Ex left his job to retrain as a doctor - no maintenance

[Childmaintenancechaser]

My ex had a well paid corporate job (between £120K - £150K at various times). Arranging child maintenance was a struggle, for a long time the level was set at £51 / week for two children for reasons I cannot fully understand (he has limited contact, by choice). Childcare fees were not accepted by the CMS as something he has a duty to contribute to either. I had to return to full time work with two under two, and am still deeply in debt accrued at that time.
Now he finally has a job where he is employed in the UK and his full earnings are under PAYE and thus visible to the HMRC. And... I have just received an official letter from him that he is quitting his current job in order to retrain as a medical doctor and not planning to be in paid employment at least for the next six years. He's in early 50s, and both our children are still under 5.
I don't even know what my AIBU is. AIBU to think that if one has enough funds to get through the medical school, it has to be taken into account for the child support calculation? AIBU to be very jealous at him for having this freedom to do as he wishes?

What a complete cock.

However, I disagree about him not able to study medicine because of his age. People study for degrees all the time with no intention to get a job in the studied field. Should all uni demand that all applicants sign a declaration that they will be in related work or looking for it upon graduating? Why should medicine be different? Maybe he is one of those extremely academically gifted person who gets a kick from studying and only intends to get a degree in Medicine with no intention to become a doctor?

Because the NHS (which is paid for by you and me) picks up most of the costs of educating a doctor, estimated to be about £160k once student loans are taken into account. Accountants (for example) don’t cost us anywhere near as much, and last time I checked, we weren’t in an accountant recruitment crisis.

I am, it’s the misquoting of my posts I am disputing which has derailed my subsequent posts from the thread.

Please don't say I misquoted you. I didn't.

That's good to hear that you want to write a book, OP. I wrote one once and it's a great way of doing something with feelings and experiences you can't process in any other way. Writing doesn't cost anything, either. I realise you've probably got very little time but half an hour on the train or after the kids have gone to bed each day would soon add up. And then for your second novel you can mine this situation you describe here. Might be cathartic!

So me saying;

“I do not think it’s unreasonable to support your children via savings”

Equates to me saying the NRP has no obligation to support his children via his savings?

You took what I said out of context and manipulated it to mean something different.

I hope OPs ex grows into a lonely old man having walked out on his young children.

I was referring to your saying that the OP had a responsibility to save as well, especially given that there will have been times that she received more than the coat of raising a child as he was a high earner.

I was pointing out that the entire premise here is based on the fact that he hasn't been paying, so she had nothing to save.

You said what you said and I did NOT misquote you so please don't say I did. Nor did I manipulate what you said.

You mused on about the rights and wrongs of savings being fair game for CMS and in two separate posts gave your opinion that while the OP's ex was being unfair etc there are reasons savings shouldn't be fair game. Muse away but expect people (and I wasn't the only one) to disagree with you.

I don’t agree, I have not disputed that NRP should be using his savings to support his children.

But in any event sorry to hijack OP. I’ll leave it there.

Have you considered getting legal advice for a schedule 1 children act 1989 claim for financial provision for children? Lump sums to assist with housing, education needs, etc. You can’t get maintenance, but you might be able to get some funds to help with children.

Read this case for some idea of how it might go:
www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.Aspx?i=ed177666

It seems to me that if he can support himself for 6 years, he can also afford to support his children.

It isn't age discrimination not to accept someone in their 50s on to a medical degree course. It makes no financial sense. They are likely to only work for the NHS for 5-10 years, possibly even less

They don't seem to retire in our hospital - one is still lecturing at the grand age of 97. Doctors drop their work load for sure , down to 3 days a week but DHs over all consultant professor is 83 and still operating, his consultant 'junior' is in his mid 60's. Our GP surgery is staffed by 70-somethings.

50 is no age, and he's likely got 20-30+ years in him to practice

What a shit he is, op. Yanbu at all.

Medical schools do place an age limit on entry due to the length of training - it’s not ‘just’ 5 years training but at least another 5/10 afterwards getting into a specialism. It’s either total BS to avoid paying maintenance or partially true and he’s doing a Biomedical Science course or something.

@Craftycorvid

RTFT. There is no age limit.

But individual Med’ schools have limits.

I am 45 and have an offer to study MBBS in September. There has never been a mention of my age...in fact the course leader told me that the NHS are crying out for mature student medics.

But Individual med schools have limits

Which ones (as they are acting illegally)?

With the number if applicants for medical courses, they really wouldn't need to use the age as a reason. If they thought the person was too old then they'd just not give them a place and say that other applicants had better experience/more recent evidence of study etc etc. They wouldn't need to use the age as a reason, even if it was the driving force behind the decision and you couldn't prove it.
I sort of assumed that's what the school would have done and he wouldn't have been given a place... But turns out they don't!

There’s huge oversight at selection committees with regards to equality etc. You wouldn’t get away with that.

If they thought the person was too old then they'd just not give them a place and say that other applicants had better experience/more recent evidence of study etc etc.

Rubbish. Try substituting they thought the person was too gay, or too female, or too black.

You can’t unofficially discriminate against someone like that.

There was talk a couple of years ago that Jeremy Hunt wanted all UK medical students to promise four years’ work in the NHS. But the BMA argued against it. Even if that had become a rule, someone starting a course in their 50s still would have lots of time to be able to promise that.

I wouldn't want someone of that age to be operating or doing procedures on me once qualified, especially in the middle of the night.

Many Doctors reduce on call and night time working etc as they progress through 50s as it becomes less safe.

I'm sure Unis are restricted by PC policies but as a Dr I think it's a ridiculous waste of (the state's) money to train at that age.

None of my ranting helps the OP though. Shocking behaviour and sadly now being facilitated by state.

Surely all graduate medicine course are self-funding?

Even undergraduates need to get student loans. I'm not sure there's much state involvement left is there?

Assholes like this guy make me so angry I feel like setting a bag of dog shit on fire on his doorstep.

@YouWhoNeverArrived I agree with your post and there’s been a lot of incorrect info on this thread. BUT, when I was at Med school in the 1990s there was a cut off at 30. You had to be 30 or younger at the time of taking up your place. It caused quite the stir that we had someone in our year who had turned 31 a week before, and he’d been given a special exemption, which he’d had to battle to get. Obviously things have changed with the equality act, but there are slightly older people out there who wanted to do medicine at the tender age of 31 upwards, and who couldn’t, which probably feeds this thread.

Because the NHS (which is paid for by you and me) picks up most of the costs of educating a doctor, estimated to be about £160k once student loans are taken into account.

Loans are not a cost, when they are repaid with interest. That aside, NHS should maybe find a way to ensure they get their costs back. The four-year work obligation mentioned up-thread sounds sensible.