...to think having to pay maintenance is unfair?

[thebrollachan]

My friend's daughter, who is in her thirties, got married a little under three years ago, to a man of about the same age. They grew up in the same area, where they still live, and were friends before becoming romantically involved.

They are both well-paid professionals, and when they got married they agreed that neither wanted children and that he would have a vasectomy so that they could stop using contraception.

Some time later, however, she discovered that she was pregnant, and, worse, the time limit for a termination had already passed by the time she realised. He claimed that they must have had sex too soon after the vasectomy, but now I'm wondering whether he ever had it.

Very soon after this, he announced that he had met someone else, and was moving out. They agreed to divorce and to have the child adopted. I don't know what order any of this happened in.

AFAIK the divorce proceedings have gone smoothly, but he has never signed the adoption papers. Before the baby was born he announced that he and his 'new' girlfriend wanted to adopt it, and so it was handed over at birth (more than a year ago now). Adoption by a stepparent can be initiated after six months, yet somehow there's still no sign of it happening.

In the meantime she has received a CMS claim/assessment and is having to pay a substantial amount every month.

All this has been relayed to me gradually over the phone by her mum. They're both surprisingly robust about the whole thing, apart from being on the hook for maintenance. But her mum is annoyed because she's now heard on the bush telegraph that he and the 'new' girlfriend have been together intermittently for years, during which time they were TTC unsuccessfully (she hasn't told daughter yet).

They're not expecting me to help, apart from lending a sympathetic ear, but I'm just amazed at how this has happened. FWIW I don't think he's a Machiavelli - I think he just got into a muddle.

I do think he's a CF to be accepting money from her now though, even though he's legally entitled to it.

IABU not a CF

IANBU is a CF

CF. Your friend should put in a claim for 50/50 residency which means no payment is due. He'd then sign the adoption papers in a hurry...

Nah, that can't be right. The person who gives a child up for adoption has no legal reason to pay the adoptive parent anything. My nephew is adopted. If this is because he won't sign the adoption papers, then she should tell him she is taking the baby 50/50.

FWIW I don't think he's a Machiavelli - I think he just got into a muddle

So potentially he's lied about having a vasectomy. Don't men have to go through a round of sperm tests afterwards to check it's worked? Does your friend remember him doing that?

Plus there's also the possibility he was having an affair and tricked his now ex wife into being an unwilling surrogate?

And to add the cherry on the cake, CBA getting round to dealing with adoption papers but seemingly able to fill in a child support application.

Yeah, she needs to call his bluff and tell them to sign the adoption papers or she'll apply for 50/50 residency.

Yes DH just had one. After the procedure you have to masturbate 15-20 times to remove any live sperm still hanging around in there, then you go back and are tested again to make sure you're firing blanks. You can get pregnant after one, but the chances are so low I doubt that's what happened

Is there some sort of agency helping with the adoption?

I don’t know whether it’s fair or not to be honest, it’s a very unusual situation!
BUT you could guarantee if it was the other way round everyone would be demanding he pay maintenance.

It’s all weird .

If she doesnt want her child has she contacted social services? Would they help?

If he is the biological parent adoption is completely irrelevant - you can’t adopt your own child, the non-resident parent pays maintenance. Adoption by a step parent doesn’t end parental rights for the non-resident parent.

Yes it does.

It does

Sorry, only half read and was thinking about a different process.

The whole situation sounds weird. Your friend has just assumed that an on-off girlfriend of her ex who she has never met is adopting her baby, and doesn’t seem to have the faintest clue about what’s going on or how the legal process works and is supposedly of the belief that she has to just wait around for her ex to sign some papers and notify her?

If she doesn’t want to care for her baby then paying maintenance is perfectly fair. That’s just how it works. She had a baby and her ex’s girlfriend has no obligation to adopt it. If there was no girlfriend in the picture and her ex was a lone parent, she’d be paying maintenance.

A good twist would be if the DH DID have the vasectomy, and the DW had stepped out on him. Now he's taking in a baby that's not his

He is the resident parent, why would he not seek maintenance?

OK so the plan seems to be for a step-adoption, but the application can't be filed until the child has been living with the step-parent for at least six months, and there are things that need to be done after that (SS checks?) so the whole process takes a while. Nobody thinks it's unfair for the mother to pay maintenance during that time. But he seems to be dragging his feet.

I don't think she wants to apply for residence just as a tactical move, and she does not want a relationship. And thinks the maintenance, whilst substantial, is less than the actual cost of rearing a child. So she's hoping he will get himself sorted out, but doesn't have any leverage.

I've always in my mind been quite hard on 'deadbeat dads', but this seems different somehow. Still, accidents do happen, and a child is the responsibility of both its parents no matter what.

As I had no-one to talk to about it (my friend has probably been drip feeding this saga to lots of other people but no-one I know), I was interested to see what people here thought. Looking fairly evenly balanced at the moment.

This.
She needs to go to court and relinquish PR for the child. She'll no longer get financially responsible.