Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To expect ex wife to pay her way with 50:50 shared care

506 replies

youknowitmakessensedunnit · 03/03/2020 13:55

Women's view please! I got divorced about 2 years ago and went to court over child arrangements with ex wife eventually getting a court order for 50:50 shared care for our 1 child.

I work, ex wife doesn't
We both own our own homes
I have flexible job which allows me to have full freedom to do school runs, hobbies etc in school hours
Child has completely independent life in each home, e.g. no shared stuff
I pay for all school activities and one offs

My ex wife rather than getting a job chooses to claim child maintenance from me via the CMS, child benefit and state benefits, maintaining a position that she is the child's primary caregiver because she doesn't work.

AIBU to think she's a lazy git who should stop sponging?

OP posts:
RainMinusBow · 04/03/2020 00:24

It's not the case (well it certainly wasn't in mine) that courts look at "similar lifestyles" of both parties when ordering 50:50.

In 2014 I left my controlling abuser ex-husband. Kids were 3 and 6. He applied for 50:50 shared care and that's how it went.

6 years on...I'm still in privately rented while he lives with his unemployed gf in a huge five-bed with four bathrooms and four sports cars on the drive.

He earns in excess of £100k pa, I earn just over £13,000 pa working ft.

Financially things are a struggle and have always been as he doesn't have to pay a penny.

A controller's dream, basically.

Kirkman · 04/03/2020 02:46

Its not that all men must be lying at all.

It doesnt make sense.

If he has 50:50 care and pays £200 either

it's wrong (in which case he needs to go back to the CMS, her working or not doesnt impact this)

He earns a fortune, in which case £50 per week isnt going to stop him having nice holidays. Her working still doesnt impact this. He will be expected to pay it wether she works or not.

Or he doesnt do 50:50. CMS works on nights, not daytime hours.

Also, their child is school age. State benefits do not support people with school age children that do not work. So either theres a disability or she has other younger children or she doesnt claim benefits or it's actually job seekers (in which case she is looking for a job and that doesnt last forever) or lives off her personal money.

All of which doesnt impact what CMS has to pay.

I think there very few people out there, that would still work if they could afford not to and support themsleves.

The fact is, it only adds up if CMS is wrong. In which case, given that he has been given the breakdown, he knows it's wrong. Instead of moaning about wether his ex works or not, he needs to sort that out.

Original poster
youknowitmakessensedunnit · 04/03/2020 07:39

Many thanks for all your comments - appreciated!

I wasnt really looking for the legal justification of 50:50 equal shared care, but the moral aspect of the case, and I've had lots of feedback and votes so very grateful.

OP posts:
Whatafustercluck · 04/03/2020 08:11

I think the op has gotten a hard time. So many people on this site see no issue with a women being supported by a man after divorce. In some cases women do leave themselves vulnerable by being a sahm, yet time and time again it is pointed out to them that a lack of work history will affect future job prospects and leaves them vulnerable.

And many women are where they are because of controlling/ abusive husbands. These things are in place to protect women. Many women are left with no other choice than to be a sahp because their husbands earn more to begin with and it makes more financial sense. That's not a real 'choice' is it?

BigChocFrenzy · 04/03/2020 08:47

"many women are where they are because of controlling/ abusive husbands"

Most became SAHM by mutual agreement - and because they wanted to;
it seems to be an aim / dream of many here to be an SAHM and not merely until school or even secondary school

That's absolutely fine when both continue to agree on this and the partnership lasts
However, it makes the SAHM very vulnerable in the event of a breakup

Most think it will never happen to them and take the risk
Others make the choice to keep working, rather than rely on someone else to always be faithful & decent

UniversalAunt · 04/03/2020 08:48

Moral aspect?

Your ex wife claims benefits in her own right, & unless she is claiming incorrectly & there is benefit overpayment, then her actions are morally sound.

She claims on behalf of your child the child benefit that is due. Again unless she claims incorrectly, then this is also morally correct as she does not seek to defraud or mislead.

You pay what the CMS say is due for your child & do not duck this obligation, & as a responsible parent that is morally sound.

‘...she’s a lazy git who should stop sponging? ‘ - Your observation from the moral high ground.

BigChocFrenzy · 04/03/2020 08:48

Many men seem to change dramatically from being a loving partner to being a ruthless bastard after a breakup,
who will avoid any help to his former partner, or even to their kids

BigChocFrenzy · 04/03/2020 08:53

All women should be aware that 50:50 can be awarded after breakup - especially if the man is a higher earner who plans this
and then CM can legally be little or nothing

Sounds like the ex is in a better position than most, with no mortgage
but some SAHMs are surprised to find they end up in dire straits.

BigChocFrenzy · 04/03/2020 08:55

"moral aspect"

You are entitled to apply for CM to be re-assessed

Your ex is entitled to claim benefits if she qualifies

Babytigerrr · 04/03/2020 08:59

@Whatisthisfuckery

why are you being so rude? just because op is a man?

i bet you wouldnt say we were dancing round ops vagina if op was a woman Hmm

gross.

