To not want to pay for his kids

[ilovemycatmorethanyou]

I started a thread about separate finances but realised that’s not the issue so my apologies but I’m starting a new one.

DH has twins to his first wife. I have no
Children. We earn very similar money, our home is paid for and was mine before we met.

He pays his wife spousal maintenance plus child maintenance despite being on a modest wage (below 30k). The spousal bit boils my blood for many reasons but essentially she held him to ransom over the divorce and be agreed so she would sign the papers. She works 12 hours a week and the maintenance allows her to do this. The kids are both late teens (twins). The spousal maintenance payments will continue until way after the children are adults unless she remarries.

I don’t want to pay for his kids, I mean I contribute to their food bills when they’re with us but I don’t want to have to pay for anything else. AIBU? I feel our life is already compromised by this spousal maintenance and I don’t feel I want to give his ex anymore of my hard earned cash via her kids.

peace wherever you live that is a shocking amount. £1100 per month on only clubs and food for 2 kids - that is the equivelant of some peoples whole wage.

DSS for example plays rugby every week, it costs us £20 for the full year and I think we spent around £40 on a kit, and about £30 on boots. That's £90 for a whole year. The only other activities he does (because that's all he wants to do) are after school clubs which are free. His school dinners cost £15 a week.

You obviously live a privileged life, but you need to realise that its not the norm, at all.

OP isn't saying he should pay less for the kids either.

also do you really think op hasn't spoken to her husband about this?

if he is anything like most men he wont be arsed with the conflict it will cause with his ex wife. Its much easier to piss off your current wife than your ex wife, because your ex wife can stop you seeing your kids at the drop of a hat. (and it does happen believe me)

If it was as easy as "DH lets go to court" do you not think they wouldn't have done it by now?

OP is allowed a moan, you know.

of course its wrong he has to pay spousal maintenance, he earns 30k a year ffs and this woman can work she just chooses not to.

The judge felt it was fair at the time, maybe its not fair now, maybe things have changed!

TBH I don't believe spousal maintenance should ever be awarded.

It’s not just privilege, I’m not complaining, but nothing here costs £20 a year and after school clubs are not free. To send my kids to after school clubs costs a fortune because they have to go via kids club first so works out at £22 per child, per session. Each of my kids has music at £150 a month - not available at school.

I’m sure OP has spoken to her DH and yet, still keeps paying for them out of her own pocket - why, when he must have change from his salary? Plus he agreed to this which is why it’s happening. Those kids could be costing closer to my kids than your DSS but she isn’t telling us. It could be somewhere in between. We also don’t know the history between the DH and ex wife and what they actually agreed on and why. If my DH and I divorced tomorrow - I’d laugh at £500 a month and also it would be a lot more complex than just coming up with a figure, we’d have to sort though other financials between us. He could keep this, I’d get that... and it would all hopefully get worked out fairly. The OP hates those poor kids and resents her husband, and outing all of that into her hatred of the ex wife. The money itself is a red herring.

I love threads like these.
When you marry someone with children, they become your responsibility financially. That is just a fact of the matter.
It seems to be a long standing arrangement and therefore you have to accept that's what it is.
My dh ex pays us NOTHING for her children and we have full responsibility and care for them.
You either accept the status quo or you kick him out.

I think both sides can be wrong in the sense that an ex isn't automatically entitled to all their former partners money as they have the kids, both households should be able to afford reasonable accommodation and they should be entitled to a equal quality of lifestyle.
However if an ex is paying 200 quid a month for maintenance... that's bollocks. Equally if you get nothing there is an expectation for the step parent to pick up the financial slack.

theWarOnPeace

I spend roughly £300/£350 per month. £120 of that is for transport for school every month, so not everyone will have that either. My ex pays nothing but if he was to pay, I'd expect him to pay half of that.

well if she just stops, then what happens? she gets painted as the evil stepmother doesn't she because she doesn't want to fund them (and why should she). You already think she hates them, what would you think of her if she only spent her own money on herself?

I agree that her husband should be funding them and if he's struggling with that he needs to sort that with his ex, not rely on OP.

