Child maintenance

[Lalala1]

Posting here for traffic!

The amount of threads on mn surrounding child maintenance I’ve noticed there’s completely opposite opinions on it.
Some find the way it’s calculated fair some don’t.
Some say it doesn’t cover everything and “certain things should be split” out with cms.
Some say people get too much because they only get lower and are “greedy ex wives” so they should be grateful.
Some say the rules around calculations are wrong and should be changed.

So I’m curious if you were in charge of cms what would/should it be?
How should it be calculated?
Should it cover everything or not?
How would it or could it be changed to be fair for all children?
Or
Is the way it is set up and conducted fine as it is?

Just putting this for vote

YABU- cms is fine as it is no change
YANBU - cms should be changed and how?

quattro you're being incredibly offensive to say I only care about money and not the quality of the relationship. This thread is about money, so that is what I have focused on. I have broken my back trying to get my ex to have more contact and a better relationship with his kids. He never takes extra days when he could, he turns down every offer for additional time. He is probably now in the next cms band down in terms of nights but I haven't pursued that for more money. I have made lots of suggestions about ways e could have better facetime chats as kids aren't great at it.. Play games, a nightly story book, all have been ignored and he ends up with a 1 minute monosyllabic 'chat' about once a week. But you can paint me as a money grabbing ex if it suits you to. Nothing is easy, but at the heart of this are kids with two parents, who didn't ask to be born. The system as it stands is broken and does not serve anyone well. We seem to agree that a massive overhaul is needed and things done case by case. Of course there are 'bad' RPs and 'good' nrps. I've never denied that. I disagree that a parent can just sit back and let the state or the other parent bear the burden of paying for and caring for children they've chosen to have.

@Soopermum1

Powerful stats from *@Pinkyxx*. It should become a cultural thing to abhor non or partial payment of CMS, like it has become with drink driving. I assume self employed NRPs, or cash in hand NRPs, or those who don't even make it on to the CMS books are not included. In other countries non payment is tackled much harder, why not in the UK?

The stats on payment are only those who opt for direct pay.. the bigger picture is even more dire. The outcome is disproportionate poverty in lone parents.

Its ok to say well 50/50 contact should be the default.. and furthermore all fathers want it. This is not borne out in the statistics:

In 2020 there were 2,856,000 lone parent families, of which 430,000 were lone father households, a figure which has been largely stable since 1996. By contrast, 2,427,000 were lone Mother households. Again a stable figure since 1996. While hopefully most of the children living in these households had contact with their other parent, the reality is that the burden of raising children alone falls disproportionately on Mothers.

The courts are very much in favour of such arrangements (I should know just gone through the last round of ex trying to get 50/50 - all weekends and holidays with him...), so if all these men want it and are genuinely willing to work collaboratively for the benefit of their child and genuinely do 50% of the care why do the statistics for literally decades show the same trends?

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/families/datasets/familiesandhouseholdsfamiliesandhouseholds

I don't disagree that Mothers should contribute but its unreasonable to liken their capacity to do so to that of a father who is responsible only for himself (& the children of the partner he acquires). Earning enough to independently raise a child takes having the capacity to work full time in a profession that pays enough to fund living, and the ability to actually work consistently. The reality is large swathes of adults in the UK cannot earn enough to support themselves let alone a dependent child at the same time. The notion a mother with a young infant can ''magic' up 50% of the cost of raising that infant + fund her own cost + work + pay childcare + care for their child 90+% of the time just isn't realistic.

This thread is now getting derailed, which is a shame as it has been interesting hearing different points of view. I think we all agree, for different reasons, that the CMS needs reforming. I've been speaking regularly to my MP about it. What will you do about it?

@Soopermum1

But 50/50 may not be in the best interests of the child. It takes a specific set of circumstances for it to be, parents who can communicate, distance from each other, and many more criteria. So discussing 50/50 in terms of finances, which this thread is about is not right

Couldn't agree more. There's an abundance of research that demonstrates 50/50 can be very detrimental to a child (even damaging) unless the parents have a demonstrable ability to work together in a mutually supportive, collaborative way and set up their lives post split with the child in mind. This means living in proximity of one and other, communicating, sharing cost, sharing all care, sharing all decisions etc. The reality is that the vast majority of divorces are not like this and in many cases conflicting household needs make it impossible. Family courts disregard financial matters when making contact decisions for very good reason..

