AIBU to think how men have got away with this for far to long

[Alex50]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-53064741

Why don’t they pay for their children and think it’s ok?

I have been a single parent for 16
years my exh didnt pay for years,I got a court order he then paid sporadically until about 5 years ago .He then left the country and hasn't paid anything since he owes over 20k in payments.Which the kids and I will never see. It's so wrong.

I would like to ask why men are expected to pay for their children twice (once to the mother and then when the kids are in their own care) and then additional on top for school trips and other activities.

I get that some men will do anything to avoid paying, but the majority do actually pay and then provide for their children when they are with them too. We only hear about the men who don't.

Also with regard to America, you start off in arrears with child support, between 6 and 9 months worth, because anything you pay before it is finalised isn't counted. So you start off already at risk of jail time and passport revocation before you can even figure out how to pay.

Another problem a lot of people in america face is that if they pay additional moneys on top of their child support the mother can take them to court for more, because if he can pay the extra then he can afford to pay more in support.

My ex would probably tell everyone that I'm mad and that he doesn't pay the full amount as he doesn't see his children. I also bet he leaves out that he was investigated and given a warning (because son couldn't cope with court) for physically harming the children on more than one occasion. He also wouldn't mention that he has never once tried to gain access to them. That there's no reason he can't pay as he lives with his mum and owns two sports cars but he's much to poor to pay it all.

He would tell you how I go out spending everything on myself. That I live the high life on his £50 a week for three children. I'm having to work my ass off just to pay the bills but if you listened to him I'm living the life of luxury.

Sorry for the rant but I'm feeling a bit pissed off this morning due to him not paying again this month.

superlative if you think an NRP paying cms is paying 'twice' then you have no understanding of how it works. Assuming the kids are with him EOW, that's 4 nights a month. The other 26 they are with the RP. But the children are 50% his responsibility, so why should the RP have to pay for that whole 26 days the NRP only 4? The % paid changes depending on overnights with the nrp.. If its 50% then no maintenance is owed. Its really not hard. Extras like trips etc are up to the paying parent as they are not 'essential' but as I said upthread, any parent who only literally provided the essentials would be a pretty bad parent, so why wouldnt an NRP contribute toward those too? Note I said 'contrubute' not pay for. The RP contributes too..far far more than 50% usually plus actually DOING all the parenting.

My ex is absent through choice so he is not paying once let alone twice.

@SuperlativeScrubs

I would like to ask why men are expected to pay for their children twice (once to the mother and then when the kids are in their own care) and then additional on top for school trips and other activities.

I get that some men will do anything to avoid paying, but the majority do actually pay and then provide for their children when they are with them too. We only hear about the men who don't.

Also with regard to America, you start off in arrears with child support, between 6 and 9 months worth, because anything you pay before it is finalised isn't counted. So you start off already at risk of jail time and passport revocation before you can even figure out how to pay.

They aren’t paying twice. If you think £7 (which is the minimum cms award apart from £0) is actually paying towards a child please let us all know where you live and where you shop. If a child spends 12 days out of 14 with one parent the other parent isn’t paying anywhere near half to bring up their child on the 2 out of 14 days they have them. The more pertinent question is why does any parent want their child to suffer? Why do some parents begrudge giving money towards their child?

I question your majority, I don’t think I know a single parent who hasn’t had some issue with the other parent paying towards their child/children.

@SuperlativeScrubs

I would like to ask why men are expected to pay for their children twice (once to the mother and then when the kids are in their own care) and then additional on top for school trips and other activities.

I get that some men will do anything to avoid paying, but the majority do actually pay and then provide for their children when they are with them too. We only hear about the men who don't.

Also with regard to America, you start off in arrears with child support, between 6 and 9 months worth, because anything you pay before it is finalised isn't counted. So you start off already at risk of jail time and passport revocation before you can even figure out how to pay.

They’re not. They have a reduction for the time that children are in their care. That covers food and heat.

There is also no obligation for them to pay anything else at all.

Thankfully many realise that the CMS minimum is exactly that - a minimum

at the idea that CM means a NRP is paying twice.

My ex has the DC for 1 day per week. That's just the day. No overnights.
On that day I feed them breakfast. Their clothes etc are provided by me. Their dad feeds them such a tiny portion for lunch and dinner that I make them a meal when they get home. They never have a bath/shower at their dads so no hot water needed. He doesn't wash their clothes. If their clothes get ruined he doesn't offer to replace them.
So how exactly would he be paying twice (if he paid at all)

The 'why don't they have 50/50' custody made me laugh. My ex would die if I suggested this, I have three DC with a man who absolutely pays for his children, and sees them sometimes. He was a great Disney Dad when we were together but he's not that keen on having them overnight

I then had a baby with a guy who is a moron, although I promise he hid it well. He decided he wasn't ready for a child AFTER the baby he wanted was born. Luckily, I'm not prepared to walk away from my children. He's never seen DS and hasn't paid a penny.

