best decision - it doesn't mean that you agree with them.
Allnew, great point on cake etc.
Dh ex really thought she had it made: she wanted and was awarded prime residency, therefore receiving max cm, she also wanted to continue to work full-time so dc were put in private schools offering tutoring and activities until 6 pm, for which dh still pays half the costs, on top of v generous cm. she also got him to pay half for summer activities planned for her time with them, half for every damn thing she could think of in fact. Oh, yes, that included services of au pair, too, as she loves socializing and is hardly home during work week. She hates me because I made it clear to dh I was not funding our new life together alone (met 2 yrs after their divorce) and he had better stop pandering to her nonsense. She also had him mind dc twice a week at her place until midnight, on top of eow. Her parents jump in now as dc stay overnight once a week with us instead, and eow.
Sorry, long rant. Dc now 12 and 16, so au pair gone, all extras funded from cm, private school still funded extra, but part of divorce settlement. Her dc reward her selfishness and obvious greed by pushing to move in with us, and yes, we have a simple lifestyle, we don't own bikes, let alone a car! Dc also hate being incarcerated all week, oldest dc already changed schools, younger waiting to follow.
Don't want to offend anybody here, just want to point out there are plenty of b****es on both sides of parenting spectrum and we should not be attacking each other here. Obviously those who are doing well for themselves feel NO NEED TO POST HERE.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.