DH spending our joint money on his DCs

[ilikelongnaps]

I just want to post here to see if IABU before i tackle this with DH. I'm on mat leave atm receiving stat mat pay so things are tighter than usual. DH and I have a joint acc which we use for our DDs things (although if i'm buying her something not necessarily needed eg a new dress I'll use my own account. We put in an equal amount of money to the joint acc and i like to keep a buffer in there.

Xmas is coming and bearing in mind things are tight this year I've been so careful with buying for our dd. It's her first xmas and wont even notice that she has n't got stacks of gifts so i'm not bothered really but if i could i would have got her a few extra toys etc. I've bought her things with money from my own account and DH hasn't contributed to this.

Today i was checking our joint account online and its ALOT lower than I had expected. It turns out DH has been using the our joint account to buy his DDs bits and pieces eg among other things £30 spent in New Look and cash withdrawn here and there when he's been with them and almost £25 in mcds, all of which he told me about but I assumed it would be him paying out of his account, not ours. I know he's bought his DDs big xmas gifts this year that he said has left him short of money but now i'm stuck with hardly any money in the account to buy dd nappies and milk etc. and we were going to buy an xmas tree and a dd's first stocking.

It's not fair that he knows I'm not earning what I was and i'm going back to work in the new year but i was so careful and not done alot of things with dd that i would have liked to while ive been on mat leave and felt guilty about taking money from the joint account for 'fun' things and not bought any clothes for myself (I wouldn't spend £30 in New Look on myself atm as i wouldn't be able to justify it) and it just seems a bit unfair that just because he's low in his account he can just use our money to treat his dds which i would have no problem with if we could afford it but we can't.

So that was long! I guess i'm ranting and ordinarily i wouldn't mind him using our joint acc to pay for stuff for his dds as long as our dd was stocked in nappies and formula which i think are more important than a 10yo getting some leggings!

[MrsTerrysChocolateOrange]

Just trying to point out why it is not a waste to spend a little on a baby, Jenai. Glad to have annoyed you.

[Arisbottle]

We have five children in total and careful planning has meant that our earlier children have never really gone without because of the others , certainly not in a tangible way that a child would notice. Partly because we have never really lavished our children with lots of stuff even when we could afford to .

[EMS23]

And this is why AIBU is no place for step parenting discussions.
Same old shit, same crap cliches:

"You knew he had kids when you married him"
"Well I wouldn't have children if I couldn't afford for kids from 1st marriage not to be affected"
"So you don't want your money spent on his kids".

Seriously OP, next time you have a question like this, come to the step parenting board. You'll get much more sensible replies.

[Viviennemary]

If his money is going into the account then I can't see why he should not use the money from this account to buy presents for his children. But you need to know what is going out of the account regardless of what the money is for. It might be easier to have separate accounts if it's going to cause friction. If my money was going into an account I would expect to be able to spend it on buying presents for my family and friends.

[Arisbottle]

EMS23 I am a step parent . Why does my view not count?

[EMS23]

Arisbottle your views absolutely do count, my apologies if it sounded like I was saying they don't.
But can you see that some of the replies from others, who seem to have no actual experience of step parenting, have trotted out the lines I put in quotations? I see this time and again when the step factor comes into the equation and its infuriating because it muddies the waters and can derail a thread.

[merrymouse]

I don't think its really about step parents/step children. The problem is that you thought the joint account was for necessities, excluding presents, and you have planned very carefully how that money will be spent because currently money is tight.

You don't need to attribute blame - he made a mistake, spending money that you don't really have. You do need to talk to him about money, so that he understands what is available to be spent.

[ginnybag]

OP, your husband feels guilty about having a third child and is trying to be a Disney Dad, spoiling his first DD's rotten rather than taking the much harder route of really making them believe that h loves them and always will and that they will always have a home with him.

He's already spent most of £800 on them for Christmas - by all logic, then, where's his £300-odd quid for your DD? He has 3 children now, not two, and should be treating them all equally.

