Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think I shouldn't be paying maintenance as well as DH?

468 replies

Mumoftwo88 · 26/04/2013 21:31

My DH has a daughter with his exW aged 8 and we have two children together aged 2 and 4. His exW claims maintenance from him and he pays it every month without fail at £250.00. She has recently just become unemployed and whilst I sympathise with her I cannot understand why she is now claiming that he should be paying more and if needs be it should be paid through my earnings. (Her words)

She seems to think that because our household has two incomes coming in then we are wadded. We're not. From my earnings I have the mortgage to pay, bills to pay for this household, a food shop to pay for, a car to run, and 3 children to provide for, including DSD when she stays here.

And I have a family holiday to pay for. I'd like to think we can have some luxuries without some woman trying to screw money out of me just because I happen to be the partner of her exH.

Now don't get me wrong I know it is important that DSD is provided for, but that is where my DH's maintenance payments come in and I make sure she is ok when she is here. At the end of the day I'm not some meal ticket to this woman.

Aibu?

OP posts:
IneedAsockamnesty · 30/04/2013 13:32

Niceguy.

In that situation they have two adults to work together to resolve it both can help each other out making it easier to obtain work or minimise cost both put in joint effort to fix it because that's what couples do.

needaholidaynow · 30/04/2013 13:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

needaholidaynow · 30/04/2013 13:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Dahlen · 30/04/2013 14:00

Well at least you're honest about it. Many more aren't. But honesty is meaningless unless it is accompanied by honest actions - which means not ever becoming a part of your SDs life in a way that is going to create a huge hole should you leave. It sounds like you've struck that balance. I still think it's cold, but it's a lot more sincere than the sort of scenario I or socking described, which is a lot more common and damaging.

No one can manufacture love; it it's not there, it's not there. But we are all in control of our behaviour and we should - as adults - have a realisation of our own limitations. My personal feeling is that if you are not capable of assuming a childhood-long responsibility to a child belonging to your partner, you should never progress to the co-habitation/marriage stage. It would solve a lot of heartache for all concerned.

olgaga · 30/04/2013 14:38

For goodness sake, anyone would think child maintenance covers everything - it doesn't, it just helps towards the cost of raising children.

If the child's mother is short of money through difficult and unusual circumstances such as illness, loss of employment (as in this case) and possibly delays in the receipt of benefits why on earth shouldn't she ask the child's father for help?

Any parent with a shred of decency would expect to be the first port of call in such circumstances, and would happily do whatever they could to help maintain their child's standard of living.

Crinkle77 · 30/04/2013 14:55

YANBU why should you pay for his children out of your wages?

KellyElly · 30/04/2013 15:08

olgaga My thoughts exactly! Same as these 'generous' benefits that fund a 'lifestyle'. They cover the absolute basics.

olgaga · 30/04/2013 21:26

Yes I do wonder what kind of "lifestyle" this woman is supposed to have been enjoying.

A working single parent of a five year old, whose father contributes the bare minimum to her upbringing...

Someone who has never before asked for more money (the OP would no doubt have told us if that was the case).

I don't imagine her life is exactly luxurious.

I wonder if she has flat screen TV! Grin

DamnBamboo · 30/04/2013 21:52

If the child's mother is short of money through difficult and unusual circumstances such as illness, loss of employment (as in this case) and possibly delays in the receipt of benefits why on earth shouldn't she ask the child's father for help?

Agree with this entirely! But isn't this about the OP having to pay, rather than her DH?

The OP is not responsible for paying any extra directly to ex. Paying for extra's for the little girl sure, but not a direct increase to the her husband ex-wife.

Why on earth should this come down to her?

olgaga · 30/04/2013 22:25

Well ultimately it's not down to her.

The point being made by the ex (as I read it) was that OP and the DH are a two income household - and currently the ex has no income because she has lost her job.

The request wasn't made directly to the OP - it was made to the DH. The ex pointed out that he was in a lot better financial situation than she is because of the dual income.

I think the OP has taken this all rather personally, when ultimately it is the welfare of the child which is paramount.

I still don't see the problem with asking for help from the father of your chld if you need it. Even if it does involve pointing out that he enjoys a dual income when you have none.

I don't imagine for a moment that this was an easy request to make - it's not implied that it's a regular occurrence.

Andro · 30/04/2013 22:49

and if needs be it should be paid through my earnings. (Her words)

olgaga - I would imagine that ^^this is what OP has objected to...and what she is taking personally.

