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.

Make child custody a default of 50/50

No maintenance issues at all and each parent is responsible for their 50%

It can be even better. The father's contribution is calculated based on nights, not days. In my case, we ended up with 3 nights / 4 nights split per week, where the father was picking them from the nursery at 7pm and dropping off at 8am the next day. But the days and the childcare costs were mine, and he made big round eyes in the children's matter hearing - "but I can't have them during the day! I am working!" - so the order was made for nights only. It did not last, however, he got tired in two months and disappeared nearly completely.

I don’t agree with this as it’s not always in the best interests of the child - both the fact of not having a “main” home, and because some parents aren’t suitable to have care of their children 50% of the time - whilst their ex partner is a perfectly good parent.

@araiwa I have tried. He does the bare minimum in every sense of the word.

I would leave the family home and my children, if my DH ever left me. Then I would ask for 50/50. No way would I be shafted with the every other weekend most men get away with.

Indeed.

My ex quit his job to become self employed. He receives benefits to help start his business. I now get the grand sum of £0 per week for 2 children. It's so depressing. He has a 6 figure sum in his bank account after I bought him out of the house, but apparently that's irrelevant.

In answer to your question op it is probably down to administration. To have every RP in the country to submit childcare invoices to CMS so they can tell the RP to pay half would cost a huge amount in staffing.

I have seen people suggest that maintenance should be taken out of the NRP's state pension if they don't pay for whatever reason.

It'll never happen though because child maintenance isn't seen as a "priority debt" or essential bill like gas / electricity etc.

Because it affects, overwhelmingly, women not men.

Much like other injustices in the world.

The 50/50 suggestions crack me up.

Many of these men are shit and uninterested parents. I mean, that's a major reason that many relationships break down in the first place.

Women don't exit these relationships expecting or hoping their exes, who previously would have done anything to get out of spending 1-1 time with their kids, will suddenly become "dad of the year". They leave because, even though it's hard, it's better not having to sleep with him, pick after him and trip over him around the house and they don't want to model to their kids that it's ok to accept being treated like shit.

And yet they're treated as bitter and greedy not wanting their DC to live 50-50 with dads who refuse to get up with them in the night, don't know what doctor's surgery they're registered at and couldn't name their teacher or friends.

I agree. I have 1 DC nursery now full time 4 days a week and once the universal hours are removed, it’s around £400 a month. When we had 2 DC in full time and youngest DC wasn’t entitled to the universal hours, it was closer to 1k a month. I realise this is cheap compared to other parts of the country but I couldn’t afford it if I was a single parent and I say this as someone on 45k a year in the North so not bad going.

It isn’t a resident parent’s choice to send their DC to nursery because working is hardly a choice.

No, children's welfare is absolutely not a priority in this country.

We see this again and again.

This, caring is seen as the responsibility of women. Ever have a look in the comments sections of papers/fora men and sometimes women freely express this view widely.

Unfortunately to cover this either other services need to be cut....which would you pick? Or we all need to pay a lot more tax the expansion due in April is already causing more closures

If there was a "minimum maintenance amount" that the NRP had to pay from earnings, then surely this "minimum maintenance amount" would also need to be paid by the resident parent from earnings (not benefits) in order to be fair? A lot of resident parents would not like that one bit!

The current CMS system isn't great, and I do think it's the working higher earning single RPs who get screwed most by it. But RPs have a lot more sources of financial support via the benefits system than NRPs, which in many cases props them up with child benefit plus tax credits or UC paying up to 85% childcare.

I'm not really sure what the answer is, because I can't see what a fair "one size fits all" system would be. There's too many variables in people circumstances for any one system to work fairly for everyone.

I can see why the OP in this case feels aggrieved because her earnings mean she's not eligible for any benefits to help her, but she's disproportionately bearing the brunt of high childcare costs.

This is a terrible idea because it in no way considers the experience of the small
people being treated as expenses.

It's not about being entirely "fair" between RP and NRP, it's about doing right by the kids. Even taking your point about RPs paying in, why should they pay in the same when they're providing care and labour to the children which their ex isn't? This, albeit unpaid, also has a value. So I'm bemused why you think it's so important that an RP provides an equal amount of financial support when they are providing support in many other ways, which it would cost a fortune to "buy in".

Why should the division be the following?

RP contribution = 24/7 care/default care except maybe EOW if lucky plus 50% of kids' expenses.

NRP contribution = 50% of kids' expenses and maybe EOW if they feel like it.

The two aren't equal.

In any case, the point is largely moot since most NRPs neither comply with their financial obligations to their children nor provide a fair share of day-to-day care, and most RPs are doing most stuff for the kids and paying for most things.

Whaaat? I did not know this. The non-resident parent doesn't have any responsibility to pay nursery fees?? But that's the biggest cost of children when they're young! I had no idea and if that's the case, it's disgraceful. I'm so sorry!

Childcare isn't a standard cost. Some have no costs as grandparents etc look after them. What if for example ex turned around and said their parents (who you believe are unsuitable) are willing to look after the child half the time instead of their contribution? Should you be forced to hand over your child to someone you don't trust? Should ex be forced to pay when they think they have an acceptable alternative?

Some get tax free childcare, cost varies hugely if its a childminder, nursery, live in nanny. If resident parent has a high power job and decides to get a live in nanny to cover all hours, should their ex on much less be forced to pay half that cost when a nursery would be much cheaper?

Or where resident parent moves away so can't share time more equally, they move to somewhere expensive like London and ex stays somewhere much cheaper. Ex is happy to become resident parent and have them with them in cheaper childcare but resident parent doesn't want to relinquish their resident parent status?

We need a reform of maintenance, it's no where near enough, but enforcing paying childcare won't happen.

I agree with you op. Both parents should either halve their child half the week or pay half of the child care costs. Really frustrating that men walk away from their responsibilities (yes I know some women do but it's overwhelmingly men) leaving the mums with the costs and the juggling!

Yes I’ve been saying this for years too! They would be charged with child neglect so why are these deadbeat non resident dads charged with that ?!! Cos abandoning your kid/lying or cheating about CMS etc is literally child neglect 🤷‍♀️

I feel for you OP. I agree with @AnneElliott "Both parents should either have their child half the week or pay half of the child care costs".

Although the main problem here is that the system allows fathers to essentially stick their middle finger up at their responsibilities, leaving the mum to pick up the pieces, there is some light at the end of the tunnel for government childcare support...

By September 2024, working families will get 15 hours of free child care/week for children aged 9-24 months. By September 2025, that will be increased to 30 hours of free childcare for children under 5 (ie. 9months- 5years). You can see more details below...

https://www.childcarechoices.gov.uk/upcoming-changes-to-childcare-support/

Because the CM system is set up to ensure men live comfortably, even if the mother and child are in poverty.
The % of their salary they have to pay is a pittance.

Yep,

I have a friend, who when she was trying to get maintenance, was told she was number 5 on the priority list of his creditors. That's right - there were four other priorities above supporting a child.

The research on custody arrangements shows 50/50 does not have the best outcomes for children.

They do best when they have one stable home where they spend the majority of their time.

Problem with this is plenty of fathers (and mothers) don’t show up when they are meant to so if this was a thing the other parent would be left looking after the child and no help financially