Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to worry about managing financially after separation with two children?

209 replies

Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 11:59

DH and I are in the very early stages of separating. We have 2 primary age kids.

I've absolutely no idea how I'm going live on a single income. Please can people give my head a wobble?

I work full time, earning £46000. I work in a regulated profession (Social Work) so moving jobs won't improve pay and I haven't got the headspace for a promotion at the moment (plus there are no vacancies in the next level up).

I bring home £2600 a month. Having done a benefits calculator online I will receive £190 in child benefit, £424 UC and then, hopefully £638 in maintenance. But I'm guessing I shouldn't bank on that?

Stbex will have 50/50 custody. Is it reasonable to expect he pays half child care costs and half kids activities and needs? Or is that what maintenance is for?

We currently own and I should get around £100k equity once fees etc are taken out. The cheapest houses in my area are £300k for a 3 bed (kids are b&g, 10&8 and the houses are kitchen and living room, no extra reception room).

I could move to a cheaper area but then costs to get the children to school and my commuting costs go up significantly.

I need to buy a car as I need one for work and does DH, the current family car is his.

I'll need to buy furniture etc.

We have about £40k in savings, I'm guessing I'll get half? Even though it's all money DH got from redundancy and work shares?

Having looked at mortgages, my mortgage will be £1300 and my income will be £3214 plus maintenance.

Is £1914 enough to live off? Gas, electric, water, broadband, food, dog food & insurance, house maintenance, Christmas, kids birthdays, childcare (no non-paid support), kids clothes, uniform etc, kids hobbies? It doesn't seem like much but I'm guessing plenty of people manage?

I did look at reducing my hours, but it's half time or full time, no in-between and the income difference would be too big even accounting for reduced childcare costs.

AIBU to be worried about the finances?

OP posts:
XenoBitch · 04/08/2026 19:40

ToKittyornottoKitty · 04/08/2026 19:37

Maybe you should be angry that £46000 a year isn’t enough to live on for 1 adult and 2 kids (not even full time) in 2026, rather than benefit bashing on the thread of a woman reaching out and asking for help on a parenting site. It’s a joke that some people think it’s ok to behave this way when someone’s just asking for advice

Show quote history

It is crazy that £46k is not considered enough to live on, so someone gets UC top ups, but now someone who is considered unable to work is expected to live on just over £600pm. Make that make sense.

ToKittyornottoKitty · 04/08/2026 19:37

confusedlots · 04/08/2026 19:34

Agree. There’s no way she should be able to claim UC on that salary and if she can I can now see why this country is in the state it is in! There is a mother and father who can more than easily support their children and more, even if they are separated. Absolutely no way they should be asking for handouts from the taxpayer, this makes me so angry.

Show quote history

Maybe you should be angry that £46000 a year isn’t enough to live on for 1 adult and 2 kids (not even full time) in 2026, rather than benefit bashing on the thread of a woman reaching out and asking for help on a parenting site. It’s a joke that some people think it’s ok to behave this way when someone’s just asking for advice

GooseyDuck · 04/08/2026 19:37

The only morally dubious bit is if she’s claiming for two kids when actually if it’s 50/50, she should be claiming for one. Otherwise, it’s what she’s entitled to.

GooseyDuck · 04/08/2026 19:35

confusedlots · 04/08/2026 19:34

Agree. There’s no way she should be able to claim UC on that salary and if she can I can now see why this country is in the state it is in! There is a mother and father who can more than easily support their children and more, even if they are separated. Absolutely no way they should be asking for handouts from the taxpayer, this makes me so angry.

Show quote history

It probably doesn’t even cover her childcare bill. The country gets more from her working and claiming UC than it does from her not working and claiming UC. Can you understand that?

confusedlots · 04/08/2026 19:34

Bananacrepewithnuts · 04/08/2026 18:59

Agreed.

It's all wrong.
I'm working earning much less. Struggling to pay bills.
Her husband earns a fortune.

Takes the absolute piss.

Something is very wrong in this country.

Show quote history

Agree. There’s no way she should be able to claim UC on that salary and if she can I can now see why this country is in the state it is in! There is a mother and father who can more than easily support their children and more, even if they are separated. Absolutely no way they should be asking for handouts from the taxpayer, this makes me so angry.

