To not give a shit

[GDragon]

exH who I've always had an amicable relationship with now wants to dictate how I spend my money on our DC.

We both work, pretty full on professional jobs that leave very little time for family life, neither of us wanted to slow down when we had kids, DD(13) and DS(8) which was ultimately what led to our divorce.

We both remarried years ago, exH went on to have 3 more kids (a child of their own and 2 DSC) with his DW who's a stay at home mom, I remarried a teacher. Our incomes massively differ, as ExH has more DC to support on just his income, whereas our household has 2 incomes with just 2 kids.

Now what I buy our DCs has suddenly become an issue with him, as it's making his home life difficult, the clothes I buy them, where we go on holiday, the gifts they get, he said he would appreciate it 'if I could limit my spending.'

It's not the first time he's bought up money, but it's the first time he's ever been so bloody patronising. I don't think its a reasonable request at all and I don't really care about his family issues.

A pp raised a good point earlier about him perhaps seeing the kids as being "spoilt"?
I'm sure this isn't the case, and is most likely begrudging the difference between the kids, or perhaps the school fees.

But it could be that he thinks that kids are being spoilt or set a bad example perhaps? (I know everyone buys unnecessary things for kids, but some more than others). If he's trying to teach them the value of money but they get everything g they ask for from the other parent I could see where he was coming from - and since that would be about the way your DC are raised U think he would have a say in it.

Is it worth asking him to clarify why he is asking, or what he has in mind?
If it's unreasonable you are perfectly within your rights to refuse, but it's possible he might have a legitimate concern? And at least then you can say you've heard him out.

I really don't know their financial position when it comes to his DW's ExH, all I know is that the DSC (14 & 11) spend every other weekend with him, he may pay or he may not, I honestly wouldn't be able to say.

My kids aren't braggy, there are plenty of kids at their school/in their lives who have more then they do, I can't even imagine DD bringing up holidays etc DS is only 8, so it wouldn't surprise me if he brought things he did up but not in a vindictive way.

I don't think I spoil them & he's never brough that up as an issue.

You're fine to go and spend your money how you see fit and to not care what anyone thinks.

However if I was your ex's wife, I would be thinking about going back to work and when I do, spending a bit of money on my own children too. And it would quite rightly be none of your business.

As we make our bed, so we lie in it.He pays no maintenance , is married as are you, but still assumes he can tell you and your dh what you can do with the money you earn? This is the ultimate definition of male entitlement.

You could ask him if he increased his income and spending on your DC.

I mean....You would appreciate it if he would increase his income and spending.

He has made decisions, to have more DC with a stay at home parent, that mean his household has less disposable income than yours. Not your fault and no reason you should have to limit your spending. Just make sure your DC aren't boasting or showing off to their half siblings. I would say that you value the amicable relationship you've always had but could he refrain from making personal comments as your finances and spending are none of his business (and vice versa) now you have separate households.

You have every right to spend your money on what you want.

But, I've just noticed the ages of the eldest DD's and I want to point out that actually if your DD is there with superdry and top shop clothing while the 14 yr old is shopping in new look and primark, that actually might be causing your ex quite a lot of hassle...

Teenagers aren't exactly reasonable about stuff like that.

OP probably is making XH's life harder than it needs to be merrymarigold, but it's tough shit really, isn't it? Nobody forced him to have another child. His decision to do so, and to have a relationship with a woman whom they've either chosen should be a SAHP or who has had it dictated by childcare costs v income, is nothing to do with OP. This is effectively saying that the standard of living of existing children should be refused as a matter of principle despite being unnecessary because more have come along.

I probably would brace myself for shenanigans over the private school fees though OP. It sounds like he might be gearing up for that, or at least for refusing to pay towards your DC2. But if the children are mostly older, aside from presumably the one they have together, his new wife might be able to go back to work and increase their income in a couple of years. The children they have between them are 14, 13, 11, 8 and presumably a few years younger (preschool?) so the balance may well tip towards work in the not to distant future.

OP's ex chose have another child and a parent stay at home. OP chose to support the children she already has and marry someone who works. Choices have consequences, adults can't just bleat 'its not fair' when they have to live with their own decisions.

Your ExH made a financial commitment to you and your children regarding private school. It was his choice to marry a woman with two children and then have another with her after you split up. He doesn't get to back peddle on a financial agreement because he has changed the status quo through the choices he has made.

I don't understand why you should stop spending on your children in a way that is affordable for you, simply because he's added three more to his brood and cannot afford the same standard of living anymore. Did he not factor in the financials prior to marrying his new wife?! Were his children simply an afterthought in this regard? I wouldn't dream of shacking up with anybody who had children if it would be to the detriment of my own child's financial safety and well being!

I don't know how you haven't completely hit the roof with him, OP. This would make me froth at the mouth.

