Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Aibu To think that dss and dh's ex cause my children to lose out.

560 replies

WomenVsBarbie · 07/03/2015 22:30

I have two dc (15) from a previous relationship with a man who left me 6 months pregnant with twins. I have two dc (8 and 7) with my current partner. I also have a stepson aged 15.

OP posts:
rebelfor · 08/03/2015 01:16

Dh's ex is a multi millionaires and lives in her parents 11 bedroom house.

Hmm
MistressDeeCee · 08/03/2015 02:18

£1500 monthly is enough to support a child. Child's father can buy extra treats on top of that if he wishes, not be obliged to buy uniforms, etc. However, thats his call isn't it, he is going along with it after all. I understand you feel resentful about this OP, but if he doesn't want to change the status quo you are fighting a losing battle.

Without getting into the "figures" side of it, he is doing a lot more than your twins dad is doing, isn't he? Id certainly be taking that into account in your shoes, as some kind of balance. Unless and until your ex begins to support his own children then sorry, I think you are best off keeping your complaints to yourself.

mynewpassion · 08/03/2015 02:26

Your husband is being a father to his first born child, his children with you , and 100% providing for his stepsons. Until their father puts up some financial assistance to their upkeep, leave your stepson alone.

redskirt · 08/03/2015 03:41

£18000 per year is a huge amount of maintenence. I supported myself and my daughter on that as a working single parent for a couple of years (ex paid nothing. ...).

I'd be cross about exW asking for extras too!

littlejessie · 08/03/2015 05:39

Another one who thinks the £1500/mth should cover necessities such as coats, and that additional spending should be at the discretion of OP's DH, not at his ex's demand.

In terms of holidays, we are planning to holiday without my DSSs this year because they are off abroad with their mum simultaneously.

I think some posters have been really unfair on the OP on this thread.

DontDrinkandFacebook · 08/03/2015 05:57

Look, I totally understand why this might piss you off and make you feel hard done by, seeing her swanning around living the life of Riley while you struggle, but irrespective of her current financial position due to her rich parents, your husband earns fairly good money and it's right that he supports his son by paying a decent amount per month, as is his moral duty, and I'm glad he doesn't shirk his responsibility or take advantage of the fact that the boy's GPs are rich.

If the boy gets loads of extras from his GPs then lucky him, but that shouldn't mean your DH gets off the hook.

It's not your DH's job to pay out to keep your twins, but I bet he does. How about you direct the anger at their father who has probably never given you enough, or anything at all, instead of directing it your DH's son and his ex?

You both already had children of your own. If it was always going to be a bit of struggle adequately support the three children between you that you already had, then you quite simply should not have had the other two.

KatieKaye · 08/03/2015 06:31

Regardless of the sums involved, the fact OP does not work and thus her DH pays for her DC and that DSS goes on holiday with his mother - to complain about having to take DSS on the family holiday is so unfair and hurtful. Why shouldn't he go on a family holiday? If your older DC go, then why should he not go too? That comes across as if you are trying to exclude DSS and are seeking reasons to justify it. Your DH is paying for your joint DC and his step DC to go on holiday. You know, he could just pay for his three DC and let you pay for your two?

I agree with other posters that you should go back to work if you resent the money your DH spends on his son. His ex wife's financial situation is irrelevant if he either chooses to pay this money through a private agreement or if it has been set down by a court decision. Lots of people with chronic pain have no choice but to keep working. But if the worst of your financial worries is not going abroad on holiday, then you are doing okay.

DontDrinkandFacebook · 08/03/2015 06:53

I was a step-child to a woman who arrived in my life as my father's mistress, bringing with her an existing child who was not supported by her own father, and then very quickly made sure she got knocked up by my father, before he'd even left my mother. My step-mother once complained bitterly to my mother that every penny she was given in whatever crumbs she received as maintenance for me took food out of her own children's mouths.

Given that my father gave her fuck all as a general rule, (unless he was occasionally forced to by a court order) you can imagine how that comment went down with my mother. Hmm

LaurieMarlow · 08/03/2015 07:05

OP your Dh seems like a good man; contributing generously to the child he doesn't live with, supporting your dt while you are unable to work.

Hold on to that and try to stop obsessing about his ex.

GoooRooo · 08/03/2015 07:19

I think you are cross with the wrong people.

Your step son is entitled to be supported by his father, and it seems your husband is doing a good job of providing for him.

He is also providing for your children, including his step children, when really that responsibility is down to your ex - which is who you should be cross with. It's not your DH's ex wife's fault that your ex husband doesn't provide for your children and the reason you may be struggling is that HE doesn't contribute, not that your DH (rightly) provides for his.

