Dsc, new baby and maintenance

[Gildolann]

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.

If I'm reading correctly, the Exw said the foul things in an angry text to the DH of the OP. Shame he shared it and passed on the hurt really.

I expect she is sorry but demanding a grovelling apology or "no maintenance" is hardly just.

It does sound as if the Op and her DH have worked out they will be better off financially if he says at home and she works. Child maintenance does make a nasty hole in the disposable income after all.

I've searched online and it does seem as if this is a legal loophole for NRP to be freed of liabilities to children from previous relationships. It doesn't mean it is right or honourable. Teenagers are far more expensive than little ones.

Caring parents will always do their best for their child. To deliberately evade maintenance is not evidence of caring for your child.

No one would advocate kids starving! And I'm sure that op and her dh will still feed and entertain the dc when they have them.

Fab. So the other 4 days a week they just starve then?

Wow my foid bill would be a lot lower if i knew I only had to feed my children a few days a week.

Now mrs you are being very troll like. Behave.

If ex wife is indeed sorry, the OP has given her the perfect opportunity to save face. She could say she was meaning to apologise but found it hard to bring it up cold again in the light of day. Now that the OP has said she is willing to move on with an apology, it makes things so much easier.

Op what your DH's ex wife said to you was utterly disgraceful. I am so sorry for your loss.

However this has nothing at all to do with your stepchildren. You married your DH knowing he had children before you two got together. You joined an already established family, knowing all that this would entail. This includes paying maintenance for these children. They became part of your family and therefore the responsibility of their upbringing (including their maintenance) also should have become yours. It's how blended families ought to work.

You and your DH have decided that due to his redundancy and your new baby that he will now become a sahp but that doesn't mean that the financial responsibility to your stepchildren should end.

There are three people in your situation that are more important than anything else, your stepchildren and your unborn baby. Their well-being should be paramount.

I could never stay with a man who had no issue with financially neglecting his children. I couldn't love someone like that and would lose all respect for him.

If ex wife is indeed sorry, the OP has given her the perfect opportunity to save face.

No she hasnt.
She has threatened the financial security of the children to earn her apology.
Seriously why can you not see the abuse via financial control?

Oh but then you think poor people should not have children

Ex wife can t have everything her way. If OP pays without an apology this is greenlighting to ex wife that she does not matter and any amount of abuse can be directed at her and she had no recourse but to take it because of the children. To me that is abuse. Shut and and put up, take all verbal because she is the ex wife and anything that impacts her impacts the children so she gets a pass on her bad behaviour.
I never said poor people should not have children. They can and that's their choice but they need to be aware and accept that that choice comes with risks and difficulty. No sense in pleading unfairness after. Life is not fair and I save my empathy for people who are on a bad situation due to factors out of their control not because they have exercised choices based on impulse and emotion without rational thought.

Btw my reply about poor people is to your statement in general and is not connected to OP's situation.

OP - where are you?

Understandably, emotions are raw right now. I suggest you and dp discuss this like responsible adults when you've both calmed down.

Personally, i don't think his choice to be a SAHD makes him a 'crap' dad or means he's 'shirking his responsibilities'.

He has every right to move on with his life just like his ex - that does not negate either parent from their responsibilities towards their dc.
How he manages this and the actions he takes will determine whether he's guilty of the above.

This would be an ideal time to re-think contact schedules and shared parenting. The DSC are old enough to have a say in this.
He would be in a position to have a more 50/50 arrangement, thereby taking on more responsibility for his dc.

I think it's an ideal way to blend the two families especially with a new sibling on the way

'Maintenance' would still be a priority if he wants to treat his dc as equally as possible - only difference will be that he pays for his dc 'directly' rather than 'giving it' to his ex.

In my opinion, you and dp need to sort out how you're going to share finances and manage budgets moving forward.
Since you're having a dc together, all income is family money - it does not belong to the wage earner alone - just like a SAHM, your dp is actually a joint wage earner in this arrangement.

The DSC are a part of this family and your dp is entitled to use some of this family money/'his half' of the 'wages', to continue paying ex maintenance until situations change.
Teenagers 'cost' more so his financial responsibilities towards his eldest dc would be changing anyway.

She is probably terrified of losing the money. She was extremely rude and said some things that really shouldn't be said. Still I wouldn't tell her.

We had similar when I was pregnant... ended in dsc's mum wanting to go via the CSA. She thought he paid too little. Calculating it using CSA revealed he was paying almost three times the minimum amount. You'd think that was the end of it. Nope, she then said "oh, but that is only for working class people" . Dsc is grown up now, yours will be fairly soon, too. Bite your tongue as much as you can.