Op I am imagining how the convo wd go if you say to your dd that as her step sister has to wear primark, she shd do the same. Please let us know how that goes down! THe ex pays NO maintenance , people.

The ex has them 50: 50 people.

It is just as fair to say OP pays no maintenance.

I wonder what the situation would have been if the OP had asked her ex not to have anymore children. Because she hasn't and it's unfair on the children her and he have together, because that child gets to live with him.

The op hasn't had anymore kids, so why should he?

You can have as many children as you want, as long you continue the commitments that you had already agreed to.

Oh, he must be getting serious hassle from his wife! I can imagine the scene, your DC turn up, designer gear, latest technology, and just home from some exotic hols....new wife sees they have a much higher standard of living than her kids, and is upset/jealous/envious/pissed off...whatever! Then she turns the screws on her DH...and he tries to sort it out by telling you not to be so generous to your kids
Well, I know what I'd think to that....but I do have a sneaking sympathy for his DC and DSC, not at all sure how I'd deal with it though!

Op I am imagining how the convo wd go if you say to your dd that as her step sister has to wear primark, she shd do the same. Please let us know how that goes down!

That is not a conversation I will ever have. I'm certainly not going to downsize my children's lifestyle to suit his family needs, if they are having issues like that then perhaps they should buy clothes they deem suitable for DC's to wear when they're at their home or they can do the reasonable thing & speak to their DC's about how although their step siblings may wear branded clothes they definetly get to spend more time with their parents etc

Their own DC is only 3, so I doubt a toddler cares very much about clothing or holidays

I am willing to talk about if their are underlying issues that he wants to address, e.g does he think that they're spoilt?

I'm not backing down on the schooling unless he absolutely can't afford to make the payments, like he has to decide between the mortgage payments or school fees, not because he wants a fancier holiday.

It's not even designer! Just mid range high street. If OP were buying couture or something equally lavish,I could understand an argument about not spoiling their children with very expensive things because they want them to learn the value of money. But Adidas hardly qualifies.

This reminds me of the discussions about how legitimate it is for the standard of living of existing children to suffer when one partner chooses to have more with another person, because they're then spreading the resources more thinly. An MN classic, and I've never been quite able to decide which side I come down on. Except this is with the existing children's standard of living suffering because the parent who had more children wants the other parent to stop spending even though they can afford it!

OP, does he buy 50% of necessary clothing for your two children, take them on holiday? I hope so.

Oh that's an interesting point!

If the custody is 50/50 but you are buying 100% of the shoes, clothes, tech, uniform, school trips.

He should sod off and count himself bloody lucky.

Good point Songbird!

YANBU.
I agree that he's either being pushed by his wife, or he's working up to refusing to honour his agreement re. the children's school fees, because it's "not fair" to his 3rd child.

But that is absolutely not your problem and your DC should not have to have their lives downgraded just because their father decided to have another child with someone who already has 2 and has (presumably) chosen not to work.

As you've already said that the clothes etc. that your 2 DC have are not ostentatiously expensive, then it's a bit daft to worry about them being mid-range high street, when the other DC have maybe slightly lower-end high street! If it's THAT much of a drama, they can just cut the labels out!

Maybe you should push this to get some resolution - ask him exactly what his game is, presuming that he has any input on how you spend your money, since the children aren't being obviously spoilt? And push to find out WHY this has suddenly become an issue. Maybe he'll give the "real" reason then.

I don't understand what he means. It seems an odd comment. Is he suggesting you buy them cheaper/fewer clothes? Take them on less expensive holidays? (Both of these are unreasonable as pp have said but it's unclear what 'spend less' means) can you ask him?

Hmm. I'm in an oddly opposite position where my ex and his DW earn a lot more than DP and I (he pays maintenence and has them often, but less than half the time) but due to their life choices (big mortgage, lots of spending on the house) have a lot less disposable income than DP and I. So, the DC have fewer days out and holidays with their Dad.

Honestly, I believe fuck it is the right attitude. Your ex has made his own decisions that have led to him having less income and more outgoings than you. It isn't your fault, and as long as your DC aren't mocking their DC about it there is nothing being done wrong that a simple explanation to the DC couldn't correct.

PrejudiceZombies, Clothing is a pretty informal arrangement, when they were younger we use to both buy equally, it's still that way with DS but I tend to buy 90% of DD's clothes now, I also get uniforms as I like to get them early, for school trips it depends on who gets the letter, if they get it sent home when it's his week, then he pays and vice versa, we use to pay for activities 50/50 but he said he couldn't justify paying for so many activities anymore so he now pays for 1 activity per child, whilst I pay for 2 and he always takes them on holidays.

I'd say I pay for about 85%

Then he can stick it up his arse!