Child maintenance

[anonforpost]

I pay my x 570 PCM for child maintenance as per CMS calculator. AIBU to expect not to pay anything on top of the amount. I believe 570 should be enough to cover all expenses of my 2 year old child.

No, and likewise, not all are like your examples either. But the stats bear out 'my' scenario far more than yours. You seem determined to deny that but it's been shown to you repeatedly. The fact that there are of course some examples of RPs who are obstructionist does not change the overwhelming majority which are uninterested nrps. The sex isn't really relevant except that again, the reality is that most are men. It's not personal at all. My approximate circumstance mirrors by far the most common scenario.. I don't need to make it personal. And now, after 11 paws of this, I'm bowing out.

lonelydad2021
Our child is in a nursery but I don't know the costs. I think she recovers most using UC. Maybe I can offer to pay half what is not covered? Would that be fair? 570 plus half nursery costs?

Why don’t you know the costs, they’re your child too. My ex refused to get a job so paid less than £7 per week. This meant, as a teacher, I had to fund nursery entirely. I was not entitled to any benefits so I don’t understand how you think your ex will have most of the nursery cost paid for her.

Of course your choices affect your child, your child now receives over £200 a month less maintenance. That may mean mum having to find that extra money for nursery or lessons such as swimming.

Honestly, if you were to calculate how much a child costs and half it and expect the NRP to pay that contribution, most of them would run a mile yet think it’s the job of the RP to pay the majority as they get £80 a month child benefit.

Sit down with your ex, ask her how much she spends on nursery, lessons, food, clothes and take it from there.

Oh, and 30 hours per week isn’t per week when it’s spread over the whole year, it’s between 2-2.5 days. So when your child is entitled to the free hours the likelihood is that 2.5-3 days nursery will still need to be paid for each week unless either of you have your child during the week.

It wasn't snarky at all. You are taking it personally! You're saying I'm blaming women when I'm categorically not.

I don't think in most cases contact can increase at all. I know a few mums who literally post on FB every time their baby is at dads and how much they hate it etc etc. Some mother's do not want to allow more contact and then there's the minority who think less contact more money and stop it for that reason. Unfortunately I know one of those too. There are shit dad's but there's selfish mums too.

So you’re categorically not blaming women but want to make it clear that women don’t want their partners to have more contact because they don’t want to lose their time with their child or they want the maintenance money, lots of reasons really as long as you understand it’s women’s fault. But don’t call me out for blaming them.

You do realise there are statistics on this whcih show what the majority scenarios are? Any decent dad could go to court and apply for 50/50 and show evidence they had been present and active in their child’s life, they were happy to adjust work like women do to ensure they could parent etc etc.

@Getyourarseofffthequattro
out of interest, what’s e aril are you in?
RP?
NRP?
STep mum?
Or no married and no blended family ?

Sorry if already covered

@timeisnotaline

It wasn't snarky at all. You are taking it personally! You're saying I'm blaming women when I'm categorically not.

I don't think in most cases contact can increase at all. I know a few mums who literally post on FB every time their baby is at dads and how much they hate it etc etc. Some mother's do not want to allow more contact and then there's the minority who think less contact more money and stop it for that reason. Unfortunately I know one of those too. There are shit dad's but there's selfish mums too.

So you’re categorically not blaming women but want to make it clear that women don’t want their partners to have more contact because they don’t want to lose their time with their child or they want the maintenance money, lots of reasons really as long as you understand it’s women’s fault. But don’t call me out for blaming them.

You do realise there are statistics on this whcih show what the majority scenarios are? Any decent dad could go to court and apply for 50/50 and show evidence they had been present and active in their child’s life, they were happy to adjust work like women do to ensure they could parent etc etc.

Did you miss the word "some" or did you not understand that?

[quote Excitedforthefuture]@Getyourarseofffthequattro
out of interest, what’s e aril are you in?
RP?
NRP?
STep mum?
Or no married and no blended family ?

Sorry if already covered[/quote]
I'm both a step child and sort of a step mum. We've been both RP and NRP over the years.

@Jessie75 "You are spectacularly missing the point, she may well be able to manage but why should she if her lifestyle was of a certain standard before she split up with the father why shouldn’t she expect that standard to be maintained for the child afterwards.
She works she contributes why shouldn’t he ?"

We never lived together. This was a very casual relationship. We met once or twice per month before she got pregnant. A little more after and more once my child was born.

@Jessie75 Does this change your point of view?

I think you should pay what you can afford. Children are expensive & sometimes the amount paid won't cover everything (usually as they get older to be fair - electricals, school trips etc.)

I personally would give anything for my ex to take more interest in my DD, as would she.

