Payrise and maintenance

[Lillo7]

Keen to hear people's opinions about this.

Two DC, father is married with more children. Mother is single.

Father is not on a great wage however his wife has received several payrises in the years they've been together and works in a professional career which means as a whole their household is quite well off and can afford quite a lot of luxuries.

Maintenance is paid by the father based on his low wage. Mother is struggling a little as also on a lower wage.

Mother argues that they should pay more as a household instead due to wife's higher pay, obviously not officially through CMS as they don't take new partners into account, but morally. Wife disagrees and says what she earns is nothing to do with the mother and is for her household/children/ stepchildren when there, not at their mums.

Father stuck in the middle a bit.

Random poll options

YABU - wife should subsidise higher maintenance.

YANBU - Mother and father should care for their children on their own respective wages and what wife earns is nothing to do with the mother.

Yeah - DH ex tried this when we got together and she discovered my (high earning) job. She was firmly put straight 🙄

Yet maintenance drops when the nonresident parent moves in with a new partner who has dc even if the dc aren't his. My DD's maintenance is dropping significantly because her dad has moved in with his gf who has 2 dc from her marriage. It's a shot father who lets their own dc get less in favour of gf's dc.

DH’s ex (didn’t work) also tried this nonsense. She was given short shrift by the lawyer. Advised I could win the euro millions today and she’d have zero claim to anything.

It’s not for you to contribute more as you are the higher earner. However although not your situation, I don’t agree when the fathers take a step back and either cut back on hours because they can or don’t strive to earn more because the wife is the higher earner. In that sense they are not doing as much as they could for their children from the previous relationship because they know that the wife’s earning are not taken into account for CMS.

I don’t agree when the fathers take a step back and either cut back on hours because they can or don’t strive to earn more because the wife is the higher earner.

I dont think anyone does agree this is right.
Its shitty behaviour

Maybe she also feels annoyed if she is a single parent as she would have to shell out for more wraparound care if she works full time whereas when you are in a two parent household you might be able to avoid it.

Father stuck in the middle a bit

He needs to man up and tell his ex to jog on. It’s his job to provide for his kids, not yours.

It shouldn't. I don't think one means the other is okay.

Not OP’s problem.

Maybe. But surely that's just life? If she were the one with the partner and DH single I doubt she'd have any sympathy about him having a bit of a harder time juggling childcare.

I mean she can go and find a partner if she really wants?

But unlikely that her ex would have the children the majority of the time, unlike their mother. Also not sure if single mothers should be looking for partners solely to boost their income. I didn’t agree with the OP paying more from her wages for CMS but my comment above is something that might be affecting the ex and why she wants more money.

Not inevitably. We didn’t reduce it when we had DC.

I’m in 2 minds about this. I know someone who gave up work to look after his wife’s kids so she could improve her carer, but this meant that he now didn’t have to pay any maintenance to his ex. I know this is a different scenario in the main….

@Toooldtoworry wow!! Bad enough my DHs ex expects me to leave my house solely to their son when we have 5 children between us (none together). cannot believe the cheek of him!!! your house to leave to your children, not even to him if you can avoid it!!

Very much this. It’s his choice to carry on earning at his current level, enjoying the extras your work provides, and luxuriating in pointless guilt. I wouldn’t have bought him a nice car if he was going to use it against me.

It’s a completely different scenario so not relevant to OP.

They just wanted more money because they thought it was ‘unfair’ the other household had more than they did, in our case, as somewhere along the line, people started believing their circumstances have to remain equal after they split.

Obviously you have no legal responsibility towards your step children, but we all know that CMS is fuck all. And that if the mother is a low earner, it's very difficult to meaningfully earn more with the cost of childcare.

If your household is comfortable to the point of two new cars, multiple holidays, then I think it would the decent thing to pay more maintenance. Not that you have to legally or even morally, but I do think it's the good and decent thing to do.

I think the only nuance that needs to be addressed is why is the father on a low wage and hasn’t progressed in his career. If he is doing the best he can then absolutely the new wife’s earnings should not be taken into account. But if as a couple they have chosen to prioritise her career, so he is picking up more of the load at home facilitating her to work more hours to achieve promotions etc then it is a bit shitty.

Ha! When I met my now DH my exH dropped the (minimum) maintenance he was paying and evaded CMS by moving overseas. Said I didn’t need as much any more…!

Some ex partners are just shitbags.

Luckily for me and my DC, my DH isn’t - it was him who even bought DC’s first car many years later.

Legally it's not the wife's problem but morally wrong. So many men do this, hide behind a wealthy spouse and stall their careers as a result. I wish these wives would wake up and realise this is what they're doing.