To think this is scandalous yet in plain sight because the patriarchy has no shame

[Webjisroommate]

A year ago I separated from my DD’s father and she was in the middle of her first year of nursery. He paid the cms amount every month, without fail. This was 360 a month, even though I was left to pay over 1,300 on nursery fees alone. Obviously the situation has now changed slightly with the hours but his 360 contribution is quite literally nowhere near half her costs. I have spoken about this with other mum friends and have learned that 360 is actually pretty fortunate! Some women are being paid less than 200 and others have to chase cms when their ex is self employed. I was not aware of any of this before having Dd.

My career is now hugely clipped as I am doing 95% of childcare while ex sees her a day a week… the day I use mostly to clean and get the house in order to start the week again. And yes, I suggested 50/50, he didn’t want that.

I honestly feel like this is a huge joke player on women in plain sight while nothing is actually done about it?! I also can’t fathom how HMRC can chase tax from the self employed but Cms can’t chase these men to pay for their children. It’s a disgrace. Why is this allowed to happen?!

This thread is getting stupid now. In general terms men as a collective do very little to contribute truly equally to a well functioning family unit. Of course, there are exceptions as with all things. Arguing about whether the exception is right or wrong is entirely missing the point that on a societal level men being shit fathers and husbands is a big problem.

I did it fine as a male lone parent.

A born child is an actual person with needs and rights. Refusing to pay child support is not analogous to abortion.

This is the stone truth.

Hsving to pay adequate child support might make neglectful fathers reconsider spreading their seed all over the place without a thought for the consequences.

Let’s be honest, I don’t think any woman has a child with a man thinking that he might ditch her then quibble about paying the £2.50 per week the CMS says his child is entitled to.🙄

We live in Sweden, in these cases there is a base rate then the actual costs of the children are calculated, both parents incomes are taken in to account to work out what the NRP pays. If they’re 50/50 which is the most common here, if there is an earning gap the lower earning party would still be provided with financial support. If the NRP doesn’t pay until everything is formalised, the state will step in and pay a base rate, this then becomes debt the NRP owes the government. As it looks at the costs of the children it does take nursery costs etc into account, meaning one parent isn’t left with all the fees, however childcare costs are extremely low here.

It has needed to change in England for a very long time, but I sadly can’t see that happening.

Proof that you don't do much parenting can be found in your claim that it's "not that hard" after age two. It shows you have no concept of the day to day reality. Have you never even heard of the terrible twos? Toddlers are the hardest, because they are everywhere and into everything. They have to be watched at all times.
For example, infants can often be put in the crib while you go take a quick shower or make dinner.

Dad's do this too you know.

When my husband ex had an affair, she stayed in house and had the family car.

He had to buy a car get car seats, rent a house, furnish house. Buy shoes and clothes, shampoo, tooth paste etc for the children.

She just kept everything they had got together.
He planned the meals, made the meals, did everything.
Paid maintenance, didn't stop her bad mouthing him, threatening to stop the children going to him if he didn't pay a random extra amount or do something he wanted at the drop of a hat.

She moved the man she had been having an affair with into the family home.

False separation from his children who he had been hands on with from day one was awful for him but as a grown up he got on with it.
Having to deal with last minute cancelled time was awful but mostly it was unfair for the children who would be told daddy can't be bothered to have you today.

Do you have kids with him? If so, is he genuinely an equal parent to them?

One huge issue is the cost of childcare in the UK. Coupled with the cost of housing.

I don't know if OP gets free hours, but given the median salary is around £36000 (and 50% of people earn LESS than this), I don't know many men who can afford 50% £1300 nursery fees + child maintenance given other personal expenses like food, housing etc. Whereas if the mum (primary carer) is on a low income she will be eligible for benefits to help pay for rent, childcare and daily expenses.

