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?!

Im wondering why you are not using U.C. to pay for the 80% of childcare for nursery? This limit on this as a benefit is very high for a single parent.

Yes the equalness of parenting is not equal and woman come out of this less favourably on many counts - pension, career, solo time

I would push for more negotiation for more time spent with dad

Investigate your pension contributions fully, making sure you are putting as much as possible and if it lowers your net wages then more the better

which then leads in to this - see how much pension you can put away to lower your wages and use the tax loophole

put in a U.C. application for childcare cover if you are earning less than £50k - check entitled to website

Its how males have set up the system, so use it like a man would

Awful comment. The ‘father’ has choices too you know, condoms/vasectomy/abstinence. Once he has sex with a woman, especially unprotected, he takes that risk and basically accepts that a baby may result from two minutes of fun. He got his willy wet and now he needs to pay.

@Naunet men do have to pay though. It's would be better financially if women chose 50/50 custody

My new partner pays 15% towards his ex wife. He has the children for about 1/3 of the time. Whenever he grumbles I just say 'well, it only just covers a food bill for two teenagers' or 'that's only double what I pay on violin lessons'. To be fair to him he is a decent man and contributes much more than that, paying for lots of activities and holidays. But, really, just 15% of income? Having children takes up most of my income!!

The minimum a completely absent father should pay should be £1000 a month.

@SummerTimeIsTheBest but a woman can abort a baby after she lay down with him?

Well the current situation might deter women from having children with whoever Willy nilly. The OP’s whole point is that it actually does very little to deter men from having children with whoever Willy nilly. Is there any particular reason why you think it’s only women who should be deterred? Men biologically are capable of creating a lot of one-parent families much more quickly than women are, and also have a much greater track record of doing so, so might it not be logical to focus any deterrent strategies at least equally on them?

Is he not paying for them when they are staying with him?

Good advice - think like a man! Also, think long term. As children get older, they appreciate higher earning mothers! And, appreciate mothers being around less (a bit more freedom). And, if married, on splitting remember his pension fund.

Yes, he does pay for them when they stay with him. And clothes them. And takes them on holiday. And buys new phones. But, even so, I think 15% is a bit pathetic.

So how many women are 100% certain their husband wants to have a baby with them before getting pregnant?

And I used husband deliberately because I can't understand why anyone thinks it is a good to idea to have a baby with a bf then complain he won't pay

Women are the only ones that get pregnant so if you are not willing to raise the baby yourself don't get pregnant

Nothing prevents divorce or separation but something can be minimised

And as usual it is the children not the parents who suffer from adults decisions

It’s worst when they lie and don’t pay. I had this for years. Life was tough for us - really hard at points, and he didn’t give a shit. Thankfully my dd has nothing to do with this shameless arse now she is an adult.
i have no idea why the government are not keener to sort out this mess - start taking away passports and driving licences when they don’t pay. Instead we leave kids in poverty.

I would devastated if my child didn’t live with me full time. I don’t think that’s the patriarchy, I think it’s my biology.
I rather wonder if it might be the influence of the patriarchy that makes women feel that being a mother is somehow not valuable and that raising the child you gave birth to is unfulfilling?
Just a thought I’ve had since becoming a mother that I feel I’m not really supposed to say out loud, please don’t jump on me!

@Yalta she can choose 50/50 contact

well this wont work if you are on any kind of top up benefit due to low wages, as you cant have more than £6K in savings, which then leads to a point where you are saying that only the wealthy are allowed to have children. Are they the only people who can raise a child to be a decent human being?

Only if the man also chooses 50/50. And only if he is safe to parent.

most men don't want it, even if offered.

But I wouldn't. I love my kids but I would have loved 50/50.

excellent, can I ring fence the CMS amount on my salary, use that on them and then stop? Want to eat in the week before payday? sorry, money's run out. Need a new laptop for school, nope sorry. Broken your glasses, grown out of your shoes, sorry, have to wait til next month. Fab, I'll just do that. In my case my ex earns more than I do, (in the same profession) because he is not limited by parenting other than the occasional weekend. What he spends on the kids and what I spend is vastly different. THAT is what is not fair.

Shouldn’t fathers feel the same way then?

