Why are nursery fees not included in child maintenance?

[haeesgy]

Yes, I know it’s the resident parent’s choice whether to send the child to nursery… but the reality is it’s either that or don’t work..!

I would LOVE ex to have 50/50 care of our child. I didn’t have a child expecting him to turn up once a week (at best) for half a day. I didn’t want this, he left.

And now I’m left with child maintenance which is a long way from half nursery fees. Why is nothing done about this? Women treated appallingly again.

I would be fighting for fees on the days he’s supposed to have the little one. You can’t expect him to pay the fees int he says he’s paying you if that makes sense?

I agree, nursery fees are generally upwards of £1k a month and it seems very unfair that men would pay half of this if they were still with their child's mother, plus all the other costs of having a child, but can just choose to leave and effectively force their ex and their child(ren) into poverty with no consequences

Because you could want to send your DC to the most expensive childcare around and the other parent may not be able to afford it.

The real question should be why doesn't the government want to invest in childcare by making it free/very affordable so that most single parents can afford to work and have careers like the absent parent can. Why do they want so many children to grow up in poverty continuing the cycle of deprivation?

Childcare should be fully tax deductible, which would help.

In terms of expense, it could be based on average nursery fees for the area - if you use a Norland Nanny, then you meet the difference in costs.

And child maintenance should be based on the respective incomes of the parents and the essential outgoings.

I have no idea why the system is so broken and how so many men contribute nothing or very little.

It is a lesson is making sure you keep your own career and don't rely on a man, though. So many SAHMs saying "MY husband won't run off with anyone else". Well.

The problem is that quite often the fathers weren't paying for childcare when they are together. Often the women are paying it or becoming a SAHP. The father is often paying for other bills.

The big problem in this country is that childcare is often as much or more than the cost of rent/mortgage which can just about be afforded when people live as a couple. When they split, the cost of 2x rent + ? X childcare costs is just not affordable even if both parents paid a fair share. It's unfortunately easier for the men just not to pay it and the government won't do anything about it.

Do you really think that the real question is why shouldn't tax payers fund free childcare for all so that feckless fathers don't have to pay reasonable costs towards their children?

@Kpo58 its not the government’s job to pay for our child. If it’s a question of cost, the non resident parent should pay 50% of average childcare costs. Job done.

Reckless fathers would then be contributing by tax, compared to not at all

It's like saying that we should do free school meals because the parents should be paying. Sometimes we need to make changes for the good of society going forwards rather than continuing to punish single parents because they know that they can't do anything to make the bad parents improve.

Do you really think that the real question is why shouldn't tax payers fund free childcare for all so that feckless fathers don't have to pay reasonable costs towards their children?

Well, the UK’s anomalous in having such an expensive (and poor quality) childcare system. I haven’t looked this up but from memory it’s the second most expensive in the world and one of only two countries where more than 50% of the cost of childcare comes directs from parents’ pockets.

If lone parents can access childcare, they can work, pay tax and hopefully won’t need to claim benefits. If they can’t, they don’t pay tax and probably have to claim benefits - and more children end up in poverty, which it’s hard to break out of. It’s simple maths and most developed countries have reached this conclusion.

Absurd that there’s political discussion about this when women are suffering at the hands of deadbeats who don’t provide for their children.

My ex pays 500 a month. He earns more than me, just, yet I pay the entire 1,300 nursery bill and all of DC’s costs.

Of course he should pay towards this and I agree that it's yet another way women are let down, it's like the list is neverending... 😔

This. Our nursery costs are amongst the highest in the world.

SMP is paid to nine months, school starts from 4/5. The time in between should be covered by standardised, subsidised, government funded childcare. Any additional cost should be split between the parents.

Pregnant Then Screwed do a lot of campaigning on the matter, OP.

Is it because you can help from UC for nursery fees?

I tested a scenario on the UC website where I was a single mum, and even on my salary (higher tax payer), the website said I was entitled to £2k per month in childcare fees.

I think it is mainly to do with the single mother stigma here in the UK, and won't be a popular decision. Look, this woman is already a substandard mother due to failing to secure a father for her children, and now she dares to send them to childcare! Reeee! Unforgivable.

OP, I feel for you. My childcare fees at some point were £3K / month with two toddlers (the absolutely cheapest local nursery), and ex, who earned exactly the same as me, was assessed to be paying £380/month for both (as it is calculated on NIGHTS, not DAYS). It ended up in the court even, and the judge said that sending them to childcare was a lifestyle choice for me, I could have stayed home instead - so no allowance for any fees.

CMS in this country isn’t fit for purpose. If resident parents failed to feed, clothe, house and provide safe appropriate childcare, social services would be on the doorstep.

@novhange how is this possible? I earn 59k so doubt I am going to be given 2k in childcare

@zendeveloper a lifestyle choice. What a cunt.

It is unfortunately a situation no one actually understands unless they have actually been in the shoes of a single mother with an actual professional job to maintain. Invisible in plain sight. I won't even mention other things said at that hearing, but it was crystal clear that the old white male judge did not have to bother with a question about who looked after his own children when he was in the courtroom EVER in his life.

Because society is deeply misogynistic and many men (both in and out of relationships) are let off the hook in terms of their caring responsibilities again and again.

There should be a minimum maintenance amount that covers a decent amount of essentials and (assuming the child is in nursery) up to 50% of reasonable childcare costs incurred. If an NRP is unable to pay due to unemployment/low income, the state should make up the shortfall and a charge put on the NRP's pension. It should also be possible to seize assets to pay towards maintenance.

Because maintenance only looks at the income not the actual costs of the child. Its not right morally.

He won’t have his child more though to relieve the burden of the nursery fees on the op. If they both need to work a standard 9-5 Monday to Friday job, how fair is it for the dad to be able to say, well I’m not having her Monday to Friday coz I’m in work, I’ll just have her on Saturdays. Giving the op no choice but to pay for childcare for every single day that they both work? I agree that if the father has the option of having the child 50/50, then he should be at least partly responsible for the childcare fees that the mother then has to pay because they’re BOTH in work. It’s definitely not fair

What I find most sad is the number of women who don’t seem to understand it. We should all be making men accountable.

I fully get your point. I can only speak from my experience, where we are responsible for the childcare on our days. Though ours were older so it was wrap around costings rather than nursery.

All of this basically.

And there should be consequences for non payers.