AIBU to keep maintenance for my DC and not put it in my "stepfamily" pot?

[iloveberries]

Ex left 4 yrs ago and has paid maintenance regularly and on time. I have always saved the maintenance as I work and don't need it to cover DC living expenses. My plan is to give to DC when older for deposit on house / uni / car unless I need it to support DC (eg. Redundancy / illness or similar)

Been with DP 2 yrs and are currently buying a house together. We will both be putting our earnings into "our" pot. However I feel that I should continue to save the maintenance for my DC into his account for the future but DP thinks it should come into "our" pot as we are sharing all our other income.

I have 1 DC and he has 2. They live with their mum and he pays maintenance accordingly. We know she doesn't need it for their living expenses but obviously don't know whether she saves that for them.

We will have bedrooms for all children in our new house and have his children here a lot so we will both contribute to upkeep for his 2 and my 1.

We never argue about money but this maintenance has become an issue. AIBU to want to keep saving it for my DC?

[iloveberries]

Something to think about definitely.

Maybe for savings he should save for his 3 kids and I save for my 2... Might help stop his ridiculous food spending if he sees what I can save with a bit of pre planning!

[coconutpie]

PS
It's ok to want to offer some support to his DC while they are DC, eg som joint money goes into say food, clothing, etc but you are not responsible to save for his DC's future.

[coconutpie]

I still think you are being screwed over here - savings for HIS DC are not your responsibility. Your responsibility for savings are for your DS and unborn baby. Savings for his DC should be coming out of his individual pot. His DC already have 2 parents who could save for them - why should they suddenly get a potential 3 parents saving for them? It's your DS and baby that will be disadvantaged here as they'll "only" have potentially 2 parents saving for them.

[HarryPottersMagicWand]

He is still doing better out of this though. Why should saving for his children come out of a joint pot? It isn't your duty to save for step children just because you are better with money than his ex.

[Kr1stina]

Personally I think marriage as a " romantic gesture " is vastly over rated. It's primarily a legal contract which usually protects women and children.

Romance is lovely, but it won't pay the mortgage or university fees.

" cynical " is what men call smart women who think about their and their kids future. Please protect yourself legally and financially , one way or the other .

[iloveberries]

kristina - we haven't ironed out the details yet but I am happy That we will find something which works. Marriage has also been on the table for a while and we have discussed that in a very non romantic way () as "financial protection".

I feel safe. (And I am being overly cynical anyway given I've been through one divorce.)

[SandyY2K]

That's great. I'm glad it went well. All the best.

[Kr1stina]

That's good to hear he was open and positive - so is he cutting his hours to 4 days ? Remember he has a legal right to request different working hours, so he needs to apply in good time and follow the correct procedure

I mention this because it's amazing how many father decide to mention their request in the passing to their boss a week befroe maternity leave ends and then suddely explain to their partner that it's "impossible " .

There are very few careers that it's genuinely " inpossible " to work flexible hours but people have to be prepared to compromise . And sadly it seem that mothers are just so much better at compromising than fathers.

How much shared parental leave is your partner taking ?

[iloveberries]

I agree.
We discussed splitting the parental leave and also both doing 4 days per week after parental leave (amongst other options) as neither of us is keen for baby to be in full time childcare. He was open and positive about all options.

[Dogcatred]

The bottom line is that the riskiest things women can do is give up work or go part time and also to move in with someone who is not prepared to marry them but who is going to continue working full time. Savings for children pale into insignificance compared with the financial risks women run who do that particularly when they already have a child from a first relationship or marriage.

[MariposaUno]

Glad you have cleared the air.

[AyeAmarok]

Sounds positive berries.

[iloveberries]

mathsmum - I'm not saying I am worse off cohabiting at all. Technically we will all be better off as we will have two incomes and a similar mortgage on the new place to the mortgages we have each maintained in our separate homes. So with that in mind overall ALL the children should financially benefit. I just didn't want my DS to have what I've been saving compromised because I had to save towards DP's 2. Hopefully that makes sense?

We had a very positive discussion last night.
the maintenance will continue to come straight Into the savings account for my son and we will also save from our joint pot for the 4 children again (amounts tbc). He finally "got" that things won't be equal for them, eg. His ex wife has very wealthy parents so perhaps his children may financially benefit from them in some way, my ex has no other children so perhaps can save more for DS. DP and I have a big age gap between other children and our baby so we may have more years of higher earning to save for the baby. We don't know the exact figures. But we have agreed the principles.

We also discussed my being off work, marriage, etc and I am feeling MUCH more comfortable with things. We also discussed how much to join finances and whether to even buy this new place and think we are both much clearer and happier so thank you very much for all the advice on the thread

[SandyY2K]

If you want to create a blended family and co-mingle finance's, then your DC will take a hit, just like any DC will take a hit when a sibling is introduced.

