To be upset my hubby is insisting I go back to work full time even though ...

[Willowwisp]

We could manage me doing 4 days compressed into 3 with strict budgeting and if he went to the CSA again to get the 1/3 for OUR daughter taken from his salary?

Ok long story cut short coming up .... Hubby has ex-wife, has two children who I adore and get on famously with. Ex-wife is a complete loony who has made our lives, particularly mine a misery since we got together (they were split 3 years before we met). She thinks he is a personal bank for her to delve into when she see's fit, he has always paid for his children, never missed payments and pays half for everything, but she still wants more!

When we met he paid an outrageous amount of money to her (over £600), we wanted to get married, get mortgage, have a family of our own etc and he asked her to reduce money by £100, she said no (blamed me, she refers to me as the 'bitch' to his kids) so he went to the CSA and they reduced it for us, which was fair according to his salary.

We now have a daughter (8 mths) and I'm due to go back to work in 8 weeks, I can't bear the thought of it but know I have to, I want to go back part-time and he is insisting 'I have to get my head around full time' as we can't manage financially. Ex knows we could go to the CSA to get the other 1/3 taken of his salary for OUR daughter so she has been Mrs Nice since DD was born, calling him mate, sending pleasant text and it really fecks me off! He forgets that last year she told his kids he was a shit Dad!

He point blankly refuses to approach the CSA to see about getting the 1/3 taken off his salary, ex has massive 4 bed house, convertible car, works part time and lives a life of luxury, BUT I'm expected to struggle through. He say WE will have to cut down and DD doesn't need all the nice things I think she should have, like his kids do!

So AIBU to think my DH is being unreasonable in expecting ME to finance his ex-wifes luxury lifestyle and miss the most precious days of my daughters life to a CM?? all because he says we can't manage, when he knows what has to be done!

Any suggestions?

What I find curious (about English law) in your case, Xenia (and you say that had it gone to court it would have been a test case, so obviously you were in a set of circumstances that were very rare in England) is that your XH got 50% of joint assets plus maintenance because he was the lower earner, but had not been a SAHP.

Here in France a SAHP might get a reasonable lump sum settlement for maintenance on divorce providing he/she could prove he/she had been doing the lion's share of parenting and domestic work. If he/she could not prove that (ie he/she had been a ), he/she would not be entitled to maintenance.

But an earning partner would not get anything other than the share of joint assets as provided for by the marriage contract (three sorts, with three different provisions, decided upon at the time of marriage).

The UK is one of the best places on the planet to be a housewife of a rich husband. Women choose the jurisdiction if they have several homes abroad and egg theirs husbands on to make London their residence so they can file for divorce here because virtually no where else will give you 50% plus maintenance for life.]
We used to have a system of reasonable needs being met and if that were 1% of someone's fortune so be it but cases changed all that in the last few years.

A lot of women think it's very fair and that marriage is a partnership, what is mine is yours, with all my worldly goods I thee endow until death us do part and even if she has provided really bad housewife services for 20 years and slept with 100 lovers and he worked night and day and earned £800m you still start with 50/50 and if that is not enough for a clean break maintenance for life too. Paul McCartney was able to produce £23m lump sum which gives his wife £600k a year to live on so the lump sum was enough to fun the maintenance but not all cases can achieve that.

Another problem is the law is not very clear which is very difficult for people and means you spend more on lawyers than you need.

My understanding is that for people with homes/nationalities only in the European Union there are now quite strict EU rules governing the jurisdiction in which a couple may divorce.

The divorce laws all do seem mighty unclear in England. Also residency/access arrangements.

Couldn't agree with Xenia more.

The law on contact is not really enforced so the parent with care can ignore court orders and refuse the other parent contact. Virtually no mother has ever been nailed for that and very few judges are anything like tough enough in forcing contact. The law is a bit of an ass in these matters but then the law really should have no part to play in contact issues and usually doesn't. The arrangements that work best which are the majority of arrangements in the UK after divorce are not in any court orders at all - they are what the parents agree. As soon as you involve courts and lawyers in family matters the results are much worse. In fact some family lawyers now are part of a scheme where they agree to stop acting for that client if the matter including money is not resolved in mediation rather than court. That is a very very good scheme to use.

Hmm. I think it is useful to have formal access arrangements that are enforceable by law.