50/50 feels like a blunt tool for solving the issue this thread is debating.

It should be a criminal offence not to pay CM like it is in many other countries!

@ChiselandBits

quattro you're being incredibly offensive to say I only care about money and not the quality of the relationship. This thread is about money, so that is what I have focused on. I have broken my back trying to get my ex to have more contact and a better relationship with his kids. He never takes extra days when he could, he turns down every offer for additional time. He is probably now in the next cms band down in terms of nights but I haven't pursued that for more money. I have made lots of suggestions about ways e could have better facetime chats as kids aren't great at it.. Play games, a nightly story book, all have been ignored and he ends up with a 1 minute monosyllabic 'chat' about once a week. But you can paint me as a money grabbing ex if it suits you to. Nothing is easy, but at the heart of this are kids with two parents, who didn't ask to be born. The system as it stands is broken and does not serve anyone well. We seem to agree that a massive overhaul is needed and things done case by case. Of course there are 'bad' RPs and 'good' nrps. I've never denied that. I disagree that a parent can just sit back and let the state or the other parent bear the burden of paying for and caring for children they've chosen to have.

I'm not saying that's personally how you feel about your own children, I am sure you have done your absolute best for them. If you are who I think you are, you always talk about the importance of money, getting a second job and sod the contact. Money is important but you seem to think that is easy to acquire it and that anyone can and should, that's just not the case.

Nobody is saying one parent should step back and leave it to the other, I'm saying that this level that you have in your head of appropriate maintenance perhaps is not realistic for many people, and getting two jobs is not the solution.

@Soopermum1

This thread is now getting derailed, which is a shame as it has been interesting hearing different points of view. I think we all agree, for different reasons, that the CMS needs reforming. I've been speaking regularly to my MP about it. What will you do about it?

I've spoken to my MP about it in the past but he didn't care. I don't know what else I can do.

50/50 is definitely not the solution for anyone, but the relationships you mention @Pinkyxx any contact is probably shitty for the kids if the adults can't communicate with eachother properly. I'm not sure it's the specific time that's the issue. Is it any better to only see your dad once a fortnight because him and your mum don't get on? I'm not sure it is. That's like saying you can't see dad because we don't like eachother. It's placing more importance on the relationship between the parents than it is their relationship with their actual children. It's a real shame that some people hate their ex more than they care for the welfare of their child. That should be cracked down on too. I don't know how mind but it should.

It's a real shame that some people hate their ex more than they care for the welfare of their child.

Yes, this.

I am lucky because I have an excellent co-parenting relationship with my stepson's mother, without every getting court or mediation involved. Because she actually puts her son's best interests first, unlike many, many other women (especially on MN) who pretend to have their child's welfare at heart but really they're just getting back at the ex. I could link countless threads on here that demonstrate that.

Anyway, back to CMS. I agree men who aren't stepping up are lazy assholes who should be held accountable, and it's deplorable that we don't have structures in place that can force them to. But it's not as clear cut as people like to pretend it is.

They should absolutely not consider another woman's children that are not his for a start!!

@MissMaple82

They should absolutely not consider another woman's children that are not his for a start!!

Agreed!

It's a real shame that some people hate their ex more than they care for the welfare of their child.

This goes both ways

@MissMaple82

They should absolutely not consider another woman's children that are not his for a start!!

Agreed. But the system should also not then take step parent income into consideration when deciding on things like student loans and arguably not for benefits.

@Soopermum1

It's a real shame that some people hate their ex more than they care for the welfare of their child.

This goes both ways

I know, I didn't specifically say it's a shame that mothers, or women, I said some people as in you know men or women. Don't make this into something it's not please.

@Getyourarseofffthequattro This has nothing to do with me not liking him, or causing conflict. Domestic violence and abuse doesn't stop when you divorce, in a lot instances it gets a lot worse and the child becomes the means with which to abuse. As it relates to contact, I had a policy of always agreeing to whatever extra contact ex wants despite my belief that it is not healthy for a child to spend anything other than the bare minimum of time with a parent who has irrational hatred for the other parent.