I do get your ex partners frustration but I think you're doing the best thing for your child. Hopefully you seeing your child more will help your ex in other ways rather than financially via CM. For example, can you help out so less childcare is needed for you ex?

[quote anonforpost]**@Jessie75 "You are spectacularly missing the point, she may well be able to manage but why should she if her lifestyle was of a certain standard before she split up with the father why shouldn’t she expect that standard to be maintained for the child afterwards.
She works she contributes why shouldn’t he ?"

We never lived together. This was a very casual relationship. We met once or twice per month before she got pregnant. A little more after and more once my child was born.

@Jessie75 Does this change your point of view?[/quote]
That's not the child's fault. Surely you want your child to have the best standard of life you can afford.

[quote anonforpost]**@Jessie75 "You are spectacularly missing the point, she may well be able to manage but why should she if her lifestyle was of a certain standard before she split up with the father why shouldn’t she expect that standard to be maintained for the child afterwards.
She works she contributes why shouldn’t he ?"

We never lived together. This was a very casual relationship. We met once or twice per month before she got pregnant. A little more after and more once my child was born.

@Jessie75 Does this change your point of view?[/quote]
It doesn’t change my point of view because as I say I just think there’s a little human here who needs to have the best life that their parents can possibly give them and that applies to both parties. I can understand how the person who’s been forced into fatherhood might be a little bit pissed off but he made that decision when he made a deposit into you. And equally I hope you’re not trying to stop that person from having a relationship with their child having made the decision to bring them into the world on a casual basis.

I don't agree that as an ex you should expect the same standard of living you had when you were together. It's obviously going to be harder paying for two homes and two sets of bills than one. It's an unreasonable expectation.

As a child yes I would expect a contribution from both parents relative to their income. I would expect "the same as before" because most cases it's impossible. As I said before, paying for two of everything is going to cost a lot more than one of everything.

@HugeAckmansWife I would love to have more time with him but she won't allow it. As I said, my new job is very flexible and family-oriented and I could do school runs, take him to the GP, take him to parties, etc. She is very protective of him and already misses him a lot when he is with me. I do overnights every other weekend as that is what she is comfortable with. I hope once he is older she will allow more time and help more.

@anonforpost - hate to say it but you’re going to need to be a bit more assertive than that, she doesn’t get to tell you when and where and how often you can see your child. The bottom line is if you can’t contribute financially you’re gonna need to do more in terms of childcare in order to give this child a decent quality of life and that can’t be dictated by one parent.

[quote Jessie75]@anonforpost - hate to say it but you’re going to need to be a bit more assertive than that, she doesn’t get to tell you when and where and how often you can see your child. The bottom line is if you can’t contribute financially you’re gonna need to do more in terms of childcare in order to give this child a decent quality of life and that can’t be dictated by one parent.[/quote]
Realistically that means mediation and then court. Being assertive may not cut it.

[quote Jessie75]@anonforpost - hate to say it but you’re going to need to be a bit more assertive than that, she doesn’t get to tell you when and where and how often you can see your child. The bottom line is if you can’t contribute financially you’re gonna need to do more in terms of childcare in order to give this child a decent quality of life and that can’t be dictated by one parent.[/quote]
If I go to court it would be a nightmare and she will probably stop contact for many months. My hope is that she will find out someday that it is nice to have more time for herself or to go out with friends during the week (she is much younger). I am happy to be a nanny to my son but we are not there yet. My reasoning is that if I am available she will use me more to take care of my son.

@anonforpost - so in the meantime why wouldn’t you offer more financial support? I’m at an absolute loss to understand why during the biggest boom where ever likely to see in our lifetimes in terms of employment opportunities and workers ability to negotiate working from home, flexible work patterns and pay rises why you wouldn’t be making hay while the sunshine‘s if you’re not allowed to utilise the spare time to spend with your child it, literally makes no sense.

[quote Jessie75]@anonforpost - so in the meantime why wouldn’t you offer more financial support? I’m at an absolute loss to understand why during the biggest boom where ever likely to see in our lifetimes in terms of employment opportunities and workers ability to negotiate working from home, flexible work patterns and pay rises why you wouldn’t be making hay while the sunshine‘s if you’re not allowed to utilise the spare time to spend with your child it, literally makes no sense.[/quote]
He's literally just explained - he wants to spend more time with his child.

Why is okay that because the mum doesn't want to allow more access that dad should have to work more and pay more?

That literally makes no sense.

Get rewarded for denying access is basically what you're saying. Is that okay?

I am happy to be a nanny to my son but we are not there yet.
What does this mean? He's your son, you're a father, it's called PARENTING. This makes it sound like you don't understand at all what parenting responsibilities look like. Have you spent any time with the child alone? How much and when?