Rumpledandcrumpled · 04/08/2026 19:32

Bananacrepewithnuts · 04/08/2026 19:24

My point is the ex H who earns a very good salary should be forced to ensure the needs of the ex W and the children are met.

It shouldn't fall to the tax payer.

Show quote history

And he’s only responsible for his kids, not the ex wife, marriage is not a meal ticket for life.

Rumpledandcrumpled · 04/08/2026 19:31

Bananacrepewithnuts · 04/08/2026 19:24

My point is the ex H who earns a very good salary should be forced to ensure the needs of the ex W and the children are met.

It shouldn't fall to the tax payer.

Show quote history

It doesn’t and couldn’t work like that, both parents are equally responsible for their children.

It becomes very complex if you force one to provide fully for the kids after seperation, as some people would take rhe piss. Not work, not provide anything. So it would only work if the parent with the money took full custody and gave the other visitation rights. And many don’t want that,

as parents we are equally responsible and have ro provide in our time, if the op is not able to provide for herself and her share of her children then the tax payer has to step in\

if ypu force one to pay fully then you will see them take rhe kids fully.

Bananacrepewithnuts · 04/08/2026 19:24

Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 19:18

Exactly.

I'm not sure why I shouldn't claim when I'm entitled to and my children's lives would be poorer for me not doing.

The alternative is the children live with exDH and I'm not entitled to anything. But then I'd be able to buy a smaller house and so wouldn't need any extra money.

Show quote history

My point is the ex H who earns a very good salary should be forced to ensure the needs of the ex W and the children are met.

It shouldn't fall to the tax payer.

Original poster
Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 19:18

ToKittyornottoKitty · 04/08/2026 19:01

Ex husband - she will be single when she claims. Silly to suggest OP should be penalised because she earns (and therefore pays more tax) more than you. She’s basically going to get a good chunk of her childcare covered, she’s not going to be rolling in it

Show quote history

Exactly.

I'm not sure why I shouldn't claim when I'm entitled to and my children's lives would be poorer for me not doing.

The alternative is the children live with exDH and I'm not entitled to anything. But then I'd be able to buy a smaller house and so wouldn't need any extra money.

OP posts:
ToKittyornottoKitty · 04/08/2026 19:01

Bananacrepewithnuts · 04/08/2026 18:59

Agreed.

It's all wrong.
I'm working earning much less. Struggling to pay bills.
Her husband earns a fortune.

Takes the absolute piss.

Something is very wrong in this country.

Show quote history

Ex husband - she will be single when she claims. Silly to suggest OP should be penalised because she earns (and therefore pays more tax) more than you. She’s basically going to get a good chunk of her childcare covered, she’s not going to be rolling in it

Bananacrepewithnuts · 04/08/2026 18:59

OutOfTheOtherSide · 04/08/2026 18:27

Are you definitely entitled to UC? How can someone earning well above average be entitled to tax payers money, surely that can't be right is it?

I'd question your 'raving lefty' comment if you have no idea that financially you are in a considerably better position than some 2 parent families, let alone a single parent family.

Show quote history

Agreed.

It's all wrong.
I'm working earning much less. Struggling to pay bills.
Her husband earns a fortune.

Takes the absolute piss.

Something is very wrong in this country.

Original poster
Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 18:48

OutOfTheOtherSide · 04/08/2026 18:27

Are you definitely entitled to UC? How can someone earning well above average be entitled to tax payers money, surely that can't be right is it?

I'd question your 'raving lefty' comment if you have no idea that financially you are in a considerably better position than some 2 parent families, let alone a single parent family.

Show quote history

This has been covered many times on this thread now. Yes, I'm entitled to UC.

I didn't say I'm not better off than a large portion of other single parents. I wasn't asking how I do compared to others. I am asking for advice on how I live on the numbers I have.

OP posts:
OutOfTheOtherSide · 04/08/2026 18:27

Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 12:32

So I use the car for my days in the office/ on visits but I have 2 home working paperwork days.

The point of the thread is I'm worried about living on a single income. I was surprised but pleased I could still get UC. I'm a raving lefty if that helps? I think more people should be eligible for benefits. And not just because I now need to claim them.

