Being made to feel guilty by friends. Should I contribute?

[Jpw74]

Nc as other threads may be outing. Sorry if this is long!

Been with partner for several years. Both in mid-early 40s. We are getting married later next year, second marriages for both.

When I first got married, neither me nor my parents had any real money to speak of. Ex-dh and I did a low key registry wedding.

Since then, my career has taken off, I feel incredibly lucky and I am planning on paying for the kind of wedding I’ve always dreamed of.

Now the point of my post: we were having drinks with partner’s best friend and his wife this weekend and the wife made some sort of comment like “I can’t believe you (me) are willing to throw Xxx at a wedding but are ok letting (my partner’s) other child receive less money via CMS”

Partner used to work a very stressful but lucrative job. When we got together I saw the effect the job had on his MH and how truly unwell he was because of it. After looking at my salary, we decided that it would be better for him long term to retrain and become a teacher, something he has always wanted to do!

His ex is unhappy because the drop in maintenance was significant and must be sharing this with friends. In all other respects partner has maintained the same relationship with his dd as before and we intend to do so going forward.

To my point: Am I being the unreasonable one in thinking I’ve worked hard for my money and if I want to throw myself a big wedding I should be allowed to do so. I am a hurt that the wife thinks I should be contributing to partner’s dd’s maintenance to keep it at previous levels.

Partner’s thoughts on this are that he is not dodging his responsibilities, parents lose jobs, switch jobs, etc As long as he parents to the best that he can both in the financial sense from his current salary and is physically present for his dd, Ex should have no right to look at me and my salary + the lifestyle it provides us as dd is not my responsibility.

To give you a sense of figures, I make high six figures/year as did partner before switching to being a teacher.

Any harder than the OP spending her 800k salary on herself and new partner?

That’s irrelevant, though! He was paying child maintenance to share 50% costs of raising a child. And then a hefty whack on top. Now he’s not earning, he’s still paying child maintenance, out of his savings. His new DP is not obliged to support him, her step-child AND another adult (child’s mother). She just isn’t.

Kid’s with then EOW, 50% of holidays and a day a week. And he pays £1,300 a month. How can anyone think she’s hard done by?

That is high, the op shouldn’t be feel she has to pay that sum. Does the ex wife have her own income out of interest? Or working towards getting one.

You shouldn’t rely on people like the ex h for high sums because if they are miserable and want to change then of course they can.

Stuck the OP has stated the figures. He was paying approx £10k per month and now £1300 allegedly.

I have to say this whole scenario makes little sense.

HF managers would have their own hedge funds and investments for a start. If he’s been on £800k plus for years, he wouldn’t need “subsidising“ by OP surely? These people are very good at getting their money to work for them. Many would retire I. Their 40s anyway and live off dividends.

Why would you be giving a woman that you had a two-week fling with £100k per year, when there are no school fees, the house is paid off and he’s no idea what she’s spending it on?

Surely, some of that amount would have been better spent on school fees? Put it this way, I know many people on this kind of income and that’s where it goes, first and foremost,

Paying for a ski trip would be neither here nor there to an ex-HF manager, even if he has quit.

He could have reduced maintenance payments but put the excess in trust for the DD’s future?

The whole scenario doesn’t ring true, I have to say.

Regardless of the money, I'd think twice before getting a bit snooty with DSD's mother for not having spent the money on education in the way that you think she should.

I think you said that your DSD came to you once each week on a weeknight and every other weekend. So hardly 50-50 parenting - the mother is shouldering the bulk of the childcare and the parenting, leaving your DP the luxury of making choices about how to spend his time and the direction in which he wants to take his career. Even if you assume that your DP is looking after DSD for 4 nights out of 14:

