To think stepparents should not be financially responsible for other people's children?

I’m with you OP but you can’t post on MN expecting reasonable responses when it comes to step parents, unfortunately.

It’s interesting on this forum because if a mother posts saying that her new partner won’t contribute towards the cost of her kids, the replies unanimously state that the new man is a complete arsehole and a red flag.

However, if a woman posts on here that she’s contributing towards the costs of running her boyfriend’s household the replies state that the boyfriend is a user and she should ‘run for the hills’.

Try posting on Reddit and you will get more reasonable responses.

Would you see it the same if the child lived with you?

I kind of agree. However I think that when you live together, you are naturally financially responsible for whoever is in the house. However when it comes to more longer term things like savings and even holidays and clubs, I’d say that falls on the biological parents and it’s an optional choice for the step parents to get involved. I do think that all children should be raised with the same lifestyle though. And that might be tough if the biological parents maybe isn’t as well off or able to contribute as much. It can cause a lot of resentment.

The bit that would really bother me would be the expectation to subsidise a partner paying more maintenance either directly from the stepmum’s income topping it up, or her paying more on household expenses so that her partner has more money to send in maintenance.

Oh so he massively benefitted then didn’t he given it is now partly his.
which takes it away from your children. so he benefits and your children lose out on inheritance

and how does it work as a marital asset now if you die first does he just prioritise his own child?

What would happen if you decided to have a career break to care for another shared child? Or if you couldn't work due to ill health?

This.
How could you possibly treat any child in your family financially differently to the others, for any reason? Imagine the issues that would cause them then & in future - lack of self worth, feeling “othered”, or having more than the biological family members & so a sense of arrogance, entitlement

, or that only financial values matter?
Let alone the complexities of how to calculate which child was worth what value in particular circumstances!
Awful.
And I say that as a mother and step-mother.

This thread is far too long to read it all, but thought I'd pop on it to explain what happens on divorce.

In the event of divorcve a step parent might be ordered by the court to pay child maintenance to any step children who have been treated as children of the family - in other words their main home was with the step-parent.

The court will also take in to account whether the other parent is paying maintenance - the likelihood being if they are paying maintenance and the step-parent has a similar income then they are unlikely to have to pay anything.

However, the rationale behind it is that marrying someone means you assume a financial inter-dependency. If you carry a step-child financially during the marriage then you cannot wash your hands of the obligation by getting divorced.

that's a ridiculous comment - many of us are saying we are the higher earners and very happy to pay for stepchildren

The irony is of course that he probably does
in some ways pay more because her children exist / they must have one assumes a 4 bed house that wouldn’t be needed, how are utilities split etc/food bills or is she paying more

not never! we are blended - a kid apiece and one shared and we are one family. husband & I would each always say we have three children and do things for and with them equitably, including financially.

it would never occur to me that my husband should pay for my stepson or I should pay for my son (his stepson) separately for anything.

Mrsnothingthanks · Today 12:23
** There is no legal financial responsibility for any step-parent.
----------

Well that's not new information.

How about moral

How does that work if you had a child with a wealthy ex who pays for fancy holidays cars uni, flats etc and you have a second child with your husband and a family income of less than 50 k.

Surely your second child has a far less wealthy lifestyle.
Do you expect your ex to cough up luxuries for that one also? Or tell him not to provide for his own child Or if not how do you even it out?

I’ve just had a chat with dh about this over lunch.

He actually laughed at the idea that he wouldn’t have financially provided for my ds. Ds lived with us (saw his dad two weekends a month, then one, then less as he got older, Ds dad paid £300 a month maintance but we lived in London, it all went in the one pot we have and didn’t go far).

He said he met me, I told him I had a child. He said he could have backed out there and then if he wasn’t up for step parent hood if we got serious.

He said it never occurred to him that our lives would be any other way - he would work to provide for our family, all three of us. He said he’s genuinely never questioned it.

He sees ds as his son - absolutely no difference in the way he feels about him to how he feels about the two children we have together. He also said, you’d have to be a massive prick to live with a child, day in, day out and not treat them as your own in every way. He knew that when he married me, that’s what he was signing up for.

I agree to an extent but OP's take on it is a bit smug and lacking in self awareness. It's very easy i imagine to breeze around extolling the virtues of your financial independence when you are the higher earner and the bio dad actively coparents and contributes.

That wont be the same for all families where mum can't work FT or earns a lot less, perhaps because she's had more children with husband 2 and they agreed that set up. And/or some bio dads aren't on the scene or don't pay. Should those kids have a lower standard of living than the new members of the family?

I have no skin in the game as I have no stepkids nor are my kids stepparented. But even I can see that drawing a harsh line could be very unpleasant for kids in blended families where their mum hasnt got much of her own money.

So what would happen if the other biological parent is useless? Would you see your children being treated differently to any children you have together?

Because not all children have a biological father in their life, your comment is very naive!! My daughter's "dad" walked out and didnt care less, my husband who has been in their lives for 15 years is who we all class as their dad and pays as much towards them as i do

I think the family courts treat biological parents as primarily responsible for finances but they will make an order against a step parent in some circumstances where it is in the child's best interests and where the step parent treats the child as a child of the family. In practice, I'd say it is a matter of choice for each family to decide.what works for them.

I don’t see how that could practically work irrespective of whether there’s any legal responsibility. You’re going to spend $ on step kids.

Not unless a couple lives separately and keeps finances separate - or the one with children has a substantially higher income so I’ve they’ve paid for the kids there’s an equal amount of money left for everything else.

Would you expect your ex husbands wife or girlfriend to support you? Be for real. Its not up to someone else to ensure you're supported in life. Your ex husband should absolutely fill in if you cant but thats a parent, not a step parent.

To those with children- being in a relationship with someone is not a ticket to get them to pay for stuff or help with the cost of raising a child, you should be able to cover your 50% your own self.

Juding by the responses in this thread there is an incredible amount of people ( women) who think it’s someone else’s responsibility to pay for their kids!