I can see why OP is angry with the ex wife though because it is hard to see someone getting a big % of your family money, when you don't think they deserve it.

If you divorced tomorrow, you'd laugh at £500 but again this just shows you're privileged and you cant seem to understand that some people have quite a lot less money than you, and much lower outgoings than you.

Things like music at £150 are totally optional and are not a condition of bringing up a child. Childcare, yes, but the ex doesn't have this issue.

When you marry someone with children, they become your responsibility financially. That is just a fact of the matter.

its definitely not the fact of the matter at all. Someone elses kids do not become your responsibility financially because you marry their parent. Nope.

What's the point of marrying someone with children if you refuse to accept some responsibility for this? If I refused to pick up the financial slack for my husbands children our household would be all kinds of fucked up.

If it's anything like my husband it was whatever they agreed in their financial agreement at the end of their marriage. My husband is a fairly high earner and his ex wife gave up her career to look after their kids.

He pays her £1200 a month and neither of the kids live with her because they are 19 and 21 and work full time.

He agreed 10 years ago to pay her this until they are both 21 so in about 18 months time it stops. I knew this before I married him though so just accepted it as a financial commitment.

you marry someone because you love them, not because you want to become financially responsible for their children

that's nice for you, but I certainly don't pick up DPs slack for his child.

When his child lived with us things like food, uniform etc came out of the household budget and this was fine, but DP wouldn't expect that we discussed it.

Now DSS lives with his mum, dp pays maintenance before the rest of his wage goes into the joint account. I would not pay this and nor would he expect me to.

Things like extras generally do come out of the joint account, but again this is because it's been discussed and I am happy to contribute, not because I SHOULD or dp expects it.

Someone elses kids do not become your responsibility financially because you marry their parent. Nope.

I'm both a stepmum and mother to DS1 who has DP as his stepdad. If he'd differentiated between DS1 and his DDs there wouldn't be a relationship. The same goes for me. If I commit to him, I commit to being there for his children as well as my own.

It is as easy as DH let’s go to court. We live in a country where we are free to do exactly that.

Of course the ex wife is contributing the same. She works almost 50 hours a month which should bring in at least £500. She will get tax credit of about £500 plus child benefit of around £120. She no doubt has mortgage or rent of £500 a month at least, bills for council tax, gas & elec, water rates which for me are around £250 a month, food which from Aldi say will be £400 a month, car insurance and running of about £75 a month. Kids bus passes and lunches of around £100 a month for both, clothes, toiletries, haircuts and other sundries. Then she may need to save for a holiday for the kids, there may be school trips, pocket money, saving for Xmas and birthday gifts, driving lessons perhaps. Saving for emergencies. She will need to have her own money from this for her own life too.

It can be a very personal decision after a split how the money is sorted. Lots of factors can be taken into account such as the pensions, the house size and location, the kids school catchment area in terms of selling the home, who left who and why (I’m talking personal reasons here, not legal).

The ex wife may not have felt able to get back into work so easily, having been an agreed SAHM in the marriage. Maybe they don’t live somewhere where this is easily facilitated, who knows! The OP hasn’t disclosed any info.

For gods sake the ex is hardly rinsing him & above al it was his choice to agree!

im not saying treat them differently, i'm saying a step parent is not financially responsible for a step child.

It is as easy as DH let’s go to court. We live in a country where we are free to do exactly that

we are of course free to do that, although it costs money which they may not have. There is also the very real threat of the ex stopping him seeing his children, and parental alienation. Hopefully as older teens they would choose to see him anyway, but you cant guarantee that.

i'm not saying she is rinsing him, but I am saying that spousal maintenance in this situation is ridiculous, and if it were me I would have taken it to court already to be honest. It was his choice to agree but It was an inherently stupid one, though I can totally understand why he did it.

would have been a better idea for him to not push for divorce. £500 out of his monthly pay!

But what you are describing is being financially responsible and accepting that he has a previous financial commitment to his children.

If you refused all responsibilities you would wouldn't have a joint account to pay for their food and clothes when they were with you?