Ex and his wife have filled our poor child's head with some of the most disgusting comments and lies about me you could ever hear - all aiming to make her hate me. I found her diary from when she was 7 a few months ago - it made me weep to read her words '' step Mum and Daddy keep saying Mummy is (insert profanity / lie) - I hate them, they are mean''. Similar entries over and over through the year. They have persistently pressured her to live with them and stop seeing me dangling the promise of her having access to the luxurious life they lead and everything she might want - which she is denied for living with me (at the order of the court, not a decision she had any say in). Social services believe she is being emotionally abused, and this is driven purely by his irrational hatred for me. As the social worker said: ''he wants to destroy you, it's as simple as that and he uses your child to do so. There is nothing you can, or could have done differently. Just keep doing what you've being doing.''

I now regret my stance of just agreeing to whatever extra contact he wanted when she was little because it backfilled royally when she got older and started refusing to go. It wasn't until she was a certain age that she started to articulate what was happening in that house during contact. What I have been told by social services is that contact must be kept to a minimum to limit the damage he / his wife are doing to her, and if she doesn't want to go I am not to make her. I won't force her just because it's what ex wants or it reduces the amount he has to pay me...

Children services spend an inordinate proportion of their time on similar cases, so much as it's comforting to think my situation is not the norm, the reality is that it is more common than people want to believe.

50/50 can only work for the child in instances where the parents are supportive of each other, and sadly these seem to be in the absolute minority. Reasons why will vary. Women are disproportionately raising children alone as a result, hence why CMS needs to cover at least 50% of that child's cost.

[quote Pinkyxx]@Getyourarseofffthequattro This has nothing to do with me not liking him, or causing conflict. Domestic violence and abuse doesn't stop when you divorce, in a lot instances it gets a lot worse and the child becomes the means with which to abuse. As it relates to contact, I had a policy of always agreeing to whatever extra contact ex wants despite my belief that it is not healthy for a child to spend anything other than the bare minimum of time with a parent who has irrational hatred for the other parent.

Ex and his wife have filled our poor child's head with some of the most disgusting comments and lies about me you could ever hear - all aiming to make her hate me. I found her diary from when she was 7 a few months ago - it made me weep to read her words '' step Mum and Daddy keep saying Mummy is (insert profanity / lie) - I hate them, they are mean''. Similar entries over and over through the year. They have persistently pressured her to live with them and stop seeing me dangling the promise of her having access to the luxurious life they lead and everything she might want - which she is denied for living with me (at the order of the court, not a decision she had any say in). Social services believe she is being emotionally abused, and this is driven purely by his irrational hatred for me. As the social worker said: ''he wants to destroy you, it's as simple as that and he uses your child to do so. There is nothing you can, or could have done differently. Just keep doing what you've being doing.''

I now regret my stance of just agreeing to whatever extra contact he wanted when she was little because it backfilled royally when she got older and started refusing to go. It wasn't until she was a certain age that she started to articulate what was happening in that house during contact. What I have been told by social services is that contact must be kept to a minimum to limit the damage he / his wife are doing to her, and if she doesn't want to go I am not to make her. I won't force her just because it's what ex wants or it reduces the amount he has to pay me...

Children services spend an inordinate proportion of their time on similar cases, so much as it's comforting to think my situation is not the norm, the reality is that it is more common than people want to believe.

50/50 can only work for the child in instances where the parents are supportive of each other, and sadly these seem to be in the absolute minority. Reasons why will vary. Women are disproportionately raising children alone as a result, hence why CMS needs to cover at least 50% of that child's cost.[/quote]
I haven't commented about your specific situation or mentioned you not liking your ex at all. Unsure why you think I'm talking about you specifically?

Again, I've never said 50/50 is the answer for everyone. Just that it can work for some, and some children will be affected by their shit parents whatever contact they have. That remains a fact, unfortunately.

Yes in an ideal world CMS should cover 50% but how can that be worked out? It simply can't. My child doesn't cost the same as yours or the boy next door or the other kids at school. We all have different costs, spend different amounts and earn differently. If I worked out every cost directly related to my son and halfed it, I'd come to a different figure than you would for your daughter and so on.

Equally, if someone didn't earn well in the relationship, it's unrealistic to expect that to change because they are no longer in the relationship. Ie, if someone couldn't contribute half when they were there, why on earth would they be able to now, on top of housing themselves.

I don't think there's any point creating expectations that simply cannot be met. It needs to be realistic. That's why I think start with everyone paying something in proportion to their income. Actually use the powers the CMS have, before trying to enforce debt, second jobs and paying "half" a figure which can't realistically be worked out, and even if it can would be viewed as chronically unfair.