That DSS’s mum losing her house isn’t our problem.

[heavenknow]

DSS is 20, graduating uni in 6 months. DH has paid a generous maintenance throughout. The agreement they had in place was financial support ended in Dec 25. (Due to lump sum payments requested by ex)
She has now said if we can’t continue the payments for a minimum of 6-12 months then she will lose her house. She currently works for herself. AIBU to think this isn’t our problem?

@Motheranddaughter @ACynicalDad Yes, I’d be interested to know ( and the OP may not know the answer) is what’s going to change financially for the Mum in 6-12 months, which is how long she wants to payments to continue?

Her son is planning to take a year out to travel before starting a deferred graduate scheme in 2027, so he won’t be contributing much in that timeframe.

I don’t think that her ex is morally obliged to continue as they had an agreement-but if there’s a clear financial change that will occur in six months, perhaps he might consider it.
I hope that the Mum isn’t going to tell her son not to travel….

Bollox, a large number expect men to contribute towards the cost of raising the child, that's very different to expecting an ex to feed and house them.

My priority would be his exams
Would I deliberately put my own DC through any upheaval during crucial exams,no I would not
So I wouldn’t go it to my DSS
After that the position can be looked at again

However it is of course normal for both parents to support DC through the post school phase

Are you talking from the perspective of the dss mum who seems to be remaining ion employment that doesn’t meet the finances she requires?

But she isn’t prioritising his exams - he can live with us FT and so can his stuff. Apart from furniture which can either be swapped with his stuff here or stored. Their family dog can come to us if needed.

Why has she not gotten a job all these years, OP?

I wouldn’t have wanted any of mine to have any disruption when doing their exams,but you do you.

His own mother doesn’t care so why should the OP?

What a dreadful attitude, are you a stepmom?

Yes actually. I was also a single mum and I have taken responsibility for myself and my children . In this case the mum has not done so, she has relied on handouts and still asked for more, if she can’t keep her house then that’s her problem and she is the one letting her son down. Not the OP.

100% she is blackmailing

What a dreadful response, do you expect others to fund your lifestyle?

She has now said if we can’t continue the payments for a minimum of 6-12 months then she will lose her house.

This timeframe is really beyond their son’s graduation, assuming that he finishes his degree in June 2026. Unless there’s something happening next year that will significantly boost her finances, I think she’s going to have to move anyway. It’s horrible, but sometimes people do need to downsize for financial reasons.

Oh come on OP, are you really so lack of empathy that you really think it won’t fuck up his finals if his mum is made homeless, even if he’s ok?!

Has it not occurred to you and your DH that the fact his mum will be in a mess and distraught will cause stress for him right when he needs to study?

Look - be hard hearted if you think it’s really important to stick to the principle not be kind, but don’t lie to yourself that your DSS won’t be effected.

Have you factored in the long term damage to your /your DHs relationship with DSS when he invariably blames you for his mums homelessness?

The person responsible for this will be his mother.

Good gracious. 18 YEARS she’s had to sort herself out!! Some people are just ridiculous.

She is making herself homeless! OP and her husband are no more responsible for financing the ex than you or me.

The dad here has more than fulfilled his responsibilities to his son. He's had 50/50, but still paid maintenance and the mother's business debt. That's above and beyond.

His responsibility is to his son, not to support his ex whose business seems to have never gotten off the ground as she says she can't pay rent. He can't be expected to subsidize her forever because they had a relationship 17 years ago. Son can live with him. Mom will have to get a job and downsize.

The mother is responsible. That doesn’t change the fact the OP is probably very wrong that her DSS “will be OK”.

If maintenance had stopped at end of year 13, then that would make sense. Keeping going to now seems an odd choice and even odder to stop now knowing it’s going to lead to the son being put through the emotional wringer just when he has the toughest part of his degree.

It doesn’t really matter whose fault it is, it won’t change the DSS being put through the stress. The mum should have sorted herself out. She hasn’t. The dad can either prop the mum up until the summer when it won’t matter as much, or he can let her life unravel right when it’s got the potential to fuck up his son’s education.

Or there’s another option. The norm round us is when maintenance stops at end of year 13, if the child is then going to uni, the maintenance amount is then paid directly to the child to support themselves at uni.

normally, the child has gone away to uni, but would the OPs DH consider that option?

it doesn’t matter if the dad is responsible or not for his ex being homeless, it won’t change the fact it will probably effect their joint child. Right when he needs to study and focus.

Im not suggesting the OPs dh should continue to support the mother forever. Just until their son has graduated. It’s 6 months. After that, while I’m sure he’d be upset his mum was made homeless, it’s not going to fuck up his degree. (and if they give her money until August, the DSS may have left the country by the time the mums financial mess catches up with her and he won’t be around to witness it.)

Why would he blame OP and his dad? If he's mature enough to be taking exams he's mature enough to understand that a grown woman who's had 20 years to figure out how to support herself, and abjectly failed, (preferring to "run her own (failing) business") is completely taking the piss.

Some people have the mentality that it's OK to pick others' pockets indefinitely and some don't. That the former are gaining on the latter is a huge problem in today's society.

Absolutely but as you’ll see on mn those whose pockets are being picked should be grateful and joyful, and if not they are evil and hateful…

Or, in light of the season, called miser or "Scrooge."

Maybe if more people had the savings ethic there wouldn't be so many on the dole.