To think this is scandalous yet in plain sight because the patriarchy has no shame

Yes, my ex worked for a very highly regarded and well known character and as soon as we split his salary dropped. But his boss bought him a car and my son has told me over the years about the envelopes full of cash that would be lying around (my son didn't know what that meant, he was just fascinated). There are lots of men who facilitate these men.

What's worse is I left my ex because he was abusive and his boss was one of the very few people who witnessed some of the abuse.

They could attach earnings and deduct from benefits, like they do if you don't pay your council tax.

If the paternity is established there is no valid reason whatsoever why they can't do that.

A child is the responsibility of both parents equally and the OP is right.

This is another thing that women should not have to fight for but are going to have to.

I don’t have kids and was naive to how ingrained the attitude of men shouldn’t have to pay for their kids when they leave is.

Over the years I’ve dated a few different men who work in the same industry and have all worked for the same man who is a beloved household name. Affable chap, family orientated.

Each of the men I dated all told me a version of the same story - as soon as a man announced he’d split from the mother of his children (and one of these guys had a kid so experienced it directly) the boss man would announce ‘don’t worry, we’ll pay you cash in hand and you won’t have to give that bitch a penny because you won’t officially work here, win win’. None of these guys has ever worked with each other, only ever directly with boss man.

The guys without kids thought it was shocking but funny. The guy with a kid left because he was so disgusted at what seemed to be an accepted practice in this wider industry.

Most of the time that makes very little difference. If you are both equal earners (as I was) then they skip away with only the CMS to ineffectually keep control of them

It's utterly disgusting.

I volunteer for grant giving charity and all the single mums we help are amazing and tenacious and aren't getting a penny from their ex husbands/partners, who in most cases were abusive and this is effectively a new firm of abuse.

And yet you see women on here encouraging their new partners to drop hours at work or become stay at home dad's so they don't have to pay as much /any maintenance . There are women complicit in this too

It's utterly disgusting.

I volunteer for grant giving charity and all the single mums we help are amazing and tenacious and aren't getting a penny from their ex husbands/partners, who in most cases were abusive and this is effectively a new firm of abuse.

And yet you see women on here encouraging their new partners to drop hours at work or become stay at home dad's so they don't have to pay as much /any maintenance . There are women complicit in this too

If you’re the lower earner it’s really better to get married first before having kids. That way there are more ways to ensure you’re not left with all the financial responsibility.

Not many jobs actually require this though....the majority of jobs are 9-5 - no sacrifice is required. But you do have to have childcare and pay for it and take a hit financially and have a lower standard of living then you'd otherwise be used to

The whole system stinks.

I was a teen when I got with my ex who was in his 30s.

Coercive relationship (which turned violent eventually) so I had 4 dc with him.

I went to a refuge with 4 young dc, he moved on, I put in a claim, he went part time to look after her kids, and claimed financial responsibility for them, so I got around £20 a week for my 4 dc while they made financial arrangements in their best interests.

I can't work now as my dd has a disability and needs constant 1:1 care, so fuck knows what my future will be.

At least the men are OK though I suppose, that's the main thing.

It will never change though because the tossers in the government would all be nailed for more child support, and they aren't going to financially disadvantage themselves.

There is also the issue of some women not wanting their ex to be involved at all. The ex was either cruel to her or their child/children. There are too many stories on here of men leaving all the grunt work to women eg not feeding washing or even spending time when they do have their child but it's too difficult to prove or as someone pointed out the mother is too damn busy to fight with the ineffectual system that is currently in place.

I knew a woman who split with her husband and went so far as to go and clean his house before he moved in so that his children wouldn't spend their time in an unclean house/bed.

Men won't change the system because they have it too good. Only women collectively can do that, but as I know from experience a female dominated environment can't and oftentimes won't mobilise because they have so much else going on in their lives.

I agree re the American system. One thing they’ve got right (I’m sure there’s other things but I don’t know everything about their systems)

I think they can go to jail if they keep not paying too.

They don’t want the cost moved to the tax payer, I believe, is why they have a strict system - which makes sense really.

So by people, you specifically mean women then? Do you think men being forced to pay a proper amount for their children and be involved in the parenting, wouldn’t put men off, so the only answer is to punish women and children with poverty?

It's not just about the day to day expenses but the massive hit the resident parent takes on earning capacity, pension contributions and promotion opportunities. Early starts, late finishes, overnight trips, management roles all fine for the NRP who can just carry on as though child free. The RP would have to source and pay for 24/7 care such as a live in nanny. Unless they are extremely well compensated, it's not going to happen. You can't realistically rebalance that but it should be acknowledged and the NRP at the very least made to pay a genuinely useful amount.

I agree- passports frozen, driving not allowed etc. make life very very inconvenient until the men pay up. And it cannot be that hard to calculate I’m sorry it can’t. For PAYE earners it should be easy (and should be higher than it is!) and for self employed there needs to be a better way.

Yah sterilisation or celibacy- it wasn’t a workable solution to prevent unwanted pregnancies in women so why would it ever be a workable solution for men?

And sadly, the ones who don’t fit this description are few and far between.

OP made it clear she does get some funded hours, but as we know that scratches the surface.

Even if she does earn £100k, so what? This is about relative contributions from both parents

The man can choose to have a vasectomy if he doesn’t want children in the first place. Or to keep it in his pants.

Women don't really want abusive/ violent/ controlling/ lazy/ cheating men around.

It is not fact that 99.9% of men do not want children.
It is sexist stereotyping.

”Just over one-fifth (21 per cent) of childless women aged 18-34 recently polled by Pew Research Centre said they don't ever want to be parents, compared to 15 per cent of men. Conversely, 57 per cent of men said they want to have children some day, versus 45 per cent of women.”
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/02/15/among-young-adults-without-children-men-are-more-likely-than-women-to-say-they-want-to-be-parents-someday/

This is pretty much what happened in my parents’ marriage.

Stop letting him turn up at your house then he will have to do “real” parenting
Id also be scraping the leftovers in the bin in front of him before he could get a chance to eat them, before I’d feed him.

Surely you mean a bill for half the amount and that the resident parent should also have to pay back half too or opt to receive half.

💯👏🏻

It’s not my argument, it’s fact.
Statistically men don’t really care much about having children vs statistically women do care as part of their life plan.

Plus if we’re talking on this thread about men leaving their partner and kids then thats actually the minority of cases we’re discussing here.
The majority of divorces (62%-70%) are instigated by women. So one would have to assume in the majority of cases women have a financial plan to bring the kids up in the manner they want after the household income that was supporting one household now needs to support two households when filing for divorce I guess. Unless it’s all just not been thought through properly. Who knows. I read stats but I’m not a sociologist digging into it deeply.