AIBU to expect a Mother of older teens to go out and worK?

[doglover17]

One child well into their teens, walks to school. Shared 50/50 care with Father (ex). Lives off child maintenance, spousal, tax credits and child benefits. Has had a few part time jobs in the past but never sticks at them. Now declares they should not have to work. Is it unreasonable to expect them to find more independence through finding employment? If so why? And outside of this scenario, what sort of case would make it unreasonable?

You can't bankrupt your family because you're supporting his lazy ex. Tell her to get stuffed. The teenager will cope.

I'm thinking, was it initially in his interest that she didn't work?

But even if so,a lot has changed, that lifestyle has gone.

I think that he needs to go to court and get properly organised.

And she move away to spite him?

With what money?

And supporting herself how when she got there??!!

It is utterly ridiculous and unfair for a grown adult to be supported by other adults unless all concerned agree.

Jesus Christ, only on Mumsnet would this be considered OK.

When does the child turn 18?

What I don't understand is why your DP felt the need to make these sort of longterm agreements. Was he unfaithful and she the injured party?

It just doesn't make sense if she's got marketable skills to 'keep' her.

Was the financial settlement negotiated by a lawyer, or did they agree it between themselves?

I wonder what the advice would be, if your dp went to visit a lawyer now about the situation.

The thing is though, this is your partners mess and it comes across to me that he is every bit as bad as his ex, as he is willing to live off your earnings while he diverts his income elsewhere. He now has two children and a partner to think of and it's unfair to prioritise his ex.

I don't actually think it matters if he cheated or whatever! You still don't get to live off someone else for the rest of your life because your husband did the dirty.

Stop she will not be claiming JSA as she is not actively seeking a job

The benefits the OP referred to obviously meant child benefit and probably tax credits.

OP I do think your husband needs to take legal advice.

I'm with you on this OP. YANBU. If you can only afford to be a SAHM whilst relying on the state than you should get off your arse and get a job! Fair enough if you have young children and the childcare costs outweigh the benefits of going back to work but if you have teenagers that are able to be left for a couple of hours after school then that is just sheer laziness. I'll probably get flamed on here for thinking that but that's my opinion.

You won't be flamed Monkey - it's what many of us think.

Just read latest update too OP - I do think you should seek some legal advice I agree with a PP who said you can't bankrupt your family so she doesn't have to work. I can totally see why you are angry and YA definitely NOT BU.

The problem here is not the ex, it is your spineless DP. And you, to an extent, for enabling this.

Absolutely - if a family is able to live on one income then fair enough (although I will point out that many of us many to work AND contribute to the local community AND raise a family AND volunteer AND have hobbies). That's patently not the case though here - both families are not able to live on one salary, and there is absolutely no reason why the SAHP should not take some form of work.

If a family is able to manage on one income, then it is up to then if one parent stays home. Why is paid work the end all be all in our society? There are plenty of satisfying ways to occupy oneself and/or contribute to society that do not involve being paid. Full-time homemaking, volunteering, hobbies, organizing things in the community, helping with school and after school activities, gardening, the list goes on and on. I see a family as a division of labour, and i don't believe paid work is of more or less value than unpaid labour. If the family is content to live on what the paid worker earns, that is their perogative.

The wife and husband are no longer together therefore this is no longer an option. There is no longer a worker in this family.

My experience is as baby barrister has said. When my brother divorced his wife she tried to say she didn't want to work and wanted SM. The judge told her exactly what they thought of that idea.

OP your DPs circumstances have changed. Although it is seen that your wages contribute half to bills etc you should not be having to pay the lip share so that he can pay large amounts to his ex. He still has to be able to support himself after paying his ex. It doesn't matter if you were a millionaire.

Larger not lip!

That is a totally shit situation, OP. I really don't know how some people justify things to themselves.

Maybe she made huge career sacrifices, enabling her exh to buildca career and high salary, in the expectation that as a unit the financial rewards would be shared.

The thing is, though, that you have to adjust your expectations to reality. If the reality is that the financial rewards stop coming if for the exh, the exw can't expect to get the same amount regardless: after all, she wouldn't if they were still together.

I think the exh needs legal advice and needs to produce a letter saying he will from, say, 1st September be paying child maintenance only, quoting chapter and verse as to why she isn't entitled to spousal support.

Doglover, you say she's making threats, but really - she can't have a leg to stand on at this point. I agree with the posters saying call her bluff - stop this insanity, and go to court if necessary.

Haven't RTFT but in my experience it is easier to work with a younger child than with a teen, so maybe she HAS to be around in order to meet their needs?

There's no reason for alimony anymore, child maintainance yes, but she is fully capable of earning money for herself and for her share of paying for the kids, so off to work she should go.

If she or her partner are supporting themselves what's the problem!