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!

@CombatBarbie Genuinely...someone can earn 70k and still get UC?! Is that true?

Well you have to read it to see how it pans out. Once you have read it, it's perfectly reasonable to then form an opinion. It's generally better to form an opinion based on facts than assumptions. Nobody forced me to read the thread, you're correct.

My exH pays less in CM for our daughter now he’s living with his gf and her two kids even though his gf gets CM from her ex. It’s a joke. The system is all wrong.

@ButWhysTheRumGone Why does he have to pay less?

@Mrsnothingthanks I think you are sadly looking at this through a very narrow lens. It’s worked out fine for you - great. Families can be complex and sometimes messy - it’s not so clear cut.

@Strictlycomeparent If you are happy to do that then fair enough, but I still don't think it should be your role as a stepmother. Even if my husband offered to pay for everything for my kids I would not accept as to me that is my role, not his. I suppose we are all different. My husband loves my sons but still respects the fact that I don't want nor expect him to take away my financial responsibility. I work hard so they have all they need.

My DH and I are jointly responsible for the family we chose to form.

That includes the two of us, the children already he had when we met, his extended family members that we adopted, and the children I gave birth to. It also means that when I was diagnosed with a progressive disease and realized my working years may end earlier than I expected and I'm likely to need a fair amount of care his response was to do the maths on how much we should put into savings to be ready for that together rather than thinking that was my problem alone to deal with.

@GravyBoatWars Again though, where are the bio parents in all of this? It must be incredibly hard on you financially - how many kids are you supporting? I agree that partners should absolutely support their spouses if they become ill - absolutely ❤️

Apparently, it was on one of the benefit bashing threads.....I wss quite shocked when I read it.

@CombatBarbie That's absolutely shocking if so!

Because he is living with other children so os deemed to be partly financially responsible for them 🤣🤣

I can only assume a disabled child or childcare costs.

But theres plenty family's combined incomes of 50k getting UC top ups too.

@CombatBarbie No that's not correct. He still has to pay the same amount of maintenance regardless as it's based on his earnings. If he moves in with another woman he is not deemed automatically as being financially responsible for her children. The lady needs to challenge this.

I can assure you its true. I had it with my own DD when I was getting CMS. They get a reduction if they live with other children.

@CombatBarbie £50k if both working is not much tbf when you think about it - £25k each.

Yeah but its still a household income of 50k. Anyway I dont make the rules lol

So this is incorrect, @CombatBarbie?
Your child maintenance payments generally will not change if you move in with a new partner, as payments are based on the paying parent's income and are separate from the receiving parent's new relationship status.

But back to your point lol does it make more sense now why some women expect, well not expect, thats the wrong word, any partner coming into the family unit is in part financially responsible for step children.

The Child Maintenance Service (CMS) determines child maintenance payments based solely on the income of the paying parent. The earnings, savings, or financial contributions of their new partner are not factored into the formula used by the CMS. This ensures that child maintenance remains the responsibility of the legal parent, rather than shifting any financial burden to a step-parent or new partner. Even if the new partner has a significantly higher income, this does not reduce or increase the paying parent’s financial obligations to their child.

Thats the resident parent moving in with someone. If the non resident parent moves in with someone they can be asked to be reassessed. Unless the rules have changed since last summer?

@CombatBarbie According to the CMS contributions do not change (see above guidance).

https://www.gov.uk/how-child-maintenance-is-worked-out#:~:text=The%20Child%20Maintenance%20Service%20will%20take%20into%20account%20the%20number,made%20directly%20for%20other%20children.

They do.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/child-maintenance-faqs-on-the-paying-parents-income/#:~:text=Under%20the%202003%20child%20maintenance,the%20support%20of%20their%20child.

This one explains it better

It does change in the situation the PP was talking about. If the paying person moves in a household with step children then there is a reduction in the calculation of what is owed. As the paying parent is now deemed as a financial contributer to the household where he lives with the step children.

The PP is not saying that she will get less off her ex if she herself has someone move in with her

It’s not some random ‘other peoples’ children though is it? It’s their step children who surely they are committing to as a family when choosing to marry their parent. Otherwise what is the point?
That doesn’t absolve either bio parent of their responsibilities, but this delineation between different parts of a family you’ve decided to create seems weirdly cold and transactional to me.