DamnBamboo · 30/04/2013 22:59

The request wasn't made directly to the OP - it was made to the DH. The ex pointed out that he was in a lot better financial situation than she is because of the dual income

No the household, is in a better financial situation, not the DH. The household, which is funded in part by the OP

I still don't see the problem with asking for help from the father of your chld if you need it. Even if it does involve pointing out that he enjoys a dual income when you have none

She isn't asking from the DH though, she's asking from the OP.

Not on and not the OPs problem.

IneedAsockamnesty · 30/04/2013 23:35

All we know is that is how the op's dh phrased it to the op.

allnewtaketwo · 01/05/2013 07:19

I still do come back to - if this was about an NRP being made redundant, there would be a very strong focus in the thread on the following points:

  • his redundancy money, and needing to pay towards the child with that
  • does he not have any savings to contribute towards the child
  • his immediate need to find alternative employment ASAP to pay for the child

Yet when it's a mother who has become unemployed, these aspects aren't mentioned. It's expected that the answer is more from the NRP household, without even asking these questions

olgaga · 01/05/2013 07:56

not the DH

The DH is the father.

The ex is pointing out that the child's father's financial circumstances are more favourable than hers, and asking the child's father for help.

There's nothing wrong with that.

The child's welfare is more important than the OP's sense of outrage at the request.

olgaga · 01/05/2013 08:02

Yet when it's a mother who has become unemployed, these aspects aren't mentioned.

Because in this case it's simply not relevant!

allnewtaketwo · 01/05/2013 08:10

Why are none of these aspects relevant? I may have missed the bit where the OP said the mother didn't receive redundancy?

Why is it not relevant if she has savings? Why is it not relevant for her to find alternative employment?

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 01/05/2013 08:19

It's been said several times on the thread that people would feel differently if the RP wasn't looking for a new job.

Binkybix · 01/05/2013 09:47

See this is where I don't get MN. The majority of threads about household finances lean towards all money being family money, rather than money earned belonging to each person who earns it (to the point where people question the validity of partnerships where this isn't the case).

So why in this case is it seen as OPs money and not family money? Seems contradictory to me.

Having said that, I'd bristle at the request too, but I don't think I would get involved with someone who has young children because not sure I'd have it in me to do the job thoroughly and properly, and agree it's not fair to duck in and out, even if you're not the biological parent. I've never actually been in that situation though, so you never know.

IneedAsockamnesty · 01/05/2013 09:58

Allnew,

I have seen many a thread where a dad pays £5 pw and the mum is called money grabbing for asking further contributions.i have seen many where dads are given much more leeway stuff that gets mums flamed gets brushed under the carpet when done by dads.

I don't know how frequent take the bastard for everything threads are because I have never seen them but I do know if I had a none resident child and got made redundant nobody would have to go after me for anything because I would offer it.

allnewtaketwo · 01/05/2013 12:36

I'm not talking about "take the b* for everything threads", I'm talking specifically about threads where the NRP has lost his job and so maintenance towards the child falls. Those threads will focus on the points I mention, namely his redundancy money, his savings, and his need to find any other job quickly.

gotthemoononastick · 01/05/2013 12:54

Sock is a very wonderful human being....unusual nowadays and really hope there is such a thing as Karma to reward her!!

olgaga · 01/05/2013 13:05

Well why wouldn't they allnew? In a situation like that it's a nightmare for the RP if maintenance they rely on suddenly stops.

Just as it must be a nightmare for this ex who has lost her job and needs help, and has asked the child's father.

The whole point of redundancy money is to help you make ends meet during a period of unemployment and no pay. If you have dependent children you should obviously make provision for them out of that.

There's no difference - a child's welfare should be the main concern of any reasonable parent. If a parent was in a position to keep up maintenance payments despite losing their job then clearly that's what they should do, and presumably in the threads you refer to, if there is a redundancy settlement, then people have rightly pointed out that there is no excuse for not paying maintenance.

But we don't know if the ex was made redundant. All we know is she has "just become unemployed" - there is no mention of a redundancy settlement. There's no mention of the ex refusing to find work either.

All we know is the ex has asked the child's father for help because she has "just become unemployed".

Which seems perfectly understandable to me!

allnewtaketwo · 01/05/2013 13:34

I was, as I said, contrasting it with NRP unemployment. I've never once read a thread on mn whereby an NRP would be advised to ask the PWC for a contribution towards the child's upkeep in their care, if the NRP had lost their job. The NRP would just be expected to suck it up, use savings or find another job - not to request money from the other parent.

olgaga · 01/05/2013 14:48

I've never once read a thread on mn whereby an NRP would be advised to ask the PWC for a contribution towards the child's upkeep in their care, if the NRP had lost their job.

No, you wouldn't - because usually the NRP will stop paying maintenance in those circumstances anyway. Isn't that enough of a "contribution"?

Swipe left for the next trending thread