You mention motherhood being valuable and fulfilling. Shouldn’t/Wouldn’t fatherhood be the same, hence 50:50.

But the it would be your choice. When I was pregnant with DS ( surprise baby) his Dad and I made a deal that if we were to split up ( we never lived together ) that HE would become the full time carer. Without this I wouldn't have continued with the pregnancy

I had 2 older kids whose dad didn't pay or bother with them so wasn't prepared to put myself in that position again.

When we did split u when DS was 5 he did become the main carer. DS had never known us living in the same house so it wasn't a great deal different for him

Financially we worked it out between us so no need to maintainence

I agree with you, wholeheartedly.

They can - or they used to - be able to deduct payment at source. I don't know why this isn't the default.

I owed some tax back this past tax year as I earned over the amount for child benefit. I was hounded via email and they wouldn't have hesitated to take me to court had I not paid - but apparently they can't apply this same level of duty when it comes to CMS.

At the end of the day, rape aside, the woman has the final say whether or not to go ahead with unprotected sex. If the man goes ahead regardless of her saying 'no' then that is rape and a whole different discussion.

Just to be clear, I'm not in any way supporting men's right to bugger off and not pay for children that they both were equal partners in making, nor am I a believer in women raping men, but there are definitely some women who want to go ahead with pregnancies for their own reasons ( we see that on here sometimes) and manage to manipulate this even though they are aware it is not what both parties want, so the answer to this as to whether the men in those situations should pay regardless I really am torn. On the one side, the child shouldn't suffer but on the other, the father also has been hoodwinked.

Lots of men only become abusive when the woman is pregnant. Lots of men only start cheating when the woman is pregnant/has a young family

The penis defenders coming on a thread to argue that if men fuck off and don’t financially support children, it’s the woman’s fault and problem, or what about the men not getting 50/50 - which time and again so many only every want to use as a weapon because they don’t actually want to parent - would be depressing if it wasn’t so bloody common in real life.

Those of you putting in a full time shift on here defending deadbeats must really be peaches in your own lives.

Bottom line is that women invariably carry the burden of raising children financially and otherwise if there is a split and men want to be BMD ....a bare minimum dad, like your Ex.

It is why some women are very careful and protective of who and when they have children, as they know ultimately they will be responsible for their children and that will hugely restrict them in their ability to juggle everything.

Financially, pension wise, women usually bear the brunt of the decision to go ahead with a pregnancy.

Unfortunately so many do NOT look beyond delivering the baby and find a relationship breakdown so shocking, as the reality of how single parenting will impact their ability to work hits them.

I think if most women fully educated themselves it would give them deep pause.
I also think that schools could really help in this area to explain the Math of having children to young women.
As mothers we definitely can have the conversation with our daughters too.

A friend of mine has a daughter that found herself in this situation, .......that she couldn't continue her primary teaching job with the logistics of her young child after her relationship broke down.
She hadn't been with her partner long, 18 months when she became pregnant and decided to go ahead with the pregnancy...at 28.....despite her parents explicitly warning her of the pitfalls.

The relationship fell apart 12 months on, and suddenly her daughter is looking to mum and dad to be her child minder as her ex has taken a new job an hour away and is a BMD.
My friend and her husband were both only 12 months retired, and had zero interest in child minding a baby fulltime.

They are actually very pissed off with this turn of events as they had tried to talk to their daughter at the time, but she was having none of it.
She has had a very rude awakening as to the consequences of her decision.
They decided to help financially with the cost of childcare rather than do it themselves as they want to enjoy their retirement.
They reared and put all their children through university whilst working full-time and had really looked forward to plans they had made.
Life is now very different for their daughter juggling work, a childminder and parenthood alone.
She loves her little boy as do her family, but the responsibility to make it work is on HER, and my friend has said that if she had her time over she has no doubt she would make a very different choice.

My friend has huge sympathy for her daughter, but after nearly 40 years of working, rearing her own children, educating them, making sacrifices for them, she and her husband want to enjoy their good health and retirement while they have it.
Not unreasonable IMO.

My friends that are recently retired/retiring soon, have spelt out very clearly to their children that child minding will not figure in their retirement if their children choose to have children.
This is a great conversation to have prior to your children procreating so expectations are clear.
Emergency help of course, but regular childcare....absolutely not.