To ask what child maintenance is meant to cover?

[MoiraNotRuby]

STBXH and I need to agree child maintenance. I know there is a suggested calculator and that's great for getting a figure.

But what I can't make my exhausted brain wrap around is, say DC are with me 5 nights a week and 2 with xh... I feed and clothe them when they are with me. Xh does the same on his nights. What about stuff like their:

Dinner money
Phone contracts
Music lessons
Sports club fees
School trips

Do I pay for 100% of that, or 5/7ths, or something else?

Thanks in advance.

@ConsuelaHammock

Half the costs of raising a child . However the resident parent should take into account child benefit and any other benefits they get to help them support the child/children.

What a load of rubbish! Child benefit etc etc is to contribute towards the resident parent's half of raising the child! It's not to contribute towards the non-resident parent! That is why it does not consider the non-resident parent's income whatsoever! 🙄

It’s not even about half of them costs associated with the child. It’s intended to cover half of the costs for the portion of additional time that one parent is responsible for them rather than the other. That’s why the number of nights they stay is part of the calculation. The NRP is covering 100% of the costs of that portion of time. The RP would be covering 100% of the same amount of time themselves. And maintenance is so that the NRP covers half of the time not accounted for in that calculation. That’s why 50-50 care incurs no maintenance; they’re both already covering 100% of the costs 50% of the time.

But it has absolutely bugger all to do with the actual costs. It’s just a proportion of the NRP’s income.

That’s why some children are calculated at £7 a week (even where they live with their RP 100% of the time) and others are calculated at £160 a week (with a 1/3 v 2/3 contact arrangement).

It’s not that the children in the first example cost £14 a week to feed, clothe, house and everything else, while the child in the second costs £960 a week (calculated as a weekly total where £160 covers 1/6 of the week - half of the additional third of the week the RP has them). It’s just that it’s difficult to do it on anything other than a proportion of income.

@BeyondOurReef

It’s not even about half of them costs associated with the child. It’s intended to cover half of the costs for the portion of additional time that one parent is responsible for them rather than the other. That’s why the number of nights they stay is part of the calculation. The NRP is covering 100% of the costs of that portion of time. The RP would be covering 100% of the same amount of time themselves. And maintenance is so that the NRP covers half of the time not accounted for in that calculation. That’s why 50-50 care incurs no maintenance; they’re both already covering 100% of the costs 50% of the time.

But it has absolutely bugger all to do with the actual costs. It’s just a proportion of the NRP’s income.

That’s why some children are calculated at £7 a week (even where they live with their RP 100% of the time) and others are calculated at £160 a week (with a 1/3 v 2/3 contact arrangement).

It’s not that the children in the first example cost £14 a week to feed, clothe, house and everything else, while the child in the second costs £960 a week (calculated as a weekly total where £160 covers 1/6 of the week - half of the additional third of the week the RP has them). It’s just that it’s difficult to do it on anything other than a proportion of income.

I don't think anybody believes that ANY children cost £14 to feed & clothe etc 🤦🏼‍♀️🤣

No. Of course they don’t.

But they make the same argument where the logic of the calculation means a child costs (just the child) nearly £50k a year.

Both are equally as absurd really.

The fact is that it’s actually got bugger all to do with how much a child actually costs. It’s just the most easily administered system for trying to ensure that NRPs do contribute something towards their children after a relationship breaks down.

Pretending that it’s actually about sharing the costs in any meaningful way isn’t really helpful. That’s why there’s no answer to the ‘what is it supposed to cover?’ question. The idea of sharing the costs of anything specific is not built in to the system. In a great many cases, it’s a pretty tokenistic gesture towards contributing.

It is not that difficult to work out some costs.

Nursery for my 2 dcs cost me £1100pcm split 2 ways should have been £550 each.

I had them 98% of the time - 12 days per year on a saturday or a friday night .

Have not even fed and clothed them!
To one of the posters are you seriously suggesting he should only cover 2% of the cost of child care for when he was with them!!! He provided nothing at his house - I sent them with everything for the 12 days per annum max they spent there.

No maintenance for 2 years - then £250pcm for another 2 years until he left the OW. Now pays properly.

OP - look at the calculator then look at what you spent last year, think of the future and remember child care gets less but they cost more in expensive needs.

Some people do not get what it costs to bring up a kid, allow the parent to work so child care costs, feed, clothe and nuture your children

it might be simple to work out some of the costs on an individual basis - but try scaling that up to a National system.

And even if you compile a comprehensive list of costs to share, you can’t make your ex pay them.