1. given the timing of those nights, it seems unlikely that your DP is actually doing 4/14ths of the actual parenting - more that he gets to have fun with her after her mum has done the hard work of the day-to-day parenting. Please feel free to tell me I'm wrong, for example, but it seems unlikely that your DP will be taking his daughter to the dentist on those evenings, or to have her feet measured, or using the time to fill in endless school forms, or spending hours researching strategies to help her if she's struggling with something at school. Is he spending the majority of his free time reading books about how to stop her being bullied, or reduce her exposure to inappropriate material on the internet? Or is he literally just hanging out with her, when she turns up with the clothes her mum has packed for her, and then sending her back to her mum - like a babysitter, rather than an actual parent? This isn't meant to be rude - I say this because DH is a high earner, and as a result I now only work very part time. Sometimes we barely see him, so I do understand your points about stress and long hours, OP, but he doesn't have time to do any of this stuff, and so we have divided the total labour up between us so that I do most of the tasks mentioned above. If DSD's mum has been doing the same, because your DP wasn't around in any meaning parenting sense, then her freedom to pursue retraining to "even things up" has been curtailed. It's in pretty poor taste to be rude about it because she has been doing a good chunk of your DP's share of the parenting as well as her own - talk about a double whammy. This is on top of the early years of night wakings, etc, which she would have been doing mostly on her own. I'm not saying it's impossible to go back to education when you're on your own with children - other posters will no doubt say that they have done it - but I think your expectation that she is somehow a bit of a failure because she doesn't have the same job as you is pretty short-sighted, when you and DP haven't accepted a full 50% of the responsibilities she has been shouldering for all those years; and
2. If your DP has genuinely been in such a stressful career, has he genuinely been able to spend that much time with his DD? Again, I only have my own experience to draw on, but DH very, very rarely has a whole weekend free to play with the kids, let alone every other weekend. Jobs that pay that much money and involve the level of stress you are talking about are very often 7/7 jobs. Again, if this has meant that a greater level of parental responsibility has fallen on your DSD's mother, that would have further limited her choices.

Plus if he was a HF manager until recently, he wouldn’t need the OP to be paying for their wedding and they wouldn’t need to be making a song and dance to other people about having an expensive wedding either because it’s all relative. Does he have no savings / investment portfolios of his own?

People are suggesting she pay another woman a full time salary.

Fuck me you really are obsessed with the mother, aren’t you?

No, child maintenance is not ‘paying another woman a salary.’ HTH.

Exactly cosima.

HF managers would have their own hedge funds and investments for a start. If he’s been on £800k plus for years, he wouldn’t need “subsidising“ by OP surely?

Not if he had any financial sense himself. One of DH’s best friends earns similar in the same profession. He essentially ‘retired’ last year at 33 (he is working, but for pleasure rather than for the money). His wife is a SAHM, so no subsidising there. His investments are sufficient for them both.

When did OP say she struggles with a computer. Did I miss that bit? I'm pretty sure OP is conversant with computers if she works for a Hedge Fund.

The only thing she said was "Sorry just downloaded the app and not sure how to reply directly yet."

Fuck me you really are obsessed with the mother, aren’t you?

No, child maintenance is not ‘paying another woman a salary.’ HTH.

Fuck me, it is a full time salary when it’s £100K per annum. It is a full time salary when it’s NOT HER CHILD. Why would it be “child maintenance” when she doesn’t have any bloody children?!

Child maintenance is meant to cover 50% of a child’s living costs and expenses. HTH.

Nobody has explained how much the child will be going without and this huge disparity of the luxurious life of the OP and her partner and the child. Where has the Op said she has that lifestyle?

The ex has a house (which she keeps) and a very large income and now she doesn't have such a large income. She will need to get off her arse and get a job and the money for the child goes to the child....it is still a heck of a lot for one child - she won't notice the disparity then will she?

OP, If you do decide to contribute, do it directly, eg pay the pano/maths tutor, pay the school, set up a savings account etc. Don't pay the EX any money, her gravy train has ended.

Are you exceptionally dim or something?

Must be.

