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.

[quote Getyourarseofffthequattro]@Waxonwaxoff0 I wasn't suggesting you were?

You mentioned your husband's very important job which clearly must pay well...[/quote]
I was being sarcastic, because a lot of men seem to think their job is more important than their wife's or ex wife's.

@Graphista

How is half of school holidays any good when most jobs offer only 20 days and bank hols?

Well that's the point isn't it! Why should it all be on the rp to juggle/pay for childcare and/or time off work!

That's what lone parents have to manage!

Plus I'd be VERY surprised if op only got 20 days leave given he's a high earner

There's also parental leave (while unpaid - again the op is well paid pretty sure he COULD actually manage)

This stopped me dead in my tracks

Well quite! As if!

Every choice has an impact on your kids if you're a parent

As an rp you have more protection.

There speaks someone with little experience of UC/benefits!

to do neither of those is absolutely despicable and frankly is what most non-resident parents get away with

Totally agree - but then all the laws around contact and cm in uk are appallingly ill thought out and barely enforced EXCEPT when it's to the detriment of the rp (in most cases women!) and therefore massively sexist

We need widespread and significant changes and have for some time

My dd is now 20 almost 21 and things really haven't improved since I split from her dad in most ways.

The only thing that has changed for the benefit of Rps is that cm is no longer deducted from benefits (whether the nrp paid or not!) that was a huge problem for me in the early years and led to me literally going without food and other basics so dd could eat/live.

Most? Have you got any evidence for that?

I don't believe that to be true at all.

That most nrps don't want more contact

86% of single parents are mothers

20% of fathers have no contact with their dc from previous relationships at all

A further 31% have irregular/infrequent contact with their dc from previous relationships

Both these figures increase as the length of separation increases and then of course once the dc turn 18 they drop off the stats.

That's also not including where the nrp is abusive but still allowed contact which is wrong imo, also doesn't inc Disney dads who yes have contact but make a pigs ear of it!

300,000 pay zero cm at all

Can't find figures on those who don't pay every month or have been made to pay via earnings - if someone else can find this info great!

So yea...statistically generally speaking nrps - who are mostly men - are pretty poor parents!

Also worth noting on this query and something I was shocked to learn when going through multiple contact hearings with ex - the rp can neither stop NOR make the nrp have contact with the child!

AND the bar for how bad things have to be for courts to stop contact is horrific! I was told of a case where the father had been CONVICTED of raping the child, served a prison sentence and was then awarded UNsupervised contact! The mother was apparently going out of her mind with worry and the child was in a suicidal state.

CMS rates simply do not reflect anything like a fair proportion of what that costs the RP in direct fees or lost earnings and pension.

Totally agree

So if there was no childcare (child older, mother not working, gran doing it for free) do you think £90 pcm is enough?

If that = half the costs of raising that child then yes - but that's rarely the case! Older dc are more expensive in other ways ime

The point is the nrp should be paying their half

This RP (the one which we are taking about) is a teacher. Who exactly does it benefit her ex having the child (or putting them in childcare) half the holidays?

Nobody. Definitely not the child.

In general, where both parents don't only work term time, there's an argument for it, of course. But that's not what were talking about is it?

How do you calculate half and who decides what goes into that calculation?

I see @Waxonwaxoff0 again I am lucky enough not to have to live with an arsehole like that.

@Getyourarseofffthequattro

I see *@Waxonwaxoff0* again I am lucky enough not to have to live with an arsehole like that.

That's good. One of my work colleagues is a grandmother and she was saying the other week that her grandson was poorly and her DIL's work was being really arsey about her having time off to care for her poorly child. No mention of dad taking a day off to help with the childcare. When I suggested that the response was "well babies want their mum when they are poorly."

It just seems to be a common theme in my experience that the woman is always the one that has to do all the juggling.

@Getyourarseofffthequattro

In all likelihood the child would be attending private school before the divorce.
As was my case.
To pull the child out of private schooling AND have them deal with their parents divorcing - horrendous.
So it really isn’t just as easy as… well, don’t pay

Thanks for all points of view. I will talk to my ex and try to make a compromise. I will show her this thread.

Thanks for coming back. OP.. Apologies if your original q gets derailed.. Some of us on here have been round this debate circle a fair few times. It does matter exactly what you plan to do with your additional free time in terms of the impact I'm your ex and child. In short, they should not take a hit because you choose to decrease your earnings. Good luck.

Do you think £570 per month equates to 50% of the cost of housing, feeding, clothing and raising your child? I highly doubt it. If not, then no, morally you are not paying enough (assuming the child lives with the other parent). CMS is not the recommended payment but a legal minimum to force deadbeat non-resident parents to at least pay something. If that's the type of parent you want to be then crack on.

[quote Excitedforthefuture]@Getyourarseofffthequattro

In all likelihood the child would be attending private school before the divorce.
As was my case.
To pull the child out of private schooling AND have them deal with their parents divorcing - horrendous.
So it really isn’t just as easy as… well, don’t pay[/quote]
Well no but is putting yourself into massive debt benefiting your child? It's not as simple as just continuing to pay either is it?

@Waxonwaxoff0 definitely and it's something that needs to change. We need to stop accepting that women are the default parent. We should be equal parents with equal responsibility. Ok 50/50 won't work for everyone but it's a better starting point than eow

quattro whether or not private school is worth it is a totally different thread and not as black and white as you seem to think. I'm not going to say more as it's not relevant to the op.

