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

[youknowitmakessensedunnit]

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?

would you want to?probably not if I was doing 50:50. But that issue lies with CMS.

Not with her

yes @kirkman we know. How many times do i have to say it - I KNOW!

They are 2 separate issues!

so you dont have an opinion on anything that doesnt affect you? yeah right.

No. I certainly dont judge someone values based on something that's nothing to do with me and doesnt impact me

Her not working, doesnt impact him. I certainly dont assume people who dont work, are a bad influence on children. Because I dont know what they are like as a parent.

I might start though. Am entitled to it.

Like you are entitled to believe non working parents are setting a bad example to their children. You stated your opinion as fact

Her lack of job was fine when he was in a relationship with her. Why is it an issue now?

What's changed? Why did he think she would work, if they split?

please dont state your opinion as fact.

It's an opinion......I can have that cant I?

We could put it simply.

Is the OP unreasonable to "think she's a lazy git who should stop sponging?" - yes, why is he still so bothered about how his ex chooses to live.

Is the OP unreasonable to think the CMS decision isn't correct - of course not, he should take the (very simple....) measures available to have the payment schedule re-examined.

Her lack of job was fine when he was in a relationship with her. Why is it an issue now?

because a lot has changed hasnt it?

What's changed? Why did he think she would work, if they split?

errrrr theyve split? youve just said it yourself?

are you being deliberately obtuse or can you actually not understand how different the 2 situations are?

It's an opinion......I can have that cant I?

of course. but like i said, dont state it as a fact when its not one.

certainly dont assume people who dont work, are a bad influence on children

oh and i never said bad influence, i said sets a bad example. 2 very different things.

because a lot has changed hasnt it?

What has changed? They have a child? Yes that she self funds.

Why on earth would you have a baby with someone you know doesnt have a job, lives off their wealth....then complain they dont have a job?

errrrr theyve split? youve just said it yourself

Yes, so it's not his business. How she pays for living costs, what she works is not his business

are you being deliberately obtuse or can you actually not understand how different the 2 situations are?

They are that different.

She dodnt work before. She didnt work after. Her not working impacts him less how than before.

She still supports her child.

She doesnt have to work just because she is a single parent.

oh and i never said bad influence, i said sets a bad example. 2 very different things.

If you are setting a bad example, you are a bad influence.

Weird how sahp, being funded by a partner is ok

Single parent, self funding, is a bad example.

Why on earth would you have a baby with someone you know doesnt have a job, lives off their wealth....then complain they dont have a job?

because its different when you're together! You support eachother within the relationship. You want to support the other person. Presumably he doesnt want to support her via CMS now she is an ex. I wouldnt either!

lol nobody is saying she should work because she is a single parent. I personally think she should work a little even if she doesnt need to to show her child that living off mummy and daddy isnt the way to go. Have some ambitition!

You clearly dont agree, and thats fine, but it doesnt make me wrong, or op.

If you are setting a bad example, you are a bad influence

no, i dont agree with that at all.

please stop putting words into my mouth.

because its different when you're together! You support eachother within the relationship. You want to support the other person. Presumably he doesnt want to support her via CMS now she is an ex. I wouldnt either!

He isnt supporting her now. She is self supporting. He is paying towards their son. Because CMS said he has too.

The money is for the child. It doesnt enable her to not work. She does that herself.

If you are with someone who prefers to self fund rather than work, its daft to expect them to work and stop self funding if you split, just cause.

please stop putting words into my mouth.

I didnt. It's my opinion. If you are setting a bad example for your child, you are negatively influencing them. If what you were doing wasnt influencing the child, it's not setting an example.

Let's recap

He knew she preffered to self fund than work

She still prefers to self fund rather than work

Her decision to self fun, doesnt impact wether he pays CMS or not

He can think that's unfair.

That's not her problem. He needs to take that up with CMS.

She isnt obliged to stop self funding and get a job, because he thinks she should.

She isnt a scrounger.

She isnt living on benefits, as he claimed.

Why would he claim that, when it's not true?

