To think stepparents should not be financially responsible for other people's children?

[Mrsnothingthanks]

That's just it really. I'm married. My husband is only financially responsible for our daughter, not my other children. Why should he be? Not his kids!
Surprises me on MN that others think stepparents should assume financial responsibility for kids that aren't theirs!

It's up to the step parent. My friend's partner didn't pay out for step kids hobbies, holidays or uni. He did own the home outright that they all lived in, and picked up the costs related to home. She's always worked full-time and had child support from ex, and has paid her DC costs out of this money. She said it might have caused issues in relationship if he had to pay for stepchildren so she went out to work.

What happens, if for some reason, you suddenly became unable to work? You won't be entitled to benefits as your DH works.
You have a strict I pay for me and my children arrangement so who will pay the mortgage/ food bill? Will your children's father be expected to step in and pay your (more than half) proportion of the mortgage, utilities and food? Savings only last a short time.

OP you are insufferable. Will you ever give this a rest? By now we all know just how bloody marvellous, independant, righteous and better than everyone else you are.

However I fear that the overwhelming message you will be passing on to your kids is that money is the most important thing in the world. Far more important than love, generosity or family ties (though my definition of family is not your miserably narrow one). I don't think any of this will serve your children well. Perhaps you'd like to reflect on your messaging to your children and see relationships as a bit less transactional and a bit more about love.

You sound all high and mighty because you're the higher earner and you seem confident and secure in your job. That's fine.

What if something happens to you (I truly hope not and certainly don't wish it, so this is entirely hypothetical) and you're no longer able to provide for your children longterm, would you be okay with it if your children go without enough food sometimes or clothing or christmas gifts, new school uniforms, school trips, the basics, etc while the child you have with your husband gets all those things?

Going by your quite rigid rule, would you choose for your other children to watch their 'half sibling' get what they aren't able to because their mum doesn't believe their stepdad should contribute to their welfare?

Basically i want to know if there is any situation where you'd change your rules or feel the opposite way. If so, what would that be? If not, could you answer the questions above?

Would you allow the children to be treated differently based on finances. That’s not particularly nice is it? What if the step kids were in poverty?

If one parent (who has other kids) gives up work to enable their spouse/partner to concentrate on their career, I do think the maintenance to those kids other parent should still be paid though. It is not fair on them to suddenly lose maintenance, especially if the 1st couples household income stays similar to what it was.

I remarried when my son was 9 (he’s now 23).

My husband has always treated ds like his own son. Even when ds dad was paying maintenance.

We are a family. Dh still takes care of ds financially now when he needs it, and ds still lives with us.

To be honest, if Dh hadn’t seen ds as his family, I wouldn’t have married him. He’s treated no differently, financially or emotionally to the children we’ve had together and rightly so.

Dh will is split equally between ds and our two children together.

Christ, even his parents have my equally in their wills with the other grandchildren - he’s their grandchild no matter if ds isn’t his biological father.

As a family, wouldn't you just each put in what you can afford and make sure each child gets treated equitably irrespective of where the money comes from?

Husband & I had a son each when we met then had a daughter together. The lads are now adults. They've all always been treated equitably as children of the same family by us, grandparents, wider family & friends etc. This includes in everyone's wills.

Our lads always lived with us as their primary residence and neither of their other parents contributed financially. Sometimes one had more material goods than another coming from the other parent but they were always treated the same by us and from the same pot - we are a family and do not differentiate funding streams.

I am the higher (currently sole) earner and we receive no benefits, including no child benefit.

I missed the bit where the husband is carried their child, went through all the associated risks of pregnancy and childbirth and then took time away from his career to care for their newborn. In fact, her post makes it appear that she did all of that and he supported his family financially.

Another saying it depends.

If you are going to blend families, you can’t have some children immensely wealthier than other children, that is just cruel.

So, if there is a significant wealth discrepancy, you have the choice of keeping all children at the lower level or paying for your step children.

This is me. I was self employed when I met dh, when we married a few years later, I was very part time.

A few years after that, I had our first child together and have not worked since.

