To say to DH that these payments to his ex should stop now?

[yardandbard]

When me and DH first met he has a set up with his ex (who was single at the time and on a lower wage) where he'd contribute towards her going on holiday every year with their children. There was no maintenance paid as they've always done 50:50 but he used to pay towards her holidays.

We've now been together for nearly 6 years and this is still ongoing. Its not just expected and imo should stop. DH has made suggestions before in the past that it stops but it's always met with complaints and kick offs and to keep the peace he ends up carrying on for another year.

The ex is now with someone else herself and has been for a couple of years, we also have joint DC to think about too, a bigger home than before etc etc.. all meaning spare money isn't as easily found as it was before. Its not that it's not affordable but more that the money could be used for more important things for OUR family and in my opinion she should now be supporting her own holidays with her own job and partner if she wants to go away, I've always thought the arrangement was odd and a bit cheeky but I lived with it at first. Now I just think it's ridiculous.

Aibu to say to DH this really needs to stop now? He'll agree with me as he's wanted to stop for a while but I know she'll likely moan she can't go away with the children otherwise so it's just about getting him to keep saying no despite the fall out.

Oh, I read all your posts. My opinion of them stands. 😡

Bitter much?

If there's a big inequality in income/earning potential between him and her, the split may have made it hard for her to afford holidays with the DC. It would be rough on the DC to only ever go on holiday with their father and new wife, yet never have a holiday with their own Mum. So your now DH contributing to that seems reasonable. It's a bit telling that you see this as a payment to her (in your title!), rather than support for his DC to have a rounded childhood.

That would be fair only if the ex then funds her children's trips with their father and SM.

The ex is doing nothing but using OP's DH as a fool. She plans vacations that cost the OP's DH thousands of pounds. She is just another manipulative, bitter ex, who is trying to take as much as she can. She'll be mad the well has tried up and if she stops access to the children, I hope he goes to court, gets full custody of them and lets her see them EOW with supervision.

Personally, any bitter ex who would deny access to the children that their ex is paying/caring for 50% of the time should get to spend a week in jail, every time.

Does his ex contribute to the holidays that you and your husband take the children on, if the answer is no then yes the payments should stop.

I dont fell your disagreeing is trying to silence me.
Your tone is pretty sharp and aggressive and I am not sure why thats all

No, that's not what you were saying. You were responding to my point that nobody is owed a relationship (you didn't understand why I'd said it, so I explained) and asserting your right to give your view (nobody had disputed it).

My view is that there is nothing punitive, harsh or in any way unreasonable in deciding that stepchildren are a complication you would rather not have. Yes, this limits your dating pool, but there's nothing wrong with that either. Some people prefer to be single than compromise on certain things. Perhaps more people should be like that.

i know what I said and what I feel

as I said your tone is sharp and aggressive and I do not know why.
I dont need an explanation for this...
just confused as to why you sound so offended by my opinion.
Then again its very easy to cross wires with typed words, happens all the time with text messages.

I am Neuro- Divergent ADHD and Autism so I get very upset if people take me the wrong way, which happens all day every day.

Hope OP makes the choice that is truly right for her

We were not discussing my tone, and what you said is literally on the page. You asked why I said that nobody is owed a relationship, so I elaborated, and you asserted that you have a right to your opinion, which I do find a bit tiresome because it's something people tend to trot out when they've been contradicted, as if contradiction is an attempt to silence them.

If you are worried about having offended me, don't worry, you didn't. I'm just disagreeing with the notion that it's somehow unfair or punitive to choose not to date someone with children. That's all.

Anyone who thinks you are being unreasonable is either doing the same thing so doesn’t see an issue or can’t read.
There is no way on gods Earth I’d be paying for my ex to do anything. I also wouldn’t be paying for my ex’s choice to take our kids on holiday. Spending money yes, half of the costs no.
Glad to see the update that your husband has sent the message. Tell him to stay strong.

So many people on here can’t or don’t read, or lack comprehension skills. Threads are often driven by nonsense dreamt up other posters. Nuts.

Wow what a lucky ex to have got away with that for so long.

I'm glad your husband has been able to see sense.

Enjoy your extra funds.

You are being unreasonable if that's the only financial contribution that he makes towards his children. Even though I share 50-50 custody with my ex he still pays maintenance towards school uniform, school trips, clubs etc. you're also being unreasonable if he doesn't take their kids on holiday so the only holiday they get is with their mum.
You're not being unreasonable if he pays maintenance and also takes their children on an equal holiday to what his ex takes them on.
Regardless of her having a new partner, they aren't his kids they're your husband's.

Lucky ex? Having to pay for school uniform, school trips etc on her own with the only contribution a bit towards her kids holiday?

Why should be pay maintenance when he has them an equal amount of time?

Who said she's paying those things on her own? He has his kids 50% of the time and probably pays for everything they need for his house including uniform etc.

Because that's the British rules, the parent who earns the most pays the other parent money towards the children's upkeep.
Child maintenance told my ex he has to pay me even though it's 50-50 plus it's goes on a calendar year of 365 days and only nights spent count towards it so there is no 50-50 because 365 can't be divided by 2 equally.

She did "he doesn't give maintenance because we see them 50-50"
And when questioned about what else he pays she responded with "we see them 50-50"

Maybe that's your arrangement but it's certainly not the norm.

OP, I’m so glad your DH has seen sense

So he pays for whatever they need when he has them. The ex pays for whatever they need at her house. It's 50:50 so they both contribute to their children's needs equally.

I really don't see why posters make random things up and state them as fact. The OP has said more than once that they have them 50/50 and share costs 50/50. It's bizarre.

He pays half of everything they need always has.

He probably even pays a little more on paper than her as he pays for phone contracts too for both.

People asked me to further clarify whether this meant my husband pays for everything 50:50 too which I did in my next post.

The OP has made 14 comments on this post so far. She's mentioned more than once that they have 50/50 care of the children, pay 50/50 for the children.

You can click "see all" to read what she has said. It's clear that the contribution to the holiday isn't his only contribution to their upbringing. A quick scan of the OP's posts tell you that.

You are very passionate about it @Nanaof1. Why are you so invested?

The OP isn’t the parent of the kids so it’s not her decision how much her partner chooses to pay in support. If he wants to pay a decent amount that shows he is a caring and decent individual - OP should see that as a good thing. If I dated someone who had kids I would expect them to always be being the priority.

I was asking the OP (not you) if she would feel better if it went towards rent as she seemed to have an issue about it being towards a holiday.

The OP isn’t the parent of the kids so it’s not her decision how much her partner chooses to pay in support
He's her husband. They have joint finances, so it's actually also OPs money.
If he wants to pay a decent amount that shows he is a caring and decent individual - OP should see that as a good thing
It would not be good thing If he failed to be caring and decent towards his wife and younger children, whose finances and trust he would be undermining If he continued to give their money away.
If I dated someone who had kids I would expect them to always be being the priority
Nobody with more than one child gets to make any child The Priority. Anyone who doesn't make their spouse and all their children priorities has no business being in a relationship or having children.

Why is he paying her any money at all? He does his share of childcare and pays for everything they need. Why should he be paying the ex at all? Why can't she pay for her own expenses?