Otherwise (IME) there is far too much ongoing renegotiation which pisses everyone around. My second stepson regularly complains about his mother making his life fit around her personal and professional agenda; that shouldn't happen.

totally agree with you there Xenia - it's a double difficulty because as you say once lawyers are involved in contact issues it becomes far more adversarial than it needs to be, communication channels aren't there so far more room for misunderstandings/chinese whispers via the poor children - and of course the parents who need contact agreed via the courts are often those who are unable to communicate and whose relationship with the other parent is completely antagonistic. Courts don't tend to help in that situation!

My understanding is that most couples sort their own arrangments out. Some use lawyers and some people are really masochistic and go to court.

Yes, most people sort them out. We've nothing in our court order about contact and that's the best way. Every study ever has shown that unless one parent isn't co-operating and if they really really don't co-operate then because the courts won't jail the mother there is no real recourse. If they could be braver and say unless you allow that father to have the children to stay every other weekend for the next 3 months then the children will be moved to live with the father ... if they were brave enough to say that all those mothers who refuse contact might start to play fair.

Or where both of the couple work full time there could be a default 50% time with chidlren each unless you get a court to agree otherwise which would hugely help fathers who are often made to feel they're lucky to see the children once a fortnight but who really want to see them every day. But then as King Solomon demonstrated in that old story you can hardly cut them in two.

In France when a non-resident parent fails to show for contact, or a resident parent refuses scheduled contact (and there is a "standard agreement" that can be legally binding without recrimination), you can call the police.

If a parent does too many no-shows, access is reduced by the courts.

Well, you can call the police in the UK too - but Xenia's righ... YOu won't get anywhere....

I do agree with Xenia's point - it is the best way to leave contact out of it, but I would, personally, like to see that the NCP gets at least some rights....

DH's ex often tells the DSDs that she will move (to a very distant part of the UK and / or abroad) if they (or Dad!) don't behave and it's really upsetting...

We've had DSD1 here in tears because she doesn't want to leave her school (which DH pays 100% for on top of CS and maintanence) but her mother has the right to do that.... That does p*ss me off....

It's funny I'm on the other thread talking about chatting with dsd's mum over a cuppa ....... but dh had to get a Court Order to get to see dsd. He had a solicitor initially but couldn't afford it so went as litigant in person. He wasn't a masochist just prepared to do anything to make sure he stayed fully involved in his little girl's life.

Although it paid off in that contact was ordered, dh and his x just polarised even further. It's taken 8 years to get to where we are today in terms of our relationship with his x.

Hi Surfermum!!!

Me too!!

it's taken us 10 years to get to the place we are today.... My DH has bent over backwards to stay in his kids lives...

And we are certainly not going to jepordise that by going back to court now, just because we are expecting a baby of our own...

I'm happy to keep the status quo going and if that means my baby has slightly less financially, then so be it....

Xenia- just curious here, but you've said before that ex-dh shared care of the children with you equally. So presumably he was quite an involved father. So why no conact now? Seems hard on your 5 and o him too.

Yes, the going to court thing which is a last resort sometimes means less contact than you had before because mothers can ignore those orders if they choose to. It's a hopeless system and then the child gets caught in the middle. You would think mothers would want a break from the children even if they can't realise children are better off seeing both parents. Thankfully some people do respect court orders so I'm not saying that route is always pointless.

Why no contact? He sees the twins for 2 hours a week at the moment. I think he was going to kill himself if we divorced and then secondly going to move away so when he turned up the first Sunday to take the twins out for a few hours I regarded it as a bonus. We've never had one contact discussion ever which must be unique in the history of divorce. Weird. I think he feels rejected by all of us not just me because the older 3 chilren wanted the divorce because his conduct at home was so appalling so he knows it wasn't really just me divorcing, it was them asking me to too which must have made it feel doubling rejecting for him but even so he could have tried after to make some relationship with them. They've tried texts etc. Invited him to various family events, graduation etc He just doesn't reply. Sees the older 3 once a year for a few hours at his parents' house which they say is very difficult and after last Christmas they've asked me if they can visit those grandparents when he isn't there in future. I suppose if you're with a man who is adequate you don't divorce him. His conduct after shows how he is in a sense. How you can love a child and not want to see it bemuses me.

I agree that the divorce regime does put people off marrying - I have met several people (all men) who refuse to marry and one even refuses to cohabit - to preserve their own assets.

How bizarre that he could just walk away from the children. Do you think he is depressed?

Yes, but he wouldn't have any treatment for it.