How she funds her lifestyle, doesnt impact CMS. How she funds her lifestyle, isnt his business.

My opinion is that a sahp being funded by a partner is jot different to a single parent funding themseleves.

How is it a better example for your partner financially supports you, tha for you to support yourself?

He isnt supporting her now. She is self supporting. He is paying towards their son. Because CMS said he has too

He's doing 50% of the parenting, and then paying on top, which is therefore subsidising her 50%. CMS by their own admission, are wrong.

the money is for the child. It doesnt enable her to not work. She does that herself

i never said it enabled her not to work. But the money is additional to his 50%

If you are setting a bad example for your child, you are negatively influencing them. If what you were doing wasnt influencing the child, it's not setting an example

still dont agree with this

He's doing 50% of the parenting, and then paying on top, which is therefore subsidising her 50%. CMS by their own admission, are wrong.

Oh my god. Then he needs to take that up with them. The money is still for the child. He says she lives of personal wealth.

He isnt funding her. CMS is for the child. The CMS (rightly or wrongly) have decided despite it being 50:50 he still need to pay towards the cost of the child. Not her.

still dont agree with this

Ok 🤷‍♀️

She isnt living on benefits, as he claimed

Why would he claim that, when it's not true?

except you have no idea whether its true do you?

Oh my god. Then he needs to take that up with them. The money is still for the child

the money is for the child, but he's subsiding her by paying a % of her 50%.

What cant you understand about that?

except you have no idea whether its true do you?

Yes. You can not get state benefits that enable you to work, as a single parent with one school age child.

He is either wrong or he hasnt shared further information.

Benefits just dont work that.

the money is for the child, but he's subsiding her by paying a % of her 50%.

No, he is paying what CMS says he needs to pay for the child.

CMS say he has to pay for the child. He is paying for the child.

I agree at 50:50 he shouldnt have to pay.

However, that not her fault or problem. It doesnt make a value judgment on her.

He income, doesnt impact it.

CMS are currently saying, regardless of having the child half the weeks he still needs to pay. To pay for the child.

That's what CMS is for

She might be lazy, she might also be depressed and not sure how to get back into the workforce. She will have to find work at some stage.

How about you drop the hostility and negativity and forgive whatever has gone on before. You have no right to interfere with her life now but guessing what, you will have a happier life, and so will your child, if you can be pleasant to her.

Instead of slagging her off, tell her you are sorry how stressful the last few years has been and you will give her moral and childcare support if she wants to try and get back to work, with no hidden agenda and no judgement.

All this bitterness, it's not good for you or your child.

Yes. You can not get state benefits that enable you to work, as a single parent with one school age child

Erm yes you can.

OP

When is your child's next dental check up?

Are they up to date with vaccinations? How do you know?

Have your child been to the GP this year? What for?

Do you make appointments with Dr dentist etc?

Who does the school phone if your child is ill or needs to be collected?

Finally, what benefit will your child get if your ex does go to work? Will they be loved more? Will they be treated better? Will their intellect be boosted?

@HathorX she didn’t work before she had the child.

Why should he say sorry for the past two years?
For whatever reason she withheld contact. If she hadn’t then he wouldn’t have needed to go to court.

Erm yes you can.

Do tell.

@sashh
How are those questions relevant?

If someone asked me those questions I wouldn’t answer. Why would anyone want to share details about their child on a random public website?

This one time couple went to Court to make arrangements for divorce/child care/financial (delete as applies) matters
Clearly matters could not be settled amicably or through mediation.
The Court has made a decision on the child care arrangements & the CMS guidelines are used to determine the level of payments that the non-resident parent pays for the child to the resident parent.

Any change of circumstances or appeal is to be taken to the CMS or back to the Court if mediation does not work.

OP has dithered on the detail of the number of overnights. That said, he can go back to the CMS for a standard review of the payments.

Obviously something is grinding OP’s gears, but his Ex’s financial arrangements are not his business nor substantial to his sense of grievance.

Wherever his Ex’s wife income comes from it is not material to the monies determined by the CMS to support his child.