Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 12 13 14 ··· 31 32

Original poster

Dsc, new baby and maintenance

783 replies

Gildolann · 22/05/2017 22:52

NC for this just in case!
DH has 2 dc, dss 15 and dsd 12. He currently pays cm to his ex wife.
I am 26 weeks pregnant and DH has been made redundant, so we have decided that I will go back to work full time and DH will be a SAHD, all going well with the birth, my post natal health etc etc.
DH ex wife has gone absolutely mental when she found this out, texting DH that i will still have to give her money every month. Saying her dc are more important than our unborn dc and how I will probably miscarriage again anyway and now I don't want to give her anything. I was going to continue the maintainance arrangement as normal but she has fucked that.

OP posts:

Lottie991 · 24/05/2017 12:44

Oh my ex did this, went on to have more kids and told me he didn't want mine anymore and pays nothing for my kids as he is a sahd and she works, Its disgusting.
And so are u op for saying she has fucked it with her words. Its about the kids not you and your ego.

FlossyMooToo · 24/05/2017 12:45

So Spice dads contribution is 2 hours child care for a 12 yo and mum is now forced to work more hours as dad is failing to contribute financially to the children he helped create.

You logic is completely skewed and for you to think a couple of hours childcare for 1 child is enough in place of financies you are deluded. I am sorry for any children you come across tbh.

FlossyMooToo · 24/05/2017 12:47

This thread makes me sick.

All those who are happy to see children go without because they are not your bio children are not fit to be parents. You should be ashamed.

stitchglitched · 24/05/2017 12:47

Well spice, anyone who doesn't allow their SAHP partner equal access to finances is financially abusive.

witsender · 24/05/2017 12:49

So we would tell a Sahm that she was unemployed and so not entitled to any money from the working spouse Spice? Engage brain.

stitchglitched · 24/05/2017 12:55

Mrssapphirebright, what if you lost your job or couldn't work? Would it be ok for your DH to refuse to buy food for your kids who aren't his, after all they are not his respinsibility?

fatdogs · 24/05/2017 12:57

I don't think SAH parents (mum or dad) should have automatic equal access to all monies earned by the working partner. And I know this will get me flamed to a crisp on here but that's my opinion.
The working partner should, in a healthy relationship, ensure that their partner has access to money for household expenditure and spends. But ultimately, didn't earn it doesn't get to dictate how it is spent. Don't like that, go to work or get out of the relationship.
Presently OP holds the purse strings as the earner and has zero obligations to ex wife. Could argue she has a moral obligation but in light of the ex wife's behaviour, that moral obligation has disappeared. OP's DH needs to decide if he wants to take the risk of being financially dependent or not and that is a separate issue which I think applies to all people in a relationship who choose to become financially dependent.

mrssapphirebright · 24/05/2017 12:59

stitchglitched - I wouldn't expect my dh to 100% provide for my dc if anything happened to me, although i know he would. I see that as being mine and their dads job.

if i was to lose my job or become unwell I would claim tax credits and make do. That's what i'd have to do if I wasn't married.

you can't just expect people to bail you out all the time.

mrssapphirebright · 24/05/2017 12:59

fatdogs - well said!

stitchglitched · 24/05/2017 13:03

100%? He shouldn't provide a penny for them by your logic.

FlossyMooToo · 24/05/2017 13:08

you can't just expect people to bail you out all the time.

The ex is not expecting to be bailed out!
She is expecting the childrens father to contribute financially to the cost of raising THEIR children. What is so difficult to see that the two are very different?

coldflange · 24/05/2017 13:09

Maybe the ex hasn't realised that the CM payments can be reduced to the new baby too?

FWIW I think that the H is being made redundant. Will there be a payout? If yes, he could allocate some of that as a CM payment whilst looking for another job. That way the pressure is off to find work straightaway. Being a SAHP would be unfair at the moment. In 5 or 6 years time then he can - as his youngest DC would be 18 and no longer legallly require CM payments.