Is it me or does it feel like when you're the resident step parent this is a given but if you are the non resident step parent you can resent and refuse all of this? Totally bonkers.

im not saying treat them differently, i'm saying a step parent is not financially responsible for a step child.

By absenting yourself from being responsible in any way, it is treating them differently though. I don't know about your own situation, it's not my business. But you're either a family or you're not, and I can't see the sense in drawing lines where there doesn't need to be any.

Completely agree InTheHeatofLisbon

herondale yes, I agreed to be financially responsible. What I am saying is I do not have to be, am not under any obligation to be and if I wanted to yes I could do exactly that and he could pay exclusively for his own child. I frankly couldn't be arsed, but he wouldn't be bothered if that's what I wanted, because DSS is not my child. It was not my choice to bring him into this world, it was his parents, and therefore they should support him. I support him because I WANT to.

its not a given if you're a resident step parent no, if you're a non resident step parent your contribution would be paying towards maintenance which should never be expected, again unless you want to, which I do not.

You can refuse whatever you like, as long as both partners agree. There is no hard and fast rules about what step parents should pay for.

Lisbon its not treating them differently, DSS is not treated any differently by me because I do not contribute to his maintenance payment.

We are a family and I contribute in other ways, but again that's because I want to, not because I am obligated to.

Nobody should be obligated to fund someone elses child unless they want to and they volunteer to do it.

I would never expect a future partner to contribute to my son at all because he already has two parents. Its not drawing lines its being realistic.

You can refuse whatever you like, as long as both partners agree. There is no hard and fast rules about what step parents should pay for.

You're right, there aren't. Fair enough, it clearly works for you and your family and that's really all that matters isn't it? Just like the way we do things works for our family.

It may be different because of the agreement but when my mum and separated when I was younger he paid child maintenance until we hit 16 and then he helped out with the stuff we needed for college if we went. Xx

My solicitor told me that spousal mtnce can be stopped after a year.

well if she just stops, then what happens? she gets painted as the evil stepmother doesn't she because she doesn't want to fund them (and why should she). You already think she hates them, what would you think of her if she only spent her own money on herself?

She's not though, he is. OP seems annoyed that HIS money goes away from her and to them, she isn't laying out money of her own, and if she is it's when they are there and like it or not, they are her children too now.

you marry someone because you love them, not because you want to become financially responsible for their children

No, but when you are going out with someone you will find out they have two children. If you want nothing at all to do with them and no obligation to them or financial responsibility, you don't even go out with them, before love even comes into play.

I'm sorry, but when you marry someone with children, they are your children and your responsibility.
As I said earlier, if their mother were to die (god forbid) the OP would have full time responsibility of those two children. She and her husband would be 100% the full time parents and all financial responsibility would be on them. That's what you contend with when dating someone with kids, and if you're not willing to accept that, you don't date them.

OP, almost nothing of what you've talked about is any of your business. To be clear:

1. How many hours your husband's ex-wife works is none of your business
2. What your husband's ex-wife claims in benefits is none of your business
3. How much your husband's ex-wife earns is none of your business
4. How much your husband's ex-wife spends on her children is none of your business
5. How much the court-approved spouse and children's maintenance payments your husband makes are none of your business

Here's the only thing that is your business: how you and your husband agree to cover the expenses of running your household, which sometimes includes his children. That's the only discussion you need to have, and yes, I do think you need to have a better conversation about that in which you are both open about your income, your disposable income, and your priorities for spending it. It's fine if you decide that your husband will cover all the expenses for his children, but if that leaves him with, for example, no money to go on holiday with you, it seems to me you both suffer unnecessarily. So you have to work out how to compromise with him.

What you don't get to do is tell his ex-wife how to live her life. And, to be honest, you also don't get to tell your husband how to manage his relationship with her. If he wants to see a solicitor to revisit the maintenance payments, he can, but he doesn't have to do that, and you both need to be aware that the legal fees will not be nothing, and the outcome may not be favourable.

And finally, stop posting the same question every two weeks on MN hoping for some magic answer. If you aren't interested in hearing the opinions of people who don't know every part of your life, don't ask AIBU. I would have thought that was obvious, but apparently not.