MrsPiddlewink · 08/03/2015 07:31

No idea why you're getting such a flaming OP.

If your figures are correct, £1600 between the six of you Vs the £1500 DSS gets is mightily imbalanced.

I understand you not wanting to fork out for more - you are right, coats, shoes etc should come out of the maintenance money.

YANBU

redfairy · 08/03/2015 07:34

YABU. Direct your anger to the father of your two eldest who is paying diddly squat!

MythicalKings · 08/03/2015 07:36

YANBU. DSS has a better lifestyle than his siblings already. That's not equitable.

In your DH's place I'd stop all the extras and use that money to take DSS on holiday.

If the ex complains tell her to go to the CSA (or whatever they are called now) and see how much she'd get then.

bumbleymummy · 08/03/2015 07:38

If he went through CSA I think he would be paying less. It does sound a bit unbalanced.

BadLad · 08/03/2015 07:42

No idea why you're getting such a flaming OP.

Same here. 1500 quid a month is a lot of maintenance and much more than he is legally obliged to pay. It's not unreasonable to expect the child's mother to be able to find the money for a winter coat out of that.

MrsPiddlewink · 08/03/2015 07:44

He'd be paying £1050 a month through CSA. Less if DSS stays over regularly at his Dad's. That would be it - and it would be expected to cover clothing, etc

Smooshface · 08/03/2015 07:48

Sounds like his ex is being unreasonable. Unfortunately you knew of her existence when you got together, so more fool you.

And distinct lack of sympathy for no foreign holiday! We haven't afforded our own foreign holiday in six years, or any holiday of our own to be honest! Luckily grandparents have taken us away. Hoping to go somewhere this year :)

70k isn't much in London with kids but payments are up to him to negotiate

greenfolder · 08/03/2015 07:48

Your kids are not missing out because of the 15 year old. You chose to have the 7 and 8 year old. Or all of them are temporarily missing out because of your injury. You presumably married this man at least partly because he is kind reliable and takes his responsibilities seriously you can't have it all ways

SoupDragon · 08/03/2015 07:53

In 15 years you've never pursued CM for your twins?

CantBeBotheredThinking · 08/03/2015 07:57

1500 quid a month is a lot of maintenance and much more than he is legally obliged to pay. It's not unreasonable to expect the child's mother to be able to find the money for a winter coat out of that

In my case the 1500 a month is my ex contribution to the private school fees that we agreed on and doesn't even cover half of it so it wouldn't pay for a winter coat here.

Sortmylifeout · 08/03/2015 07:58

Is your dh happy to pay the £1500 maintenance? Or is it you that has the problem with it?

He could of course say no to the extras, that would be simple. Or he could involve the CMS and pay the specified amount which would be less than £1500.

This sounds so easy to resolve if your husband wants to. Why don't you moan to him?

PtolemysNeedle · 08/03/2015 08:00

It doesn't matter how much the CSA would expect the DH to pay. The CSA is a shower of shit and their figures do nothing to reflect the costs of actually bringing up a child. People were responsible for paying for their children long before the CSA came along and made up it's own formula.

It also doesn't matter that OP thinks her husband shouldn't have to pay for things like a coat on top of paying maintenance. It's not up to her, it's down to that child's parents. Having joint finances can only be taken so far when one partner already has a financial commitment to another child. The OP has no right to interfere in how two other parents choose to provide for their child.

Sortmylifeout · 08/03/2015 08:00

And it is not unusual for a family to be living on a budget and not having holidays abroad. It's the price you pay for choosing to have a family and only having one wage earner.

MrsPiddlewink · 08/03/2015 08:02

Why don't you moan to him?

Could be applied to just about any thread on MN. Hmm

I'm guessing you've ditched this thread OP. Wise move. Wishing you all the best Smile

TendonQueen · 08/03/2015 08:22

Seriously, this thread has been totally weird. The OP's DH is paying out a big percentage of his salary yet people are telling her she has no right even to comment on this and that she has 'no right to interfere' - she is the mother of the other children in the family, not a household servant or something. Plus when she's said she currently can't work due to injury people have been very mean, continued to say she has to and called her lazy. Yet if you started a thread saying 'I know a lazy person who doesn't work because they say they're injured' you'd be soundly told off, accused of benefit bashing, being judgy, how could you possibly know etc. So presumably the OP here is considered fair game because her husband earns well. It's very unpleasant.

OP, it's a pity you got some of the figures wrong early on as that opened the door for posters to get self righteous. If you can bear it, I would name change and start another thread, maybe in the step parenting section, with percentages and the response will be different.

Swipe left for the next trending thread