To think dp should stop paying child support....

[VindalooVindalooVindalooVindalooLaLa]

....for his eldest

He has 3 DC, 22,19, 18. Eldest graduated last year and works full time. Middle is finishing year 1 at uni. Youngest takes A levels this year. He has been paying maintenance for all 3. Above the level the CMS would demand, regularly, always. As he should do of course.

He continues to pay for all 3. Directly to his EXW. Up until now, their arrangements as far as I am concerned were none of my business, other than I'm happy he is a regular no quibbles maintenance payer and is a good dad.

So as not to drip feed - we have been together 9 years. He was 3 years divorced when we met. I have two DC who are in their 20s. I work hard, earn about the same as him. I am not financially dependent on him, we maintain separate finances despite living together for 3 years and paying into a shared pot. My concern is he has no exit strategy for paying child maintenance. And I don't see that it is child maintenance any more. He leaves himself short and that affects what we can do or plan together at a time when we should both be able to think about our lives together a bit more.

None of my friends are in this situation, they're married to the fathers of their children, or childless, or single parents but not in this blended scenario. So I don't know, should he stop paying for the eldest? Id have also imagined giving the middle one maintenance money directly now he is at uni, but that's a different question.

YABU - it's normal for a dad to keep paying for three DC at this point
YANBU - It's reasonable to stop paying for the eldest

Usually court orders state that maintenance should be paid whilst the child is in full time education and that includes university but once at university the money should be paid direct to the child.
So your DH should not pay anything for the eldest, pay direct to the second child and pay the exW for the third child until they go to university. If they don't go, the money should cease. The problem is not the legality but any fall out if he stops paying.
He should rethink and you should also rethink future finances if he won't stop paying.

It does not include university.

I think the concern here is that she relies on this money for her own living expenses and when it stops what is her plan for the future. Your DH needs to talk to her with a plan for the gradual reduction in payments. He should start now with the eldest and then a timeframe for the middle child ect.

I think he has had good intentions but a better way would have been to pay his DC uni accommodation so that they didn’t need the full loan or to work as much. They have not necessarily benefited from his continuing to pay.

DH ex maybe needs know it is tapering down so that she picks up more work ect.

What was agreed during the financial settlement in his divorce?

This. Also, why is he paying to the ex wife directly

I have 2 daughters 15 and 17. My ex pays the minimum child maintenance and I very much doubt he will continue when they go to university. However I think paying direct to them during university would be a nice thing to do.

For my 17yo's last year of college, I've asked him to pay 'her half' direct to her so I can get her to practise budgeting. Eg I'll expect her to take on certain of her costs I cover now, buy one food shop a month, that sort of thing.

In your shoes I'd say he should only be paying direct to the ex for the youngest child. Paying the one at uni direct would also be ok with me. Possibly paying something to the one working direct but on a tapering scale and with an end in sight. Definitely not all to the ex wife.

My db worked abroad so couldn't have his dc 50/50.
His ex preferred the money anyway to the point that when db offered to give dc money directly for uni she threatened not to allow dc home at all if she didn't get the money.

I’d stop paying her for the eldest one, I’d pay the 19 year old directly and would only pay her for the youngest one, once the others get a job, I’d stop paying for them too, he needs to have a conversation with her, the first two children she is getting paid for one doesn’t need the money and the other doesn’t even live there, she needs to manage her money better and not be relying on her ex.

So he’s doing his kids and family out of money just so he doesn’t have to have a vaguely awkward conversation with the ex wife? Pathetic.

For the eldest it’s too late, he’s already lumbered with the highest possible loan to pay back while his mum enjoyed the benefits of having his sap of a dad’s money when it could’ve gone directly to him.

The middle kid, better late than never I suppose. Stop that portion of “maintenance” now and give some support towards uni costs directly.

Third kid, keep the money in place until A levels end and then if he goes to uni offer some support there.

He is doing nobody any favours here and at this point he’s sticking two fingers up to you by not dealing with it like a grown up.

My court order does, it was added by our solicitors. Why should only Mum help with university?

I didn’t say she should. The CMs rule states that university isn’t included. Court orders relating to maintenance are also able to be overturned by either party at anytime ( after the first 12 months) .

He’s supporting the ex, not the kids. It’s just how they’ve dressed it up. You’re supporting him and ergo her.

All these suggestions about paying for another 6 months or paying just for the younger too are just stupid. It's CHILD maintenance, all of his 'children' are adults. He needs to just cut this off. If she hasn't planned how to fund her own life when all of her kids at that age, then that's her own problem. That also shows you the money is for her and not for them.