I work full time and have a mortgage so believe me, I get nowt!

The 50/50 thing also makes me laugh.

My ex went to court for "access down in black and white". He was never stopped having access. In fact he was the one who tried to stop me letting his parents take the girls on holiday on the basis it wasn't fair on his younger children (who were invited, along with his new wife who chose not to go because he was away).

Not once since that day has he stuck to that court order. It was a pure control tool. He was absolutely furious when I took him back to court after 3 years of keeping a diary to have it scrapped because it as cruel to our girls to make them stay home for a one hour window every other weekend even though we knew he wasn't coming.

He tells people now that I trapped him into pregnancy - he did overtime to pay for our IVF....
That I rip him off for maintenance - done through CMS after his CO got involved when he was dodging it.
That I prevent him seeing the girls - not once.
That I don't allow him to make the girls part of his family - he and his new wife told the girls they couldn't attend their half-brother's christening because they had "family" (their words) staying with them so there was no room for "visitors" that weekend
That I allow DD2 to call my DH "Dad" - We didn't allow this the first time it came up. DD made that decision at 16 that she was doing it. Her Sister still calls him by his first name as imo it's entirely their choice now.

He once asked what my plan was if I died because "obviously" he couldn't have them full time. This was asked in earshot of the girls at the funeral of a relative of his who died quite young.

My ex would run a mile if I suggested 50/50. He has the DC 10-6 on a Saturday, unless he has an excuse to cancel. He likes to have them alternate birthdays and christmases, but not nye as him and his wife "like to have a party" (clearly I don't). The one nye he agreed to have them he cancelled last min as his baby son was apparently in hospital. I say apparently because there were photos all over Facebook of their party, and his step daughter asked a mutual friend why "their mum is so mean she wouldn't let them come to our party".
They've been invited on 1 holiday. Every other time hes gone away they've been told they cant come as it's a "family holiday" . Not sure who DC are then, the servants kids or something. And I had to send suncream and spending money as was told "we can't afford to fund all their ice creams for a week"

But yea. 50:50 would be great

Givenupno

Two sides to every story.
And tbh, yours sounds a bit odd. Do you not have an arrangement to see your children at all, because all that fighting in court which is making you so stressed you can't work to support them can't be doing them much good either.

I asked how often my ex wanted to see the kids and he said once every 2 weeks for the day. Believe it or not some men don’t want 50/50

Believe it or not some men don’t want 50/50

Oh I believe it alright. I mean having kids around is incredibly inconvenient for your career and social life. I've told my dh that if we ever split up, I won't fight him on 50/50

My sons father has never paid a penny maintenance, the social at the time paid for a private investigator to find him, which they did, he paid them off, telephoned me afterwards to tell me what hed done! Then moved to Australia . Should be something attached to both parties wages day they have children that if the parents split the one that leaves has to pay up legally , should be taken directly from source.

@Givenupno
I sympathise with you on a personal level, purely because of the situation I’m in.
My ex and I have agreed a monthly sum (less than csa) but he also contributes towards school uniform, clothing and outside clubs. This wasn’t an easy reach but it works for us.
My new partner has a csa agreement with his ex. That was bitter so this is how I see your p.o.v.
One of his kids wants to live here however the ex won’t allow that. The child’s reason for this is because there is rarely food to eat at their mum’s, we hear what she spends her money on which in our opinion is misplaced.

That said, there are A LOT of parents who don’t contribute when they should (having seen friends in that situation) so I see where op (and others) come from.

A lot of men consider themselves the main income earner so therefore have the view (especially if the woman ends it) that they should keep ‘their’ money and the woman, left with the kids, should suffer - that is wrong!!!

Ultimately it comes down to your personal moral compass. My partner thinks all women are money grabbers whereas I’m very independent so he finds it difficult to understand why I’m not like his ex!

Menopausalcraziness If your boyfriends' children are saying they don't have access to food at their mothers house then your boyfriend should phone social services because that is neglect. Are they underweight?

I think children can be very good at triangulation, and saying what they think each parent wants to hear. Not easy for them, they are often put in a really difficult position when parents separate and try to use the children for their own revenge rather than acting like the adults they're supposed to be.
My DSS used to come round at weekends and raid the fridge, and sometimes during the week as he lived close by. He would say his mother and new partner would get takeaways for themselves but not him, and that she would go out at night and leave him alone.
While I expect there were elements of truth in this, I also imagine he angled it to get the best support he could from us.
We didn't question him, just made ourselves available to him for food and company.