Lol I'm probably totally missing the point but there are so many questions here... how do these people know your business and each other? How do they know your DFs ex well enough if they only had a 2 week fling, to discuss money? Does the other ex-wife get spousal support as part of their divorce that he will have to cover from his reduced wage (because if so then you'll definitely be supplementing somewhere down the line)? Earning £800k a year, starting from humble beginning has surely given you enough experience and tenacity to tell people to mind their own?? If your OH was earning a similar wage until recently you have been bringing home circa £70k a month. A state school ski trip is a drop in the ocean and whilst it's not your responsibility surely for the sake of your DF just offer to pay or suggest he pays to out of his savings??? And then you get your response to these people "SDD will never go without DF will make sure of that but we feel £100k a year is excessive given OH health and his previous commitment to ensure ex and SDDs financial security... ex has had plenty of time to save for such events".... end of conversation. If you don't have any children this girl is potentially going to be your next of kin too- how does the fact that directly or indirectly she may inherit from you sit with you given your feelings of her having to make her own way in life?
To be fair this is all a bit far fetched to me.... I can't for the life of me understand how anyone (your DP) who is intelligent enough to earn £800k(ish) wouldn't have sought some proper legal and financial advice here. As if his ex-wife (who I'm assuming married you DP after your SD was born) didn't say anything before it got to this- surely at some time somebody would have suggested a reduced and more sensible mainatance payment combined with a trust fund?

And finally.... teaching as a less stressful job?

I don't believe a man would pay so much money to someone they had a 3 week fling with and who has a'chaotic' life and needs to 'better themselves' as some kind of social experiment

Agreed.

There are mistruths being told by someone here.

*Surely the DD's mother, having had access to £100k a year for X years, will have saved a university fund for her child?

The father, having access to several hundreds of thousands, would seem the more appropriate person to have saved for a university fund.*

Surely they'll both have money put aside for Uni, she's their daughter not just his.

As for the 800k are we talking before or after tax? (just curious)

OP, If you're not getting new friends feel free to criticize any of their decisions you don't agree with.

Child maintenance is meant to cover 50% of a child’s living costs and expenses. HTH.

No it’s meant to provide the child with a lifestyle that reflects that of their NRP. That’s why it rises when the NRP salary rises. If it was just to cover half the DCs costs it would be set at a fixed rate.

@MatildaTheCat

"Between you you have just one child but are quibbling about her expenses? You never once mention if you have any fondness for the DD which implies that you don’t"
No, it doesn't imply she has no fondness for her partner's child. It may mean she is just stating the issue. Whether or not she likes, loves, dislikes the child is not relevant to whether she should feel guilty and contribute to the child's upkeep.

I would also add -

Given that you DF is clearly hugely experienced and intelligent and teaching is so poorly paid that it literally will make no discernible difference to your joint finances. Could he not use his wealth of knowledge to work voluntarily for education at a higher level to improve STEM provisions in schools and make a much bigger impact than a NQT in a disadvantaged state school could ever do?

He could use what I would assume to be considerably important and impressive contacts to start up funds and scholarships for this kids? Someone who was once paid such a huge amount of money must have influence somewhere?

It really is quite ridiculous to think he can change these disadvantaged kids lives in the classroom. A million teachers with the same goal have already proved that in the current state school environment this just isn’t possible. Unfortunately.

Change comes from the top, he must know this.

Surely they'll both have money put aside for Uni, she's their daughter not just his.

Agree with this. My comment was in response to a comment that suggested it should have been saved from the £100k the mother received for the child. The implication being that £100k was more than enough to save for university (which I agree it is) however if we’re basing it on having enough money to save for uni then the father was in a much better position to do that than the mother. Not just because of his income but his access to and knowledge of investment vehicles that would provide the best return. The mother had no such access or knowledge.

No it’s meant to provide the child with a lifestyle that reflects that of their NRP. That’s why it rises when the NRP salary rises. If it was just to cover half the DCs costs it would be set at a fixed rate.

Yes, technically you are correct. But when you start getting into high six figures and obscene amounts of money, at a certain amount it stops being about supporting the child. I honestly don’t think I could spend £100k pa on a child if I tried, and at some points it would either be spent on my own living expenses/stuff I wanted or just sitting there in a bank account for the child’s future. In which case it seems a bit far fetched that the mother can’t pay for a £1300 ski trip. However, that said, I think the same about the father. He also had an obscene amount of money over the years and should also have some stashed to pay it. What I don’t understand is why everyone is bashing the OP, the only adult who didn’t create the child, and saying she should pay to maintain the child’s lifestyle.

The £100,000 wasn’t cash just op guessing what he spent overall on child. Maybe he includes cost of taking her on holiday with him in this or savings for her future it doesn’t read as though it was £8000 a month bank transfer.

It is measured on the H’s income the op’s doesn’t come into it.