Dh has never seen it as me exploiting him to pay for my son. He sees ds as his son to and he works to support our family, which he’s happy to do, regardless of if he’s ds biological father. I’m not taking advantage of him. This is how we want our family to run and it’s worked well for us.

Ds is an adult now and it’s my dh that he turns to above me or his father for advice etc. They have always had a wonderful, close relationship.

I must be lucky then because I love my step dad more than my dad. My dad made a small contribution until my brother and I turned 18 but my step continued to support us until we were financially independent (he'd probably say that still hasn't happened!).
My own DH took on responsibility for my DS1. He outearns me considerably, how could we have a situation where our shared children have opportunities due to that but DS1 doesn't? DS1's dad wasn't able to financially contribute before he sadly passed away quite young.

I earn more than DH. He has a DD from a previous relationship and we have DS together. Whilst my income isn’t considered in terms of the maintenance he provides financially for his DD; I make sure that DSD has the same value for Xmas gifts / birthday gifts (maybe higher value as she is older than DS) as DS. If we are having a family day out the four of us, I will happily pay for her / her things. If she is with me and wants to buy a birthday present for her school friend (and her biological parents aren’t there), I will pay. Etc. it really isn’t a big deal. I believe as the higher earner that I have a responsibility to treat her fairly in comparison to our son.

@Cailleachnamara Disagree. I will be teaching my children about the importance of financial independence (both in and out of any relationships), the value of hard work, and the lifelong financial responsibility that comes with having children.
And I married again for love - not money - I didn't need another man to pay for either myself or my kids.

I think in principle, no they shouldn’t be financially ‘responsible’ for their stepkids. But in many homes finances are shared between a couple, both sets of wages go into a joint account. So in practice the step parent will contribute to the care of the child financially. Like when you go for the weekly shop there won’t be a separate amount from the natural parents money that buys groceries for that kid, when you go on outings as a blended family the costs will be shared you wouldn’t say ‘no you pay for the zoo out of your own money for Amy cos she’s not my kid’. Maybe some blended families keep separate accounts for this reason? Seems pretty cold and clinical to me but I guess whatever works for your family. There will be some families where the non resident parent is completely absent from the child’s life, is feckless, doesn’t contribute. The step parent won’t be financially responsible but will likely come to view the child as one of their own and feel they want to and need to look after them like one of their own.

You are though, in regards to child maintenance….for instance husband and wife divorce, man moves with new partner who has children from a previous relationship.
Man then will pay a reduced amount of child maintenance to his former wife, as he now has the responsibility of his new partners children.

@wherethewildrosesgrow If my husband and I were to ever separate, we would opt for 50/50 shared care. No CMS due.

I agree with you my ex does not 🙄

I think it's great it works for you, but people value different things. Time is also a resource, not just money. You say you work six days a week to provide for your kids, do you think they'd rather spend that weekend day with you rather than step dad? If he contributed more money would that be possible? Is he actually contributing more in time to raising your children than you because he spends that whole day with them while you work? Does he also do more housework because of this so contributes more to the household that way? Not saying you're wrong btw because it's your own life, but it's food for thought on how other people might think about it hence have a different view to you.

@Christmascarrotjumper He will always have the capacity to be an exceptional father - that's a very ableist comment. Our DD now has her own room 😀

If you're married, that makes you a unit financially. I don't even know what the logical conclusion of "not being responsible" for step children looks like. Do you figure out how much less your mortgage would be if you needed fewer bedrooms, then the parent with the kids pays more accordingly? Do you divide the grocery shopping per member of the household? I have no idea. Do you work out the difference in cost between a small car and a big one and the parent pays the difference?

I guess if you're talking about paying for spending money and clothes and school trips then maybe it's reasonable the parent pays that, but those are vanishingly small expenses compared to the overall cost of running a family home.

Personally I'd have no interest in a marriage where we were anything other than a team, in every sense of the word, and that means sharing money and financial responsibilities.

@GreyhoundGal1 He definitely does more of household chores such as cooking - that's completely his domain! As I've said before, I work that extra day to provide for my family as I have three children I am financially responsible for. I do that completely willingly.

I had to assume responsibility for my stepdaughter, aged 11, when I met her mum in 2007 because her dad sure as f#ck didn't.