AIBU to refuse to continue the 'wifework' for XP?

Sad as it is, this is the correct summation, and all the "oh but, you morally deserve..." is just a waste of time.

It’s disgusting 🤬
Have a good day 🙏🏻✌🏻🫶🏻

😉
Have a good day ✌🏻🫶🏻🙏🏻

It really is. I started a thread about this yesterday, inspired by this one and all the others I've read where mothers end up having to foot the bill for pretty much everything.

It really should not be rocket science for the government to find a way of making men pay for their children.

😂

Well that’s just shit isn’t it.
He contributed to making the child, he should be made to pay his share. Not get off scot free

So roughly £1000 a month child support? Hopefully your house has a decent amount of equity.

Do you get half or have you signed an agreement on percentages?

Is he likely to not care about the money lost so long as he screws you over or is pointing out the amount lost to solicitor fees likely to get him to cooperate with a sale (or buying you out)?

I totally agree with the PPs who have suggested a lock for your bedroom door (or at least one of the temporary door jammers sold for hotel room stays) but it may be worth cooking for him to keep him onside at least for the next couple of months until you get your first month’s salary. You shouldn’t have to but the law in this country isn’t fair to unmarried mothers (or married ones but less so) on a split either and you will need to do what you have to to get by.

Lol I love this forum for exactly this.
Have a word with yourself.
Another commenter answered me without using bold letters. Says more about you than me. No need for you to do that and no need to knock my intelligence. It’s just rude and as I said, shows more about you than me.
If it’s annoyed you that someone didn’t read all the comments then you must be commenting on lots of people’s comments

Sorry, it never occurred to me that anyone would be stupid enough to wade into a multi page thread with completely incorrect advice without actually reading the thread first.

I guess I need to stop overestimating the intelligence of some Mumsnet posters.

I think Op means spousal maintenance.
If you are married there’s a possibility to claim spousal maintenance in a divorce but it’s not common these days unless he’s a high earner or only for a short period while wife retrains/children very small.
It isn’t something to explore for Op as she’s not married.

Morally the answer is both of them should contribute.

Legally the answer is he gets off scot free, and if the OP can't afford to pay nursery fees and her own living costs out of her own salary and her ex refuses to contribute, she is up shit creek.

Mmmm tough situation.
Surely both of them? It’s both their child??? Government help (for what it’s worth)?

Ah right. And you had to say this with bold letters because????
Im not sorry for not reading through pages of comments so take your bold letters and park them in no need for that Avenue

Yes, as has now been said multiple times, £300 to £400 a month for the children as assessed by the CMS calculator.

As has also been said multiple times, for the OP, not a penny. She gets her share of joint assets and if the asset is a house, may have to go to court to force a sale since it can’t be sold without either the consent of both owners or a court order.

I'm not sure he does if they are still living together.

Which brings us to the big question: who pays for nursery?

If you split with the father of your child, surely he has to pay maintenance?

Absolutely. Which is why it is strongly advised that a financially vulnerable woman marry before having children since that only applies to a married couple.

The OP isn’t married and in UK law, her ex partner owes her nothing but a (small) amount of child support.

While she hasn’t said how much her ex earns, unless he’s a very high earner, she’s looking at £300 to £400 a month total to cover all expenses for both children. Bearing in mind full time nursery for one child can be over £1,000, you can see why taking a ‘strict letter of the law’ approach with her ex might be a problem

She is entitled to half of joint assets (so the house) but it can take months to sell and if she has to force a sale, that is also going to be expensive.

No legal separation or divorce needed she’s unmarried. She can claim maintenance for the children but it’s highly likely to be much less than he’s paying now.

Except if they went down the route of legal separation, she would be awarded maintenance because she has children and isn't working.

I don’t disagree with the moral side of your arguments!! Of course he should stick to his word, morally, it would be the right thing to do. The only point that matters though is that they are unmarried, with children, and there’s absolutely NOTHING stopping him from deciding he wants to stop funding her mat leave now that they are “separated”. If she pushes the “separation” issue now before she is back at work, he could turn around tomorrow and decide that actually ALL he will pay her from now is the CMS amount due, probably a few hundred a month.

They made that agreement while a couple, she’s decided she no longer wants to be one (no doubt for very good reasons), he can just as easily decide to stop funding her mat leave- there’s nothing stopping him from doing that, he’s not legally obliged to, there’s no comeback she can go through to get that money. She is not legally entitled to it. THAT is the point you’re missing. Morally, yes he should pay, but in actual reality, OP hasn’t got a leg to stand on if he decides to only pay CMS from tomorrow.

You’re also wrong, he can have it both ways. He doesn’t have to pay her for childcare, and he doesn’t have to accept that her doing childcare is income! That’s the point I and other posters are making and that you seem to be missing- He CAN have it both ways. All he actually owes her as a separated parent is child maintenance amount. Is that morally right? No. But that’s the legal stance. Hence I said read up the that, because your advice on “he can’t have it both ways” is just totally incorrect, he can have it both ways. Our system allows that to be the case.

You clearly missed where i said they are both being immature. They need to both grow up and so do you by the sounds of it. Clearly dont teach manners where you are from 🙄

Half of it is "her" equity you pillock. That is what is meant by joint equity. Half if hers, half is his. He is blocking her access to her half of the equity by refusing to move on and allow a sale.

Don't they teach fractions in infant school any more?

I'm guessing it is their equity you pillock. Or if its her house she could put him out 🙄