What do you think this father should do? Remain or relocate?

[Thenavyblue]

If a separated father can't afford a sufficient property in his children's home city which allows him to provide good enough shared care, which of these scenarios do you think is in the children's best interests?

1. The father stays in the city and rents a room in a flat share or at a push a small self contained studio flat, has the children over for tea during the week and the odd sleep over during which the children have to sleep on a blow up bed in the common area.

2. He relocates to a cheaper part of the UK where he can afford a house and give them their own bedroom(s) and space, is able to have them for extended periods over the holidays and provide a much better environment for them. The caveat being he sees them slightly less, so for example, staying over EOW as opposed to just going for tea at his place every week.

Additional information: father is a low earner, currently living in an expensive city where property prices are sky high.

@Thenavyblue

So - you had shared rights to the HA property, which he's now lost, and you're also saying he has to leave London while you stay and benefit from it forever? hmm I'm 99% always team LTB on here, but you've managed to make me feel like a MRA

So what was the alternative then?

Do you think the mother, in this case primary carer, who is a SAHM and children should have given up the security of a lifetime tenancy and rent a 1 bed private flat?

The DC best interests must come first i think everybody on MN will be able to agree with that, therefore it's a no brainer that they keep their home.

Should the children just suck up the fact that the best they'll get is tea at dad's and an occasional sleep over on a blow up bed or sofa?

Should the mother suck up the fact she has to do the lions share of the parenting indefinitely?

On the subject of CM as people have mentioned it.. yes he is paying under the required amount to account for the fact he can barely afford the flat he's in at the minute.

So who is benefiting from him insisting he stays here here? Certainly not the children and most definitely not the mother.

Why can’t he stay at the house on his days and you go stay in his flat or elsewhere? Then the kids don’t have to move.

The benefit of him staying in London is that your kids don’t spend a huge chunk of their time travelling up and down. You can’t rent a £500 family house practically anywhere - as a Londoner you may not realise that the rest of the country, while cheaper, doesn’t cost peanuts. And if he works in retail he won’t be able to find a job just anywhere because those cheap family houses are cheap for a reason. There’s nothing there!

You’re understandably frustrated at having to do the lion’s share but you had kids with a low earner. And you live in London. Surely you must’ve known that this would happen?

In your situation, where he is the only parent working and you aren't working, I think the sensible thing is for both of you to make a mature adult decision to move somewhere you can both afford to live where you can co-parent in a way you're both comfortable with and so you can both have a standard of living that is suitable for the children.

Should the children just suck up the fact that the best they'll get is tea at dad's and an occasional sleep over on a blow up bed or sofa?

What's wrong with that? It doesn't sound worse than only seeing him once or twice a month

You don't have to sleep over to have a good relationship

And no there are not retail jobs everywhere, especially in the rundown villages he'd have to live in on 500/month

You apparently don't work at all, not sure you get to sneer at his lack of career

You've reasoned yourself into a really nasty corner op. It's not pleasant to read. I think you need to give your head a bit of a wobble.

Not sure why he should have to move away when he’s the only one with a job and presumably the only one paying for the children unless the SAHP is independently wealthy hence not working with pre teens.

I would go with option 1. Their dad needs to be close enough to actually be part of their lives, not just somebody they visit occasionally.

I live in a small London flat with my child though, so perhaps I have a slightly different perspective? I would not thank anybody who suggested I shouldn’t see my children because my flat was too small. You are very lucky to have a house on a HA tenancy - most families don’t.

Maybe he could be the sahp and have the HA house.and you can move a long way away and work in retail so you can afford the rent? You wouldn't have to do the "lion's share" of parenting then.

"Should the children just suck up the fact that the best they'll get is tea at dad's and an occasional sleep over on a blow up bed or sofa?"

Yes they will have to. You made the choice for them when you split and he was chucked out with little money left for rent. Staying close will at least ensure some continuity for dc and they won't feel they have lost a parent. He sounds like he wants to be close anyway and is willing to sacrifice by enduring those shitty conditions.

"Should the mother suck up the fact she has to do the lions share of the parenting indefinitely?"

Then surely option 1 is better? He can be more involved if he's close.

I've taken on board your opinions so thank you for the outside perspective. I don't think people would have quite so much sympathy for him if you knew why the relationship ended or how he has blatantly put his own selfish wants and needs before that of his children but that's ok I won't derail the thread.

I’m not sure how moving away would work. Travel costs would increase and his wage may decrease and he is such a low earner that I’m not sure how much he could afford outside London.