The ex sounds dreadful though, coming out with such unkind, cruel comments. I wouldn't want to give her my hard-earned either.

stitchglitched · 24/05/2017 13:13

Its pretty depressing that supporting your spouse and their children in times of need is referred to as 'bailing them out.'

It's even more depressing that you know your husband would help support your kids if you couldn't but you wouldn't do the same for his. I wouldn't be sticking around in a marriage like that, where my kids were second rate.

AppleOfMyEye10 · 24/05/2017 13:16

I think your dh should not be the sahp and rather look for another job asap, or you both go part time if possible.
His obligations should not fall away because of a new baby, but in the same respect this should not be the ops responsibility. Whilst it's not the children's fault, there's no way I would be having anything to do with this vile woman and getting involved in their maintenance arrangements. The only solution would be for him to find another job.

VladmirsPoutine · 24/05/2017 13:19

I'm astonished that knowing he has 2 kids to provide for he'd rather stay at home. On what planet is that reasonable. You don't have to provide for his dc but he does. He's taken the easy way out. God only hopes that one day you don't find yourself staring him down the table at divorce proceedings.

mrssapphirebright · 24/05/2017 13:27

stitchglitched - no, i wouldn't expect my dh to fund my dc at all. However, if something happened that meant i couldn't work then my dh would obviously be paying for the bills / food in the house, so therfore contributing to my dc's living costs for when they are with us (around 60% of the time).

Stuff like their clothes, dinner money, phone contracts clubs etc i would expect to come out of any benefits i was getting or from their dad if he could afford it.

mrssapphirebright · 24/05/2017 13:30

FlossyMooToo - the comment about being bailed out was meant about my dh, as in i wouldn't expect my dh to bail me out by providing for my dc if i could not. providing for my dc is the responsibility of me and my exh, their dad.

i don't think that the Op should bail her dp out of he chooses not to support his dc from his first marriage. yes, this makes him a bit of a deadbeat, but OP shouldn't have to pay for it. She will have her own dc to support and that should be her main concern.

FlossyMooToo · 24/05/2017 13:35

Nobody is saying the OP should bail out the ex however if OP and dad have decided the he should be a SAHP to benefit their child then that decision has to include provision for the first children. Which they are now using to financially abuse the ex and the children.

mrssapphirebright · 24/05/2017 13:39

But surely the responsibility to provide for the dp's dc is his, and not hers? He is the one letting them down. Why should OP pay the price of his bad parenting?

Especially if there is a backstory / history of the exw being a bitch!

NotISaidTheWalrus · 24/05/2017 13:41

But surely the responsibility to provide for the dp's dc is his, and not hers? He is the one letting them down

She's helping him to let them down. She's encouraging him. She's produced another baby and will get him to stay at home with it, not pay for his own kids, and she can work and keep all her cash for her kid while its siblings get nothing.
You can see the problem?

mrssapphirebright · 24/05/2017 13:44

I disagree - OP is putting the needs of her dc first. its not her responsibility to provide for her dp's dc, thats his. Its his choice.

Yes she is supporting that decision because its probably best for her and her dc. Its her job to put her dc first. her dp is letting his dc down, he is a grown up and can make that choice himself.

mrssapphirebright · 24/05/2017 13:46

Op is entitled to have a baby and choose if she wants to support her dp's dc. She is mot obliged to.

Its her dp that is shelving responsibility, not the OP.

FlossyMooToo · 24/05/2017 13:46

It is his responsibility but how can he provide financially if the OP wants him to stay home and care for their child?

OP cannot have it all ways.
If she wants dp home for their child she has to take over financial responsibility of his other children.
Or do you think the OP should control everything and have it all her own way fuck the non bio kids?

mrssapphirebright · 24/05/2017 13:48

It is his responsibility but how can he provide financially if the OP wants him to stay home and care for their child?

He has choices though. he is choosing to support his new partner and child over his ex and their dc. HIS CHOICE. Not the OP's problem.

Lottie991 · 24/05/2017 13:49

I just think that if he can shelve the responsibility of his first two children by abandoning them financially don't be surprised/moan if you split up op and he does it to your child.
Poor kids.

Flip

1 2 ··· 12 13 14 ··· 31 32