I speak as someone who was divorced in the past and was a single parent with children.

The money is for the children, not the ex. While the children are dependent, he needs to pay. Once they are adults, payment stops. Once my children were 18 they became adults and I didn't expect any maintenance. One left home, one went to university but that was their choice and they used grant funding and a part-time job, they were not funded by ex.

He should stop paying, his ex is using it to fund her own lifestyle and this is not what payments are for, she needs to get a job. Just stop.

Unless he lived away from home for the holidays or paid his mum rent, he did receive financial support.

What provision has he made for retirement OP? Or is he just going to be supported by you?

Should have stopped at 18

Sounds like he is paying a guilt tax to his ex-wife.

Another one here agreeing that he should not be paying anything for the eldest any more - it’s no longer ‘child’ support.

I think it’s great (even if not legally necessary) for father to support past 18 years old while still at uni. However, some posters have said he should not support a 22 year-old who is working. I don’t think his employment status is relevant at all. Once someone has left uni it is up to them to support themselves. Either by working (or claim benefits if needed to pay their way wherever they are living). After education is complete, they should be fully independent.
I do accept this isn’t easy these days and many do rely on parents help but OP’s husband is actually supporting his exW lifestyle choices now. Even his youngest doesn’t need her to be a SAHM now.

But as this hasn’t been previously discussed, I think 6 months notice that it’s stopping would be fair.

And maintenance for 2nd child (and eventually 3rd too) should stop at graduation.

You are bloody joking. Why is he giving this money to his exW? At their age if he still wants to pay he should be giving the money to his kids directly.

Thank you for all of the perspectives on here. I really wanted to hear from different points of view and have got that and appreciate all of these answers.

To me, the easy answer is obviously stop paying for a 22 year old with a job, and give a child at uni their own money, but not everyone does it that way and there are sensible reasons for that. Plus it's a no brainer in my mind to say the EXW needs to get a job, but if she doesn't, the children still need a home to come back to until they're independent adults.

I am going to discuss it with him (again - it isn't like we have not discussed this). It is up to him how he spends his money but he isn't totally happy with it. I think his mind is made up though so I'll just be giving it from my side after a bit more thought. My thoughts are that I will just do my thing in the bounds of what I can afford, without him, over the next few years. I've been raising children since my early 20s and it's time to do things for myself more. I have worked hard and continue to so I can afford a bit of treats.

We do have separate finances but we live together. We have not bought a house together because of his finances, and we have not married for the same reason, so I don't agree that his money is none of my business, or any woman's in a similar scenario. It very much becomes your business when you enter into a serious relationship, unless you're reckless. It's only my business up to the point it affects my life, and since it does, I'll just have to take my own holidays for now. There are worse things in life!!!

His pension is somewhat better than mine. Their agreement keeps his pension protected for him. In reality,I imagine there'll be a clamour from the EXW over this

I haven’t read the thread as they say but first I would ask

• what does the financial agreement of the divorce say?
• secondly, the 22yr old with degree and working full time is beyond child support. Any support he wants to send should go to the 22yr direct, not via the ex and should be discussed between the two of you prior to be offered to the 22yr old. It’s none on ex’s business post Uni.
• thirdly, the19yr old in Uni, many financial agreements include a commitment to support the child through higher education. So while he should still pay this support, it should be sent directly to the child and not via the ex, but the ex should be kept informed.
• fourth, the 18yo in sixth form. Yes child support is still required and should be sent to the ex. Once the 18yo starts Uni or an apprenticeship any support should be sent directly to the child, with ex cc’d for her information.

I’d also suggest you show him this thread..?
and in particular look at the % of the poll answers.

Remind him that this woman’s forum has a lot of single mothers on here who rely on payments from their partners to help support their children, and the consensus is STILL that it is time to stop for the eldest.

He knows that he has been paying over and above what CMS/Court would order for quite awhile now so that should reassure him – he has been extremely generous. He has definitely been the ‘good guy’ in this situation and has no need to feel guilty in terms of financial responsibility.

however his children are nearly all adults… His financial responsibility to THEM is over. I believe he now has a financial responsibility to both you and to himself going forward.

You could suggest to him that he can continue to support his kids but perhaps on a more ad hoc basis… eg/ buy a car, give money towards a holiday, or any large expenses they have on an individual basis. But that would be directly to the child for a particular need and definitely nothing paid directly to the ex-wife.

Just because a man doesn't have 50/50 it doesn't make him a "shit dad". We didn't do 50/50 because it wasn't possible...the Royal Navy don't take to kindly to having kids on board during deployments.