Show quote history

Are you definitely entitled to UC? How can someone earning well above average be entitled to tax payers money, surely that can't be right is it?

I'd question your 'raving lefty' comment if you have no idea that financially you are in a considerably better position than some 2 parent families, let alone a single parent family.

ToKittyornottoKitty · 04/08/2026 18:23

Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 16:56

Well, one evening a week and one weekend day, something like that.

And it's the quality of care, not volume that matters.

Show quote history

Volume of course also matters! Have you calculated if you could afford to only have the kids 5% of the time? You’d obviously just have your wage, but would have to pay hundreds every month in maintenance in addition to budgeting for uniforms, birthdays, days out etc. Financially you may not be better off. Also if he earns so much does he not do long hours? Would the kids not end up in childcare longer?

onlygeese · 04/08/2026 17:49

Quality of care is important but so is time, time to just be in the same space. To pick up small snippets of their life here and there. Spending time with you is going to matter more than after school clubs.

Original poster
Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 17:38

XenoBitch · 04/08/2026 17:13

They may look at what you spent your money on before then to check it was not deprivation of capital.

Show quote history

I know. I work in adult social care I'm well versed in deprivation of assets. Nothings I've listed above could be remotely considered deprivation of assets.

OP posts:
XenoBitch · 04/08/2026 17:13

Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 16:42

There won't be any savings when I apply.

Show quote history

They may look at what you spent your money on before then to check it was not deprivation of capital.

Original poster
Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 16:56

onlygeese · 04/08/2026 16:51

I think you need decent legal advice. The starting point is that assets are split 50/50 and that includes pensions, cars and property. Different things impact this but if he isn't sharing his pension then you need more in some other area. It is worth paying for decent legal financial advice to ensure a fair settlement.
As a side note no kids activity is worth them only seeing a parent 5% of the time, as a SW you must actually know this.

Well, one evening a week and one weekend day, something like that.

And it's the quality of care, not volume that matters.

OP posts:
ToKittyornottoKitty · 04/08/2026 16:54

Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 16:41

I get where you are coming from, but that's the law, not me making shit up.

And they won't be on free school meals - the entitlement to that is additional to UC claims.

Edited
Show quote history

No everyone on UC can get free school meals from September

Original poster
Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 16:51

Bananacrepewithnuts · 04/08/2026 16:47

That's lucky then.
You earn nearly 200k between you and there won't be any savings.

Show quote history

We currently have £40k in savings, £20k of which will be mine. It'll be spent on stamp duty £5000, solicitor costs £2000, moving costs £500, car £5000, insurance and tax £600. Which leaves me with £6900. I then need to buy stuff for the new house as we dont currently have 2 of everything. If I can buy a reliable car cheaper, then I will.

I'm lucky that I have the savings to spend on the necessary items above I'll give you that much.

Edit: and it'll be less than that given the legal advice everyone is recommending I get.

OP posts:
onlygeese · 04/08/2026 16:51

I think you need decent legal advice. The starting point is that assets are split 50/50 and that includes pensions, cars and property. Different things impact this but if he isn't sharing his pension then you need more in some other area. It is worth paying for decent legal financial advice to ensure a fair settlement.
As a side note no kids activity is worth them only seeing a parent 5% of the time, as a SW you must actually know this.

TheBoolahBus · 04/08/2026 16:51

Bet he doesn’t want you touching his pension. You need to get proper financial advice here not 50/50 to be seen to be fair to him.

Bananacrepewithnuts · 04/08/2026 16:47

Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 16:42

There won't be any savings when I apply.

Show quote history

That's lucky then.
You earn nearly 200k between you and there won't be any savings.

Bananacrepewithnuts · 04/08/2026 16:46

Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 16:41

I get where you are coming from, but that's the law, not me making shit up.

And they won't be on free school meals - the entitlement to that is additional to UC claims.

Edited
Show quote history

No. The rules on free school meals change in September

Original poster
Therewegothen · 04/08/2026 16:42

XenoBitch · 04/08/2026 16:22

Your savings will make you ineligible for UC.

There won't be any savings when I apply.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread