To agree that DH should reduce maintenance

[Tiamaria86]

I have a DSD. We previously had her 2-3 nights a week in general. Sometimes it was more and sometimes less.

Her Mum has decided to retrain in a different career and this has meant late nights and early starts so we now have DSD more like 4-5 nights a week.

DSD has her own room with us and has friends round and we take her to all her hobbies and clubs etc.

DH pays for half her uniform and we buy her clothes and trainers and electronics etc.

DH has approached DSD mum and suggested that maintenance shouldn't be paid anymore. He's happy to go half's on anything she needs as well as continue to buy her things but really monthly maintenance is no longer appropriate.

DSD mum doesn't agree and is really shocked he has suggested this as we are a 2 income household and she will really struggle without it.

DH has suggested paying a lesser amount for now as a transition period which I think is really reasonable. DSD mum is really unhappy about it and can't even believe its been suggested.

My PILs also think DH is unreasonable and should continue to pay.

Am I going mad? Maintenance isn't appropriate in these circumstances is it? Or are we wrong?

@Milkkbottles your agenda is showing.
Cms don't change calculations because of a recent change. If OP meets cms criteria for a change then of course the change to maintenance should happen.
The point being made is that if cms criteria for length of time has not yet been met, then the circumstances may change back so the child is spending more time with her mother.
Cms want to be sure the change of primary parent is a permanent one and not just a very temporary change.

oP how long has the child been staying with you more than her mother?

Exactly @FloydPepper I'm starting to thing some people have an agenda.
Fair enough to say that mental load should be morally accounted for even though legally that's not the purpose of maintenance. However to decide that the DH probably doesn't do this simply because he's a man is absurd.

People are spouting off about 'their experience' without bothering to read all the OP's updates. It's she and her DH who do the school pickups, and the DSD has friends over at their house. How does any of that imply less mental load?

'Most men' don't do this, therefore they shouldn't be judged by the standards of 'most men'. When a man does something right - 'nah it's just his responsibility doesn't matter that most men don't.' When they're trying to make out that he does something wrong they happily lump him in with most men.

It's called aggregation bias in case anybody's interested....
https://www.statisticshowto.com/aggregation-bias-ecological-fallacy-definition/

Surely child benefit needs to go to where the child is spending most of its time.

Absolutely!

That's not the point.
If a woman said, 'my ex used to have my child full time/the most, now she's with me, but he still wants maintenance'

People would scream stop it immediately. No one would say. Ahh bless, poor guy, he's a single income household, he needs te money and shame he's just started studying something.

They would say he should have thought about that before he started studying etc.

It shouldn't be different, we shouldn't have more compassion because she's a women.
I've always heard layers said men are treated unfairly in child court and this thread shows me why

Yes, and I say this as the mum in the situation. You can't expect someone to take care of your child more often that you do and also pay you for the pleasure.

The mother isn’t asking the question so nobody is advising her anything. It is very unclear how long this change has been going on. Her stable life is with mum currently unless this is a long-standing change. No amounts of money have been mentioned either so there could be a huge imbalance and the mum will not be able to pay for housing at all in which case she may not have another option than to rethink the plans

I think a clear and honest conversation is needed. If mum is retraining, does this mean uni and therefore student finance? If so then losing the child benefit could mean a total change to her circumstances and what finance/benefits she's entitled to.

YANBU. If DSD is with you most of the time and he already contributes towards other essentials, the maintenance is essentially funding Ex's lifestyle and not DSDS's. I understand it will go towards paying for DSD's other home but | still think it's unreasonable of her to expect maintenance in this scenario. Your DH is being more than generous suggesting an adjustment period.

The only thing is were they married and do they have a financial order? If yes and no then she maybe able to claim ex spousal payments off him, for example if the reason for her low income is giving up career to support hi, but that's unrelated to child maintenance

OP just as I said change financials to reflect the actual situation. Cms work out maintenance on the basis of nights over a year.
Then if you want to gift her money do this separately. We don't all hate our exes. But then it is clear who is the resident parent and that matters legally.
If as you suggest she is claiming UC on the basis of being the resident parent she may be committing benefit fraud and you may be aiding and abetting this.

This, with bells on.
People bash men without any context, and I guess mostly, rightly so. You probably don't need context when someone has done something wrong.

But if a women cheats, her husband probably treated her poorly anyway.
If she yells and screams at him, throws stuff, he drove her to it, probably abused her, hence why she yelled.

The examples are just endless.

@Milkkbottles you are making things up so you can froth.
A lot of parents would not want to give up resident parent status.

She's retraining, I wouldn't like to assume her income has risen.

But why should he subsidise her career change?

He is already covering most of the costs of their shared child. Why should he give more just to her?
Do you subsidise all your exes if they want more money? Because once you take out the issue of their child (which is essentially what is happening, as he’s the RP), then you’re basically saying he should give his ex money so she can have a better life.

Op how long ago did this change in nights happen?

I remember a thread on here recently where a woman got drunk and yelled at her partner in front of their teenage kids, police were called, he took off with them to a different house.
Quite a few PPs were quick to suggest that it wasn't her fault, she was being gaslit, her partner was gradually withdrawing and this was his excuse to break it off and had somehow instigated this.

Nobody would even DARE suggest to a woman that she was the cause of any anger of a man towards her... that would be clear victim blaming... getting drunk and screaming until police called is domestic abuse. But because it was reverse sexes it was all ok. Couldn't believe my eyes!

Difficult to comment on a situation when there are so few details.
There is obviously more to this though. No one calls the police because their partner just yelled at them and the moves their children to another house. You must have left out a lot of detail.

@FasciaDreams you are absolutely right and it's quite disgusting in my opinion. As an example (and I know I'm going off on a tangent, sorry) DH was hit several times by his ex, and even with her admitting it, he was never considered a victim of domestic abuse by authorities. It's vile.

Why was he never considered a victim of domestic abuse?
It was not just because he was a man.