Even if you agreed that he should, perhaps, spend say 80% of the budget on the older two, he would still 'owe' around £100 to his other DD. How much has he spent on her?

Instead it sounds like you're bearing all the responsibility for your shard child, whilst he bribes spoils the other two into liking him.

He's then taken this even further, by spending yet more money on them, from money allocated to run your home.

Did he have a £1000 to spend on Christmas, after all essentials, including living costs for all his children were taken care of? Did you? If you didn't, has he been saving all year, or do you not having equal spending money at all?

[OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos]

Ginny, treating children equally does not mean spending the same amount on them! As long as they have what they need, it is ridiculous to spend the same amount of money on children just for the sake of being equal.

EMS23, what makes you assume that some of the people saying things that you disagree with have no experience of step parenting?

There would not be more sensible replies on the step parenting board I don't think, I read things on there and it scares me! I am very glad my ex has a girlfriend that he's not that into and not a wife that doesn't see how important our children are.

[IceBergJam]

I see some people are completely clueless when it comes to stepfamilies. Glad it's only on MN.

You are not BU. That account was for essetials for your DD specifically. For nappies etc. He spent it unnecessary items. You need to reclarify with him what the money is for.

We have a joint account that covers food, bills for the whole household etc then our own private accounts for our own spending. I have two stepchildren who live with us 50/50 and am not finacially responsible for them. Additionals, above the basics (food etc) is paid for by the parents. I do however often give money for college bits, lunch or take out to dinner, holidays etc. I do not expect to fork out for a car, uniform, new shoes etc. They have parents. If DH was made redundant obviously things will change.

We have a DD. From my own money I buy
Her what I fancy and have set up a savings account I pay into. It is up to my stepchildrens parents to do this for their children should they wish.

This works for us because our wage is nearly equal.

[MasterOfTheChristmasDisaster]

What ginny said.

Yes, it would be daft to spend the same amount on a baby; however that money could be put into a savings account for his third DD.

[maddening]

The thing is as a family they don't have enough to take the dds on shopping trips and have a massive present - he could of scaled down the presents and had the days out or vica versa - they have to budget and he went and spent it and now they don't have enough money - the step parent is a red herring as it's really just about op's dh not budgeting properly and leaving them short.

[EMS23]

Outraged quite often, posters will say if they are a step parent or grew up as a step child etc but yes, I take your point and accept I could well be wrong.
A while back there was a thread about maintenance that got completely derailed by a few posters who had an anti step family agenda, IMO.
Well, actually, it's my opinion that some of them had an anti step family agenda and it is fact that one of them did as she admitted that firstly she had no direct experience of step parenting and secondly she was anti step families. I'm afraid my view is clouded by memory of that thread as it showed me that as a step parent, sometimes it won't matter what I do or say, I will just always be 'the baddie' in someone's eyes.

[CaHoHoHootz]

Yikes, what will happen the DSD's go to university???

This is such a difficult situation. I can see it from both sides. OP's DD shouldn't go short but she is only one so won't really care about presents. On the other hand the DSD's are 'shortchanged' on having their Dad around and are at the age where they like things . However, it is obviously very wrong for the OP to struggle to afford things while the DSD's get IPads.
It was daft of the OP's DH not to discuss any of this with the OP but I think this is a tricky AIBU

[Arisbottle]

But EMS I have trotted out some of those views that you object to.

I agree entirely with posters that say a lack of communication is a problem here, with stepfamilies you have to communicate more not less .

It is the iPads that make this a different matter. If I were to say to my husband that we would not be able to take his son out for the day to buy an item of clothing and a cheap fast food meal because we could not afford for him to do that and us have a baby , I know he would have said that we could not afford a baby. However if he said that we could not afford to have a baby because he wanted to buy his son outlandish gifts that would be a different manner. However we have never been the type to buy huge presents so his son would not expect them anyway .

