Child maintenance vs cost of raising a child

[Pizzaandwine1]

Is it just me or does anyone else think that child maintenance should be calculated as half of the cost of raising a child?

I don’t understand how 12% of a wage is considered the correct figure given the difference in wages.

Eg scenario 1 NRP pays £100 a month as not on a huge ways - this doesn’t cover half the cost of a child

Scenario 2 NRP pays £800 as a higher earner but no where near the same is contributed by the RP in the upbringing

Obviously this would vary slightly based on how much the NRP has them I just don’t see how a child costs more or less based on parents income - surely a child costs X regardless?

[Snappedandfarted2018]

You’re argument is flawed op as the NRP is able to earn more likely due to the lack of childcare as the RP has to consider child care costs and working hours and often the type of job they can take so it’s in line with their childcare circumstances unless the nrp is doing a considerable amount of childcare (which often or not is not the case) it tends to fall on the NRP.

[flamingofridays]

I think though, a lot of NRPs could consider 50/50 care, then everyones equal but they wont for whatever reason.

[PookieDo]

They won’t because of work
How many NRP do you really truely know who do 50% of childcare all year round VS just taking kids on occasional holiday (often in term time to save money)
It’s not the norm
And it is frustrating that people think that it’s ok if NRP spends extra money on their child during their contact time as if this equals out any needs and wants they might not be getting due to RP having a much lower income

[flamingofridays]

but vs the cost of maintenance childcare is probably sometimes less....

a lot of NRPS wont even consider it even though they could be better off!

[Want2bSupermum]

Very few NRPs are better off paying childcare vs maintenance. Those that are have a an ex who is a SAHP. They should be paying an awful lot for 'childcare' in those cases.

[flamingofridays]

But they'd be paying for the childcare for their half of the time. They might have parents who can do some childcare for example so they very easily could be better off.

I didnt mean pay the other person to look after their own child

[AmICrazyorWhat2]

Regardless of household bills, I just think that some NRP's don't realise (or want to acknowledge) how exhausting the RP's schedule is because they're doing the majority of childcare.

I was thinking about this last night as I ferried DCs to activities. DH and I are together. He works FT, I'm PT, so we split the activities about 75%:25% as he works longer hours and my work is closer to home/schools.

DD: Sports practice 3X a week; 1 game a week
DS: Sports practice 2X a week; 1 weekend game

Music lesson: 1x a week
Cubs: 1 x every 2 weeks
DD starting new activity soon: 1 x a week.

If I left DH as the RP, he'd have to do nearly all this alone, not to mention school, household chores, etc. OK, CMS may be calculated on how much each parent has the children, but from what I see IRL,
many NRPs don't really want to consider what the RP actually does ...they should really be paying them petrol money at least!

To be fair, I do know some former couples who co-parent well and fairly, but I know some real CF's too.

[lalalalyra]

many NRPs don't really want to consider what the RP actually does ...they should really be paying them petrol money at least!

Some like mine would consider it the RP's choice to send the children to activities...

[AmICrazyorWhat2]

@lalalalyra

Because they'd rather their children sat at home glued to a screen, instead of getting exercise, making new friends, etc. Sounds ideal, not!

Plus, the idea that the RP should just send them outside to play with other kids doesn't work if everyone else is at football practice!

[Kr1stina]

I think that most of them don’t give a stuff as long as it’s not costing them money.

[Graphista]

I think though, a lot of NRPs could consider 50/50 care, then everyones equal but they wont for whatever reason

Because they know damn well it would cost more than they're usually expected to pay in maintenance! The vast majority of the time maintenance doesn't come close to the actual cost of raising children. They'd also find it too inconvenient having to actually personally consider/pay for childcare, take time off work if child sick etc.

I'll get flamed but it's my lived experience - for many nrps it's a case of out of sight out of mind and I've seen that with male and female nrps.

"I think that most of them don’t give a stuff as long as it’s not costing them money" exactly!

[flamingofridays]

I dont agree about paying petrol money when the clubs generally are arranged by the rp. Nobody is making you take your child to a club every single night!

[flamingofridays]

I agree a lot of nrps really dont give a shit but there are some excellent ones too.

[Julia1111]

@Dawnacorns- Because that is the reality of divorce/ separation. Being a parent is not a job you should be paid for.

If you, their other parent cannot afford to do that, then really that is that parents problem. It does not fall on the other parent to support a grown persons life. They are responsible for providing for the child not funding a life style. That is an equal responsibility.

[dawnacorns]

That's the case Julia if both are taking 50/50 responsibility for childcare. If the NRP has been an extremely high earner with a SAHM for example, then the dcs will be the ones who suffer if the RP has to return to work, while the NRP will be the one to benefit as they will in reality be the only party better off. So it's not funding a lifestyle but providing the same level of care for dcs. Of course in most cases its a non issue as people can't afford this, but if the NRP was a super high earner that's different. The RP would be taking a career hit anyway if they SAH but that may be a choice they made as a family to benefit dcs.
What you seem to be saying is the reality of divorce from dcs point of view is that the RP who has SAH must get out to work irrespective of whether the NRP is super wealthy, which I disagree with.

[princessmum1]

I don’t think there’s anything right with child maintenance. I will have to pay £300 a month. On top of this due to my ex moving away I will spend over £600 a month to see my daughter. This is far more than it would actually cost me to look after her. I still have a mortgage, pretty much the same bills etc. It just doesn’t seem to work either way. And completely depends on the other persons corcumstnaces e.g. makes a massive difference if resident parent is paying for full time childcare.

[ohreallyohreallyoh]

Nobody is making you take your child to a club every single night!

Erm...work makes me.

[Kr1stina]

Well that’s because you are a bad mother for working ohreally.

Same as you would be a bad mother if you lived on benefits.

Let’s face it, as a single parent, whatever you do it will be wrong.

Unless you are a single father, course, in which case you are a saint.

[flamingofridays]

Work makes you take your child to a club every single night?

I didnt mean after school club i meant things like swimming/football/cubs where youre driving here there and everywhere to take them and collect them.

Not sure anyone has slagged off working mother's either. (I am one)

[piesfortea]

Having been brought up in a single parent family I find the obsession on the 'cost' of children rather depressing. I am sure when deciding to have children in general people saw them as a precious gift that people wanted to have in their lives.

When an unfortunate split happens, the biggest gain for either parent should be the amount of time they spend with the child - 50/50 should be the default. If both parents want a different arrangement they should sort it out, but if a parent has the child most of the time, they are really the one with all the key benefit.

Generally I think we should be forcing parents to accept 50/50 responsibility unless another situation is negotiated.

[AmICrazyorWhat2]

I dont agree about paying petrol money when the clubs generally are arranged by the rp. Nobody is making you take your child to a club every single night!

I'm sure many parents, regardless of whether they're RPs or NRPs, would be happy for their child to play on one sports team, though?

That's what DD and DS do, but as they get older, the teams get more competitive and there are several practices a week (3 for DD; 2 for DS), plus the matches. If they don't attend most practices, they're kicked off the team. So, parents end up ferrying them around!

Then they each do one other activity per week and DS has cubs twice a month.

Believe me, this is restrained compared with some families. DD complained that many of her friends are on two different teams. We said no way!

[AmICrazyorWhat2]

BTW, I'm not moaning about the clubs, etc., I want my DCs to do them.

I was making the point that some NRPs don't realise the time commitment and money needed in order for their DC to do a few things that they enjoy.

There was a post in "Legal" from a NRP who said his 12-year-old was complaining that the RP (who works FT) wasn't taking him to things...I don't think the NRP realised what was involved...he lives in another country and sees his DS a few times a year.