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.

Maybe because if the DH was a deadbeat he and OP wouldn't have even discussed continuing the maintenance when there is absolutely no legal obligation to and they had the perfect loophole to exploit? They are obviously inclined to do the right thing as a rule.

OP evidently isn't...

There simply isn't enough information in OPs posts for anyone to be saying they're sure X will happen and berating other people for not chilling. It could be a knee jerk reaction, or it could be the excuse they were looking for.

But they don't need an excuse, they never did, the law is (morally wrongly) already on their side!

Yes there isn't enough info in OP's posts yet the majority of responses which refer to the DH are calling him all sorts.

Legally he won't need to pay her , morally may be a different story , after what she said I don't blame you for not wanting to pay her money, just spend more on your dsc when they are with you

If the OP came here and said 'AIBU to think woman is a bitch?' without her considering stopping maintenance, then she would have had an overwhelming YANBU response. But the fact that she is prepared to punish two children because she doesn't like their mother is what has caused the (not unreasonable) backlash against the OP.

Your DH should not be having more children if he doesn't intend to support the two he already has.
If you are going to work and he is looking after your child then as a couple you have to help maintain his other children.
You cannot just dismiss two children to suit your own home and faqmily arrangements.

You told your step children that their dad was going to stop paying any maintenance for them and stay at home with your baby?

I was going to continue the maintainance arrangement as normal but she has fucked that.

My god, how can you not be ashamed of yourself for posting that?!

The idea that you stand over her, holding the purse strings on whether she receives the support she is DUE from the FATHER OF HER CHILDREN, and decides that as she's behaved badly she isn't going to get it - words fail.

Not your decision. Not his decision. If the maintenance isn't going to be there, he isn't in the position to be SAHD to the new child of the family, because the family have other children already who have needs.

Really reprehensible attitude.

It's not really about whether the mum of your DH's first DC is nice or not, or rude to you. It's about doing the right thing for the children. And if he can't support his first two children, he certainly shouldn't be having any more. How would you feel if he did this to you and your unborn DC if you'd split up?

Such a shame that the needs of the existing DCs aren't being put first and foremost.

I disagree that it is as black and white as a lot of PP make it seam.
OP is not responsible for her DP's DC, and there isn't any rule saying she has to pay maintenance for him.
I can see the ex-wife's point of view, of course, but really, we are expecting OP to voluntarily give 100s of pounds every month to a family that is not hers, when the ex-wife is being horrible to her.

I think what posrs are expecting is the father gets a job and probiesfor ALL of his children.

somethingborrowed then the father should get a job. He has a responsibility to ALL his children and that means working and paying CM like he should be.

Exactly GaelicSiog. I will never understand why women marry men who already have children, and then expect his children to just fuck off when their own PFB comes along. If he can't afford to support the children he already has, he shouldn't bloody have any more. It's not a complicated concept FFS. But he isn't going to be supporting any of them, his wife/partner will be supporting the new baby, presumably his ex can do exactly the same with the older children?

The maintenance has to be paid. full stop.

The decision for the dad here to be be SAHP requires the cooperation of the OP, who has now had a MC wished on her by the ex.

No fucking way would I go out to work and pay someone who wished me that.

In this case I would say to the dad that his child maintenance is his responsibility and that HE needs to ensure it's paid. His decision to be a SAHP is not realistic and he needs to get another job.

Yes BitchQueen but that is between the mother and father of the children, not to do with OP.
Considering the fact that legally he can very well stop working and stop paying, I don't understand why the XW thought being nasty will make her XH and his new wife voluntarily continue to pay.

The bloke's entire plan hinges on the cooperation of the OP, who has now been insulted to way beyond the limits of reasonableness.

I'd be telling SAHP-to-be that he's going to have to rethink his career choice while he still has responsibilities for his existing children.

I wouldn't give her a penny and would buy stuff for the kids instead as suggested by a PP. Alternatively open a savings account for them and give to them when their older (If she can afford to feed and clothe them right now - if not then you buy their stuff instead of saving).

Also, if dad has become a SAHP, why can't that be for all children involved? So that will save Mum childcare whilst she goes to work (after all contribution isn't just about earnings, right?) . If Mum doesn't currently work then she'll need to because her kids need feeding and clothing, whilst dad provides childcare. I think people are making it more complicated than it is.

How much childcare do you need for a 12 year old and 15 year old?

Savings accounts and clothing does not pay for the roof over their head, food or heating!
The CM is the fathers responsibility.

I know the exes words were hurtful but to deprive the children of financial support because of words is wrong.

Sticks and stones rhyme comes to mind.

We don't know that mum doesn't work, for a start. But regardless of whether she's on €50,000 or minimum wage, it's his moral obligation as a father to provide for his existing children. The fact that he's found a legal loophole and OP is refusing to see past the vile comments of their mother and recognise that they, the children, do not deserve this selfishness is irelevant in that sense. He's the father. He needs to step up and act like one.

Why would you want to have a baby with a prick who was planning how to stop paying for the ones he already has?

What a major fucking turn off that would be in a partner. And what little self esteem you must have!

Your DH needs to work to support his 3 children. It might suit the dynamics of your little family if he is a SAHP, but he has other obligations. What a sh1t to think he can just opt out of paying for his existing DC.
I'm not surprised his ex went mad, I would do too if my DC's stability was undermined like this.

TBH if you were going to keep paying maintenance I'm not sure why the ex wasn't told up front. All this nastiness and worry could have been avoided.

to fund someone elses life style

This is what so many people - men and women, mothers and fathers - seem to think is the purpose of cm. funding the (usually) mother's "Lifestyle" It isn't. But it is a handy way of justifying leaving your children high and dry.

Sorry, haven't RTFT but I just wanted to say, that the children have TWO parents and the financial responsibility does not fall solely on the father to provide for the DCs. Whilst he should absolutely pay maintenance when he is working, he also has the right as a parent to stay home and provide care for his child/children.

If XW does not work because she is providing care because she had no choice but to stay at home, she now has the option to return to work. If she choses against that option, that is her choice, but she cannot force XH to work just to pay her bills. It's not like he chose to leave a good job, he was made redundant.

The moral obligation is for the mother AND father to provide for their children according to their means. The CSA will no doubt take the household income of the NRP in to account, not just the fact he is not working. From Citizens Advice -

"If you have no income or a low income

You’re expected to pay some maintenance even if you’re unemployed or on a low income and even if you're already paying maintenance for other children. Generally how much you have to pay depends on your income – it doesn’t matter what other expenses you have."

So NRP will still have to pay from household money, but at a reduced rate.

It should not be only women who have the choice to stay at home and care for their children.

I am thoroughly depressed that this is even legal. You shouldn't be able to get out of paying CM by CHOOSING to become unemployed (e.g. a SAHD). It should be a financial commitment that you are legally required to meet unless you are unable to work. Ugh.

Anyway, OP, you KNOW YABU by now, surely. A man can't ditch his responsibility towards his children just because he's having another baby with someone else. If your choice as a family is that he is going to become a SAHD then you are morally, if not legally, responsible to take his children into consideration and continue to support them financially at the appropriate level.

I sincerely hope this is just you lashing out in anger at the cruel things your DH's ex-wife has said and doesn't reflect your DH's opinion because I would question the wisdom of having a child with a man who is happy to stop providing for his children when it suits him.