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.

The OP hasn't mentioned her having a second set of children while being unable to provide for her first.

Read her posts.

I'm not making anything up. It all depends on what "feeling the pinch" means in this context. It would help if the OP could clarify.

If the dad is driving around in a brand new car while the mum is struggling to pay the heating bill and the kids' extracurriculars are being cut, then yes I think that's fairly grotesque.

If actually all it means is that the mum won't have an expensive foreign holiday with the kids this year and they've had to cut down on takeaways, then clearly that's different.

Do you think the mum is inadequate too for not having a £££££ paying job?

Apparently not - another MN double standard!

I am continually astounded by people who expect other people, or indeed the taxpayer, to pay for their children. Your kids, your responsibility.

Yet you jumped in and droned on for pages that he was a deficient father

Yes, when our kids are born and we hold them in our arms and promise them we'll do our best for them throughout their lives and make their futures as bright as possible, what we really mean is paying a few hundred a month and having them 2-3 days a week and that's the end of it 🙄.

CM is not calculated based on needs, and you do not meet your children's needs just because you pay CM. Some high earners might; most NRPs don't.

They usually are, when there's a disagreement of this type. People are often too quick to excuse the "poor man caught in the middle". He's the common link, he needs to step up and make things work for all his kids.

I think you must talking about your own situation tbh

the only time I would think you were unreasonable was if DH had taken a pay cut or reduced hours to look after your joint children and therefore maintenance had reduced. Other than that it’s not her business

We were in a similar position many years ago (i am the wife in this case also)

DH was paying his ex maintenance from a private arrangement which she was more than happy with as she was in a new relationship (with another child) but when her relationship broke down she came after DH for more money stating that I had a new car (correct but I worked for a leasing company so had an incredibly good staff deal) that we had leather jackets (?!) and we could afford holidays abroad (we’d only had 1 holiday abroad since we had been together which was our honeymoon!!)

She contacted CMS and insisted that I disclose my income/outgoings - I declined as thought this was unreasonable.

horrible situation and it caused lot of arguments

Me too. Mine was a cheap one in the sale from dotty P’s bought with Christmas money 🤣

“They usually are”

there we have it. It makes sense why you’re so determined to make out this guy is somehow a deadbeat failing his kids based on nothing at all. Your agenda is clear

Most dads earning modest salaries and paying limited amounts towards their children aren't driving nice new cars and going on expensive holidays.

Yes, it's not his money he's spending, it's someone else's and his kids/ex have no claim to it, but it's not a good look (in fact, distinctly icky) if actually his children are missing out and living a very modest lifestyle by comparison.

Kids should see their parents striving for them. Parents should have their kids' backs whatever happens. If your dad is having an expensive trip and you've been told you can't go on the school residential, what does that say to you as a child?

🤣

wtf

It’s Storytime.

You don’t know anymore that. You’re clearly projecting.

The OP has said both parents earn fairly modestly (aren't in high-paid jobs) and the mum is struggling a bit. If you can't read, not my problem.

Kids should see their parents striving for them. Parents should have their kids' backs whatever happens.

Bang straight @Goldbar. If mum is struggling she should strive to provide more for her kids, I agree.

Do as men are often told...get a better job, upskill, get a second job. Provide for your children.

It's not exactly "striving" for your kids to expect your ex's partner to stump up for you.

Has she said they have missed out on anything?