What happens when not married parents spilt up to cms or support when one person is extremely wealthy?

[Whatif1]

So obviously the legal protection is not there, property cannot be split etc but if they share 50/50 custody is there any financial support expected from the wealthy partner or anything at all legally?

Except I literally did choose it which is what I've just said?

You've clearly not been on mumsnet very long because it's really not very supportive at all, definitely not unilateral support when you're not necessarily completely innocent in the situation anyway.

I know you can't change anything now but obviously some of your decisions have had an impact on your situation.

Why not have a civil partnership then?
You think the law should be changed because your ex didn't protect you?
He chose not to. Simple as that.

@Chocolatebuttonns

I'm not aksing for "judgement or criticism" of the situation. It is what it is. I'm aksing for personal experience of what is provided or other experience of what monetary support can be available.

You are desperate to make this personal and emotional.

As are the few others who are judgemental.

I'm not making it personal.

"I know you can't change anything now but your decisions"

You want a reaction. You have no idea what the personal circumstances are.. They are not relevant to the query at all.

And the comments aren't not contributing. I've tried to ignore you but you are persisting.

I don't want a reaction. What I said is a fact. It doesn't matter to me whether you agree with it. It's a fact regardless.

I would say they are relevant but it's clear you want people to side with you and feel sorry for you and say what a shit your ex is (may well be true I don't know!) And that hasn't happened.

Youve had advice.

That's absolutely ridiculous I've made barely any comments at all, I've tried to keep it factual and financial.. It's you putting all this into my thread, you want me to comment further...

I don't need anyone to side with me and I thank the helpful people who have actual given the advice I've asked for..
I ask again how are your comments helpful?. Why are you repeatedly on here. Why not go to aibu if you want to lay judgment down and character assassinations.

I'm not judging you..I've clearly said I had done the same thing.

I'll bow out because you've obviously got some real issues with the facts here.

At last 👍

It’s misogyny 101 - from men and from the women who made vows to obey them. A very wealthy man is being an outrageous dick, so it must be something the woman did wrong. Made the wrong choice. Wasn’t savvy enough. Lived “off him”. Her “free ride” is over. I find it appalling. The (usually) men behind these cases are guilty of financial abuse. It typically comes with coercive control. Obviously no woman would put herself willingly in this position. He’d have made her all
sorts of promises and been making excuses not to marry so he didn’t have to “risk”’his precious stuff. Meanwhile she’s supporting him to earn a fuckton while she does all the unpaid labour at home, birthing and raising a child and no doubt also working her arse off in a career that he’s encouraged her to give up so he doesn’t need to bother himself with nursery drop off etc.
Thank god most of the civil world woke up to this disparity - and not just in cases with the wealthy, but everyone - with family law acts back in the 70s. FIFTY YEARS AGO. So the chances of women being exploited are greatly reduced and the playing field is sort of evened. Sort of. But no, can’t possibly change the cohabitation law here in case some 20 year old criminal moves in with an 80 year old, claims they’re a couple and takes her to the cleaners. It. Just. Doesn’t. Happen.

And for what it’s worth, decent men in this position encourage their de-facto spouse to have some sort of legal protection with a civil partnership, by putting them on the mortgage, putting a property in their name etc.

But there’s a very simple way to avoid this and that’s to not have children with a man without first getting married.

You Defs need to call a few solicitors and ask if you have any legal case. Unfortunately we still live in a man’s world. I completely side that you have not been able to excel within a career due to raising a child and being a “homemaker” however even after 11 years you never think about the what if it doesn’t work.. and for most unmarried partners they are looked after at home (financially). Physically you haven't added any finances into your living situation for how ever many years. If I was you I would see what work I could do over time on the week you do not have custardy and flexi hours when you do have custardy. I’m assuming partner had a good job and finances when you met and it was just the given you would stay at home and raise children. Upon planning for a family it should have been discussed then IMO. Worth a look to see you may be entitled to a council property too. Please don’t see this as harsh. Sending love and strength but I think you now need to go out and look after number 1. For future this is why we need to teach our girls not to rely on men financially as most don’t want to get married now and that’s the only legal way to ensure “SOME” sort of security.

@EMUKE most unmarried partners ARE NOT “looked after at home financially”?! Half the cohabitating population are not married. How do you know she didn’t add anything financially? What an assumption. Also, why is the unpaid labour (prob on top of a paid job) including birthing a child and childcare viewed as worthless? Its hundreds of hours work, lost career prospects, lost pension, while he is untouched. He’d obviously promised her security and decided to not follow through.

This really is not about not relying on men. It’s about men not screwing over the people who can get pregnant and historically have lower earning capacity while they have their cake and eat it. It about creating a fair society where this imbalance of power can’t be so easily exploited.

And that is precisely why marriage and civil partnerships were created-for protection.

I knew this would happen when straight civil partnerships were introduced. Because people ( especially high earning men) don't think "marriage is a piece of paper." They know full well that it isn't. They don't want to share assets. A man who would rather keep 5 empty houses to himself rather than adequately house the mother of his children will find ways to get round any cohabiting agreement. The men in this situation are looking at 'what if we split up - she'll take half my stuff', so why aren't women thinking ' what if we split up,' I'll be left destitute? Women need to get wise to it. No point wishing things were different or we lived in a different country. At the moment, it isnt different. Unmarried partnerships with children are something like 5 times more likely to fail than marriage.

Yeah straight CP was never going to do anything to address the issues being discussed on this thread really.

For those saying the CMS calculator gives a contribution for 50:50 care, it doesn't

The CMS calculator doesn't work for 50:50 care because, as others have pointed out, there is no maintenance payable on 50:50 (unless there is extreme wealth and you go to court for a variance)

The button you are all checking, which says something like "more than 3 nights per week", is for cases where it's often more than 3 nights per week, but still less than 50:50 across the year

@AndSoFinally You're absolutely correct. I did many years of 50/50 and can also confirm this.