@Thenavyblue

I've taken on board your opinions so thank you for the outside perspective. I don't think people would have quite so much sympathy for him if you knew why the relationship ended or how he has blatantly put his own selfish wants and needs before that of his children but that's ok I won't derail the thread.

For me it has nothing to do with sympathy for him. What you’re asking for is unrealistic. You’re a SAHM and he’s a retail worker. As you mentioned even professionals in London can’t afford their own flat - so how on Earth did you think this would work out? Just… how…?

Op what’s your work background like?
He may not want to be primary care giver but might have to if you have higher earning potential.
In real life many single mothers have to work and be “primary” care givers

@Thenavyblue I have an ex who was horribly abusive to me. But it's not about you or him it is about the children. And large geographic distances just don't make sense. Nor does the fact he is the only one working yet also the only one who can't afford.to see his kids in a manner you deem appropriate

Also to add - the worst part was that you were considering putting your kids through travel . Commuting twice a week is dreadful for adults who get paid lots. Can’t imagine what it’ll be like for kids who have to sacrifice their weekends and holidays - spending them in the i middle of nowhere. Id he doesn’t have much money what exactly do you expect him to do with them?

Far better for him to be nearer and have frequent visit. Even if it’s not overnight.

To be honest OP you're extremely lucky to be able to be a sahm given the ages of the children.....

And whatever reasons for the relationship breakdown they are irrelevant when deciding what is best for the kids. Which sounds like tea twice a week. Which is better than your preference which would probably end up being two or three weekends a year.

Besides, giving up the H.A now doesn't mean he would get it. It will go to the next most in need person on the list, a list consisting of thousands upon thousands of people.
So is it in your name only? You'd actually rather give it up than your children and their father have it?

I don't have any sympathy for him, no doubt he's an absolute twat

But it's best for the kids to still have a relationship with their dad (assuming he's not abusive)

@titchy

To be honest OP you're extremely lucky to be able to be a sahm given the ages of the children.....

And whatever reasons for the relationship breakdown they are irrelevant when deciding what is best for the kids. Which sounds like tea twice a week. Which is better than your preference which would probably end up being two or three weekends a year.

I’m also wondering how she managed this in London with an ex on that salary…. Is the HA £500 a month or something?

1. Because there is no reason why the DC should need to sleep overnight if they the father is living near them. This way he still gets to see them lots and participate in their lives. As they get older they can pop round and see him.

Should the mother suck up the fact she has to do the lions share of the parenting indefinitely?

If he moved further away wouldn’t that mean you’ll have even less support/do more of the childcare?

If he was to have the children more often would he not be able to get a 2 bedroom property from the HA?
I know it takes a long time to be offered a property but it might solve the problem.

So basically you want him to move away from his home, his job, his life, and more regular contact with his children so that you can have some weekends to yourself?

You got to keep the home in the expensive city, so yes, you do have to expect this to be the situation.

You could always suggest that you try and get a council house swap in a cheaper area that he’d also be happy to move to and you both go?

The DC best interests must come first i think everybody on MN will be able to agree with that, therefore it's a no brainer that they keep their home. Should the children just suck up the fact that the best they'll get is tea at dad's and an occasional sleep over on a blow up bed or sofa? Should the mother suck up the fact she has to do the lions share of the parenting indefinitely?

1. Children will benefit more from good relationships with parents who live in flats, than from keeping a home and losing a father

1. Sleeping over on a blow up wouldn't be an issue if you could both move out

1. If you're a SAHM to a late primary child and a teen, you have had a lot of free time, for a long time. If you don't want to do the lion's share of parenting, then you can agree to move out to somewhere you can both afford, and likely somewhere you can both work

1. doesn't actually matter if he's been a twat to you, or put his needs before theirs, unless he's a terrible father, he is nevertheless their father and they're still better of with him in their life. You don't seem that focussed on their needs either, when it comes to it ..

I think he has autonomy over where he chooses to live and his finances.

You could always suggest that you try and get a council house swap in a cheaper area that he’d also be happy to move to and you both go?

This actually seems like a really sensible solution.

Is the HA £500 a month or something?

It's less than half the price of what it would be if it were a private rent. FWIW I think the private rental market in London is scandalous and the landlords exploitative, but there's little I can do to change it.

Mother has worked in numerous sectors, nurseries, cleaning, some retail too but no work experience for several years now so not the most employable candidate unfortunately