So, I'm not sure how fair it is to call a dad "deadbeat" if he is paying child maintenance at the requested amount, but not paying an additional £650 in nursery fees. He may genuinely not have the money (I know everyone on MN has 6-figure salaries). I don't agree with posters who will reply that he should get a second job etc. In real life, most people wouldn't want to work 60 hours a week, to see their child 1 day a week and give a huge chunk of earnings to their ex for the next 18 years. The human psyche doesn't work that way.

The government need to do much more to make childcare truely affordable. The same with housing. Then everyone would be better off. Why are so many dads "deadbeat"? It indicates there is something wrong with the system for both sides (primary carer, and non-resident).

The pool of men who are actually willing to do 50% is so small that it's pretty much impossible to find one. Many will pull a bait and switch on you and tell you they will do their share. You only find out the truth after having the child. Who wouldn't be bitter about that? It's not as simple as somehow "finding" somebody better. Where? How? Is there a dating service which only accepts people who are exceptions to the norm?

I personally know one exception. Most of us have met exceptional people at one time or another. That doesn't change the reality. It isn't standard. Just face that and get over it.

Bullshit.

My two year old can potter around the lounge without constant supervision. I can leave him alone and load the washing machine, hang laundry, wash the dishes, cook lunch, etc. My five year old can certainly be left alone while I get on with things.

I wouldn't have been able to do that when they were first walking and climbing up on things.

These ridiculous gotcha posts that apparently 'prove' that I'm incapable of looking after my kids are ridiculous.

Mens are incapable of buying and fitting a car seat? Buying nappies and bubble bath? Bathing children?

Do some women really find this stuff so difficult that you can't conceive of somebody else finding it simple and mundane?

Yes we have children and yes he is really great with all of the children

Yet again, "capable of" =/= actually doing.
You are super dad, we get it. Now more energy into teaching other men your ways and less into telling women why we're wrong please.

He's not paying more. He's only paying the equivalent (at best!) of what he'd be spending to keep them 50% of the time. The only difference is he is sending it to his ex instead of paying out of pocket on the daily himself.

That's not accurate.
My DH has spent far far more on caring for older children with costs here and maintenance and the other costs (trips and other) than the younger children have ever had spent on them.

Okay, so you low-key neglect your two year old's safety? It is not safe to let a two year old wander around completely unsupervised and I'm appalled that you think it is. The hazards are too numerous to mention.

Nobody is saying men can't do it. We're saying they usually don't. Of course they can do it. It's not rocket science.

I can't make out what you're saying here. The cost difference of older children versus younger children are relevant because...?

Good parents appropriately childproof their homes, a two year old shouldn’t be in a room that isn’t appropriately childproofed, supervised or not. If a room is so dangerous a two year old can’t be left there while you fetch something from another room it isn’t a safe room for them to be in at all.

Childcare aside, older kids are MUCH more expensive than young ones.

Age isn't relevant because year on year it's the same situation the cost of child A at 9 was more than child C at 9

Well yes that's because he wasn't doing half the parenting. Hopefully his total contribution was close to half of what was needed to raise his children.

It's relevent because when his eldest was age 9 the cost to DH was X when out child was 9 the cost was far less than x
Same for every age. Because their cost at ours is fairly comparable to each other but we have additional costs with his children on top.

"It is not safe to let a two year old wander around completely unsupervised and I'm appalled that you think it is. The hazards are too numerous to mention."

It's the living room, not the kitchen. I'm less than five metres away in another room with the doors open. It's perfectly safe for him to potter around playing with his Hot Wheels toys or watching a bit of cbeebies.

He was doing as much as he possibly could seeing as mum moved away. Prior to moving away he was doing 50/50 was impossible.after the move but he did as much as he could do. Didn't change the cost of our home which was required to house them when they were 50/50 here we couldn't downsize and stick them under the stairs just because it was less than 50/50

So costs didn't go down, they still cost the same here in housing clothing and furniture. Food slightly less but not in reality as whereas our kids would eat non branded items, his children were only allowed to eat branded items according to mum.