@HugeAckmansWife

quattro whether or not private school is worth it is a totally different thread and not as black and white as you seem to think. I'm not going to say more as it's not relevant to the op.

I never said it was black and white. It's entirely your choice to put yourself into debt to pay for it. No, it's not relevant to the op. It was you who brought it up.

Really the sensible thing to do is to have a conversation with your ex with what you think reasonable expenses for your DC are.

If you agree with your DC being in childcare 5 days a week to enable you both to work and you don't object to the nursery which has been chosen for him, then the decent thing to do is to pay 50% of the nursery costs (plus a fair share of his day-to-day costs to cover the uneven split of time you have him).

If your new work schedule means you can do 1-2 days childcare a week and maybe some evenings, then you'll be saving both you and your ex a large chunk of childcare and other expenses and so it would be fair for you to pay a hugely reduced amount of maintenance.

The starting-point should be that you and your ex are both equally responsible for paying for and caring for your joint child. If she's paying for most things and doing most of the day-to-day care, there's an imbalance.

I missed where “massive debt” was mentioned?

@Internetio

The Cms calculator tells you the legal minimum level of child support you are liable to pay.

If you are morally happy that you are paying the bare minimum towards your child then you have your answer.

This comment is bollocks, though it's only repeating what many posters say in threads like these, so I'm not especially having a go at this poster.

The fact that something is the legal minimum does not mean it's the "bare minimum", or that it's an insignificant, insuficient or morally repugnant amount. It's perfectly possible for it to be considerably more than a reasonable amount.

The law could order people to hand over 100% of their income, and they'd still be paying the legal minimum.

The law is a blunt instrument, it prescribes an amount it thinks is right, sometimes this will be too little, sometimes it will be too much, there's no reason to think it errs more one way than the other. By definition it is what society thinks is a reasonable amount, if you can only base you calculation on a few easily-available facts, rather than a detailed financial analysis of every affected household.

OP seems quite reasonable, and if anything, commendable trying to get the perspective from a broad number of people.

As other's have said, if you can afford it, sharing the nursery costs would be reasonable. It'll reduce at 3-4 yrs old due to gov contribution. Then at school ages sharing the breakfast club and after school club costs is reasonable too.

Hopefully as your child gets older you'll be able to have a bigger share of the care, as it's good for your child.

We've agreed elsewhere that it's a blunt instrument and not for purpose but the balance of 'unfair' is almost always at the cost to the RP. I'd far rather see a capable adul who has 26 days a month to themselves somewhat short changed than an RP who works full time, does basically all the real parenting and pays for childcare outwith any maintenance that rarely comes close. If it can't be properly and individually assessed, let's have it swayed in favour of the child shall we?

@HugeAckmansWife

We've agreed elsewhere that it's a blunt instrument and not for purpose but the balance of 'unfair' is almost always at the cost to the RP. I'd far rather see a capable adul who has 26 days a month to themselves somewhat short changed than an RP who works full time, does basically all the real parenting and pays for childcare outwith any maintenance that rarely comes close. If it can't be properly and individually assessed, let's have it swayed in favour of the child shall we?

But more money less contact isn't always swayed in favour of the child is it?

@Mellowyellow222

There is strange phenomenon on mumsbet where if a man comes on and says he is paying a reasonable amount of childcare there is almost outrage. Attacking the mother and stating she should live on much less. They compare it to what they received and argue this unknown lady should be delighted to have such bounty.

It’s really odd

Yes I’ve noticed this too

It’s not a race to the bottom.

I'm not talking about more money less contact. I'm talking about CMS rates being laughable when compared to the real costs incurred by RPs but there's no point going toe to toe with you again - we've had this exact argument on at least one other thread.

@HugeAckmansWife

I'm not talking about more money less contact. I'm talking about CMS rates being laughable when compared to the real costs incurred by RPs but there's no point going toe to toe with you again - we've had this exact argument on at least one other thread.

How is it "laughable" though? For some it is, for other it's a significant some of money.

You can't say all CMS is laughable because it's not is it?

Equally everyone's lifestyle is different. So £500 odd for my child would easily cover everything, not just half of everything. For others it wouldn't, but that doesn't change what the other person earns.

Yes the system is shit, but you clearly can't come up with any kind of better solution so what do you suggest except just saying "more"

Oh I can, but it involves a complete overhaul of cms, folding it in with hmrc and a fleet of specially trained judges to hear each individual case and review properly every 12 months. But there's no political will or money for that so we leave the deeply flawed and institutionally sexist system we have in place because the vast majority of the 'victims' are children who are invisible in that they can't vote and women who can quickly be gaslighted and dismissed as greedy lazy cows who want their nails done in the nrps dime.
Of course the other solution is to bring men up to think it's not OK to fuck off and abdicate 98% or 100% of parenting.

How do you think the percentage of income works in terms of the numbers it’s in enforcement, that doesn’t work. And unless it’s punishable in the same way as benefit fraud is punished then nothing ever happens.
People get away with evading taxes in their thousands every year, God help a single mum though if she over Claims a couple of grand they practically roll out the stocks.

I find it quite strange that my exDIL has always complained that my son didn't pay her enough for my GSs maintenance. She now pays me the exact same amount although she earns more than him, inflation has increased and he is bigger and older and has more expenses. Hard to get my head round.

Oh and she doesn't give me anything for extras, like school trips, sports equipment etc that my son always went halves on so I'm really getting less than she was five years ago.