Babytigerrr · 04/03/2020 09:02

.Many women are left with no other choice than to be a sahp because their husbands earn more to begin with and it makes more financial sense. That's not a real 'choice' is it?

of course its a real choice. DP earns just enough for me to be a SAHP if i want. It would have made more financial sense when DS was tiny because FT nursery was expensive,

You know what though?

i went back to fucking work for a loss (we pooled finances anyway so not really but yeno) because i wanted to, and i knew it would be worth it when he turned 3.

There is always a choice. A lot of women dont want to take it.

Babytigerrr · 04/03/2020 09:06

i also dont think its that unlikely that CMS have got it wrong... They are shite.

I just find it ridiculous that posters are automatically asssuming op is lying rather than that something else is wrong.

£50 a week isnt nothing when you're already paying for a child 50% of the time. Maintenance is supposed to cover the time up to 50% that you dont care/pay for the child. In this scenario op is doing his 50% and then paying more on top.

Waxonwaxoff0 · 04/03/2020 09:08

@Whatafustercluck of course it is a choice to be a SAHP. This is not the 1800s, women can work hard and do well in their careers. It's not like it was 50 years ago when the only jobs for women were low paid secretary type jobs. We have choices.

Even if doesn't make financial sense at the time to go back to work it makes sense long term for our own protection. Choosing to be a SAHP is a fine and valid choice but it's at your own risk. I speak from experience, I was a SAHM when I split with my ex, but I did not expect him to support me financially afterwards, I got a job.

NomDeDieu · 04/03/2020 09:23

@youknowitmakessensedunnit
So I assume you are now morally feeling you are better than her and you can carry on judging away :(:(

The way she gets the money she needs to live on is NOT your issue anymore.
If you have e a issue with CM, address that.

But saying that you can’t afford a holiday because she is On benefits makes you look like a twat tbh

HTH

MarieQueenofScots · 04/03/2020 09:23

but the moral aspect of the case

There is literally no moral aspect Confused.

I can't help but agree with a previous poster that given you've not taken the easiest and most obvious course of action available to you, it does suggest more of a back story than you've shared.

Whatafustercluck · 04/03/2020 09:24

So many anecdotes being trotted out. The fact I pointed out was that there are protections in place for women, through marriage, for a reason. Of course many women choose to stay at home, and many others do not. Protections are in place for those who do not. Who is to say that OP's ex isn't one of the latter?

But to add my anecdote, I'm a wohm and have worked ft since the birth of my first child 9 years ago. I am also the main earner in our relationship - he works ft too btw. I am well aware of the potentially vulnerability of women. By contrast my sister left a controlling marriage 2 years ago. They have one daughter. They have 50/50 custody. Sister was persuaded to give up work to raise their daughter by said controlling husband. Skip a few years, she finally comes to her senses. Her career is dead, her earning capacity is low. Nonetheless she finds a ft job on low wages. She lives in small rented accommodation. She is not entitled to cm because they share time with their dd 50/50. He does, however, pay her rent because he knows full well it why she can't earn more and that if she went through the courts and asked for full financial disclosure she'd be entitled for far more.

I return to my main point. These things are in place to protect women. That's not a bad thing.

Whatafustercluck · 04/03/2020 09:29

And I have to say that had my childcare costs outweighed my income, I'd be a fool to continue to work. I suspect this is many families' reality.

itsallthedramaMickiloveit · 04/03/2020 09:33

Worse off?
Yes traditionally when paying for services you're 'worse off'

Maybe some people just need to stop composing and crack on.

Babytigerrr · 04/03/2020 09:34

And I have to say that had my childcare costs outweighed my income, I'd be a fool to continue to work. I suspect this is many families' reality

i think you'd be a fool to give up your job and independence considering how many marriages break down...

RainMinusBow · 04/03/2020 10:49

My controlling and very wealthy ex-husband hated me returning to work as a teacher after I had had the children, even though it was just day a week to begin with. I was told by his father I was a cruel mum, and my duty was to stay at home with the childen.

Controllers often don't want their partner to work as it makes them more vulnerable and reliant.

Luckily I didn't listen as I needed my career when he left me homeless and almost penniless when I walked after years of abuse.

Sotiredofthislife · 04/03/2020 12:46

But, the OP must be lying (apparently) because he's man. All women are great, so obviously his ex-wife can do no wrong

The ex wife has no obligation to the OP. She is going about her life in a manner which suits her and her circumstances. I am not sure what it is you think she is doing wrong, exactly?

Babytigerrr · 04/03/2020 12:48

I am not sure what it is you think she is doing wrong, exactly?

claiming maintenance when she only has her child 50% of the time?

RainMinusBow · 04/03/2020 12:59

I think the woman should be working - why is it up to the man to provide for his children but not her when they share care?

NomDeDieu · 04/03/2020 18:11

@RainMinusBow but the wife is providing for her dcs though.
Her ex isn’t paying for everything is he?

Whatever the way, which is NOT the OP’s problem, she is feeding them, clothing them etc...
What else are you expecting to see?

Or is it a benefit bashing?

NomDeDieu · 04/03/2020 18:14

@Babytigerrr, well you could also ask why he is paying if they really share the care of the dcs 55/50.
I mean the OP doesn’t seem to be the type who doesn’t know his rights.