I am a step parent so have no interest in casting them as the baddies however it was made very clear to me when I met DH that whenever we made a decision we would have to factor in his stepson. That until his stepson started school that most of his money would be handed over to his ex. It was probably at that time that I realised I had found a keeper.

[wewereherefirst]

Your DH has been the 'doting part-time parent' who has lavished money on his children from his first relationship, while giving fuck all thought about the baby he has at home. Who has needs NOT wants. £25 fucking quid in McDonalds is stupid. How the hell do you spend that much on shite?

Id be livid at DH if he had frittered our 'essentials' money away. YANBU.

[OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos]

Maybe part of this problem is whether you consider clothes and treat time with the non resident children 'essential' or not.

Personally, I would consider them essential. Not more essential to getting food and nappies for the baby, but they are, in my opinion, as important.

OP hasn't actually come back to say that her baby is actually going to go without anything she needs, but the way I see it, is that Christmas is expensive when you have children. This isn't a normal month for most of us, we all feel like we don't have enough money in December. So DH is a bit short because he rightly bought presents for his children, which made him feel it was acceptable to spend 'essentials money' on essentials like spending time with his children and buying them clothes. And as long as the baby has what it needs and is happy, I don't see the problem.

[OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos]

I would also like to be able to say that taking them to Mc Donald's seems like a nice cheap and easy thing to do to make his children happy and to be able to spend some time alone with them, but I have NO idea how you go about spending £25 in Mc Donald's for two children and one adult.

[ginnybag]

I agree that treating equally does not mean spending equally - it would be ridiculous to spend on a baby what you would on 2 older children.

But, the OP's husband seems to equate stuff with love and therefore, should be getting equal stuff for all three.

Frankly, yes, a weekend away for all five of them would have been a far more sensible use of the bloody money than Ipads, Mcd's and tat clothes. It would have given the two older girls what they actually need and want - time with their sister and time and attention from Dad.

Ask him this, OP - would he have bought such lavish presents had he still been living with them?

My Dad spends silly amounts on me, still, but very little time with me, and knows nothing about me, and never did. It was fun, as a kid, to have this figure swooping on and pouring stuff at me.... but it was my Step Dad, who spent very little actual cash - I think I recall the odd cinema trip - who helped shaped the person I am,and my relationships with my siblings, and he did that by teaching me the value of things, and having boundaries, sharing interests, and, yes, by including me in family holidays with my brother and sister.

[RacHoHoHog]

I agree with ginny I find this thread very interesting.

Nobody has answered my post from earlier, what if the op spent the joint money on treats for her Dd which meant her dp couldn't pay the maintenance?

[timeforachangebaby]

Its easy to spend £25 in MacDonalds on 3 adult sized meals, plus McFlurries etc.

I don't think of MacDonalds as a cheap meal, its cheaper to go to our local pub.

[DoingitOnTheRoofTopWithSanta]

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddo I am very glad my ex has a girlfriend that he's not that into and not a wife that doesn't see how important our children are.

By realize how important they are you mean you want her to financially contribute her own money to your children?

[OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos]

Of course I don't mean want her to contribute her own money to my children.

What I mean is that I'm glad my Ex's finances are not so tied up with another person that he could ever find himself in a situation where he had to justify spending his money on our children.

[mercibucket]

With no experience of step-parenting I have to say how surprised I am that so many people think the new partner should be contributing financially to the upbringing of step-children. I'd always just assumed the parents were responsible for paying for their own children. How is CSA calculated? On the parent's income or the joint family income?
As I understand it, the op's dh has his own money and the 'joint account' is really just an account for paying joint bills and for their own, joint, child. Presumably the dh pays for his other children out of his own account?

[DoingitOnTheRoofTopWithSanta]

But that's what is happening. They each have an account and a joint account. Their shared pot is going to the step children. His money is his money and their money is his money.


I am amazed that you think going out to McDonalds is equally important to a baby having food though!.
The dad can take his kids to a park if they are skint for essential time.