Why is everyone presuming that the op's step kids are going to starve without their money? I don't recall the op saying that

I was just thinking the same! Some people become slightly hysterical when it comes to maintenance.

@fatdogs it was England and it was definitely child maintenance, the divorce had been settled. It had nothing to do with CMS it was a family court setting and my friends earnings were factored into the equation when maintenance was discussed for his child from a previous marriage. My friend and he were married with 2 kids by this time.

It doesn't matter if the ex has loads of money or not, the dad should be paying for his children!!!!!!!

Op if the children decide to go no contact with their father (and I can imagine they probably will). It won't make things better for you. If your idea is getting rid of the old for the new that's not how it works. If your dh's family are half way decent people they'll be disgusted by him (and you) and you'll have no support and a depressed and lazy husband to deal with.

Good luck.

If ex wife is indeed sorry, the OP has given her the perfect opportunity to save face

She can say sorry but it won't be enough. The OP has found the perfect excuse to remove her inconvenient step children from her life. She won't be letting this one go even with the most heartfelt apology.

It doesn't matter if the ex has loads of money or not, the dad should be paying for his children!!!!!!!

I agree- he should.
He needs to get a job then doesn't he?
And if the ex does have loads of money and the op doesn't give her any money then her kids aren't going to starve are they?

i don't think anyone has suggested the the op's dh doesn't get a job and support all his dc.....

But the reality is no amount of hysteria from the exw is going to change the fact that he can choose to be a sahp to his new dc and avoid paying maintenance.

We don't even know the backstory. We certainly don't know that the dc are going to starve!

He does/should
I'm assuming though that op and dp decided to have the baby together and I would also expect that the decision for him to be a sahd should also be a joint decision which is therefore them both deciding on their "family" income - that's got nothing to do with the ex so why should her kids now not get money as things don't suddenly become free. She knew she was getting together with someone who had kids and as I have said before I certainly wouldn't want to be with someone who didn't provide for their other kids.
Ops child is not the only child in this

What possible backstory would make it acceptable for the OP and her partner to collude in withdrawing support for his children?

I honestly do not understand the point of view that people are suggesting that he is now forgetting about his first children .. I mean, he's not going to be providing for his second family if he's not working is he so how is he making a difference?
I do however think that as a family unit that they should of course WANT to provide for his children.. because they are his children and Op's kids's siblings.
Although i would be making a point of suggesting that behaviour such as from ExW is unacceptable and damaging for all children and people involved, she needs to remember that a death of OP's child is actually her children's siblings, in simple terms all she had to do was ask 'what will the situation be with cm for kids' and this whole thing would have been a whole lot smoother.
Life does not need to be so horrible!

I mean, he's not going to be providing for his second family if he's not working is he so how is he making a difference

You can't be serious. He'll be a sahd for his second family. allowing his wife to go to work while he faciliatates that. He will be looking after his second family while cutting off his first.
How can you not get this?

Just to clarify, I don't think its acceptable for the op's dh to withdraw support to the exw, regardless of the backstory.

i do however, think it is entirely up to the OP if she wants to support his dc from her income. Just because she is his wife doesn't mean she is obliged to support his family.

i appreciate this does not make him catch of the century and i would not want to be with a man who chose not to pay for his dc, but thats Op's choice.

All families are different - particularly blended families. Some are closer than others, some step parents step up to the plate, some don't. Any there is usually a lot of back story for those that are not close. End of the day, Op should put herself and her own dc first.

The exw should've realised that her cms would've gone down anyway with the birth of the new baby even if he was working.

This is the oldest of chestnuts. Is CM due from the NRP according to his (less commonly her, let's assume his) or from the NRP's household according to their total means?

Whichever answer you give is going to piss off half the membership of MN. But we all know the answer. Not your children - not your liability.

It's no different to an NRP who takes a less stressful but lower paid job. Or becomes a student. They are not condemned to the hamster wheel until their DC grow up.

As my username does not lie I should say that I am not and never have been.an NRP and have no axe to grind.

Whichever answer you give is going to piss off half the membership of MN. But we all know the answer. Not your children - not your liability

I think a lot more than half would agree that a man purposefully refusing to work and therefore not paying maintenance for his children is not ok.

Why are people still pretending its about whether OP should pay his maintenance? We all know that he should pay it, and she should stop telling him not to.
This isn't a divisive issue. Men should pay for their kids is not contraversial in any way.

Been reading this a long time - it's mostly the he/she. Not every RP is mum. NRP can be a mum as well.