A step sibling is not the same as another child of your own.

as a single person I could afford to save the same figure as maintenance for DS so in a cohabiting dual income home I should be able to continue to save that amount

You should be able to continue saving that amount, but because neither your partner or his Ex appear to be as savvy as you, he feels justified to encroach on your son's money.

His DC have maintenance given to their mum that gets spent on them only... then also money from your DP and you spent on them ... but your DS gets just a share of the maintenance from your Ex and money from you and DP spent on him.

Although in real terms you're able to support your DS, so you aren't really gaining financially. You and DS are worse off.

While your DP and his DC are better off. He's gaining from your holiday contributions etc and he wants his DC to gain by you putting more money to their savings.

I'd be saying, we keep it as is. Any further insistence would result in me calling it a day. That leaves him paying maintenance for another DC soon. He won't want that.

I usually advocate marriage, but I'm not so sure that marriage (not that it's a definite here) would actually benefit you Berries. You could end up even worse off if you divorced after marriage. Think very carefully about all.

[CafeCremeEtCroissant]

All I was saying was that as a single person I could afford to save the same figure as maintenance for DS so in a cohabiting dual income home I should be able to continue to save that amount

But you are having another baby. That changes everything.

You have already said that as a single parent with DS & this baby you could no longer afford to save the same for DS & the baby.

What is wrong with the suggestion of most things going out of a joint account which you both pay 50/50 into & whatever is left over in your own account is your own?

[mathsmum314]

iloveberries - Not having a go at you but as a feminist I am trying to be fair to both genders. Yes as a single parent you have more money, so stay single.

If you want to create a blended family and co-mingle finance's, then your DC will take a hit, just like any DC will take a hit when a sibling is introduced.

Imagine this: Twenty years time, its all perfect, you have saved £40,000 for your DC and DP has no savings for his. You love your step children as your own, DC1+2 come to you as their parents and ask you to help with a deposit for a mortgage. You say NO. DC3 asked for help and you say sure, here is £40,000. Could both of you really look DC1+2 in the eye and say we love you but its not our fault we only loved saved for one of you.

[iloveberries]

All I was saying was that as a single person I could afford to save the same figure as maintenance for DS so in a cohabiting dual income home I should be able to continue to save that amount

[iloveberries]

That wasn't what I was ever saying mathsmum

[mathsmum314]

BaggyCheeks I did read and understand that, OP earns enough to keep her and her DS going. If that is the case then she should KEEP her finances separate. Simples.

If however OP wants to merge their finances and become 1 family with 1 financial pot. Then its not fair to say "I earn more so I am saving it all for my DC and screw your children".

One or the other, you can't have both.

[FoundFreedom]

IMPO I would use my childs fathers cm payments on my child as that's what it's for. Set cm payments goes to his ex for his children for their mother to spend on them. It's a complicated situation you are in as you only have 1 child whereas he pays for 2, but that is what you agreed to take on when you got together. All your other money then goes in the family pot which pays for your everyday lives, including your new baby & days out etc.. & for all 3 children when you have your visits treating them all the same.

[BaggyCheeks]

maths The OP has said several times that she alone earns enough to keep her and her DS going, to the extent that she is able to save, from her personal income, the same amount that she receives from her ex in maintenance. I.e. the savings come from her left over money once she's covered her proportion of the joint household bills. Why should she stop doing that?

[BabooshkaKate]

JessicasCrocodile

No, berries, just (half) siblings. And I absolutely hate putting it that way because in my mind they are just siblings.

I did point out to my (half) brother recently that I would never expect my dad and step mum's money to be split equally when they die. He was devastated. Made me promise to never say that to step mum because she'd be really hurt - she considers us her children too.

I was spectacularly lucky with step parents though - they both treated me exactly the same as their own children.

Oh bore off - you're being so dramatic. As if you all don't understand simple biology which does indeed differente you from each other as half siblings. It is also completely off point as OP is being pressured into subbing her partner's children. Totally different.

[mathsmum314]

Only the OP isn't planning using the money to maintain DC, she is talking about saving it for the future. The money is supposed to be used on EVERYDAY living expenses, like the mortgage, electricity, clothes, gas... essentials. That is what the money should be spent on. If OP has money left after all household expenses are paid then put some savings away. As I am sure DP would want.

How they split up the extra money between DC is tricky because whoever earns more can claim the savings should go into their DC's account. And if a man was to say that in a relationship, MN would crucifix him.

If you don't want equality then keep your families/finances separate.

[iloveberries]

He has a longer commute and works longer hours and I work at home more so essentially have more "free" time.
Therefore I do more of the housework.
I do think this is fair - it still leaves me with more "down" time than him to be honest

[Lessthanaballpark]

What is the reason behind you doing more housework?