AIBU to expect my husband to split school fees equally between my children and his son?

[CherriBerri]

I have a husband, who has a son (7) from a previous marriage. We have two shared children (3 and 2).

I earn enough to afford to send my children to private school next year, and I will be doing so. My husband has agreed to pay for half of the school fees, and I’d pay the other.

The mother of his son cannot afford to pay the private school fees, even with my husband’s offer to pay half, because of her earnings. She has asked my husband to pay the full fee, and argued that it wouldn’t be fair for him to not be able to attend. However, my husband cannot afford to pay the full fees for his son AND half the school fees for the both of our children, just half for all three.

My husband has been guilt-tripped about the “unfairness” by the son’s mother, which resulted in us having disagreements. Because he knows I could afford to pay the full fees for the both of my children, he thinks I should be paying one full fee and half of one fee, so that he could pay the other half and full fees for his son. This way, he says it’s fair so that all children can attend private school.

However, I think that this arrangement is the actual unfair one; as the father of ALL three children, he should be providing equally. I don’t think it’s fair for him to forgo his responsibility for one child for another. I pay my half for our children equally, his son’s mother should do the same for her only child. I don’t think it’s fair for them to push the responsibility of her finances unto me. I grew up disadvantaged and I worked like a mule to afford this; paying extra so that his son can go literally is taking money from the mouths of my children (via their savings), it’s not right.

There could be other solutions, where the mother could save to provide private education for when their son is older (at year 10 intake for example), instead of making me pay.

Ultimately you’re within your rights to say you won’t pay for DSS. You husband would then be within his rights to say he won’t contribute for any of his children.

In that scenario, it sounds like you would cough up to fully fund your two children, as you’ve said you can afford it and it’s important to you.

If you did that, then suddenly your DH would have enough money to fully fund his son (as you’ve said he can afford 1.5x the fees). And you wouldn’t be able to prevent him from doing that.

So rather than force it to a horrible scenario creating resentment all round and you paying 2 full fees, why not be the bigger person and just split it with your DH so you’re doing 1.5 each?

This is a really strange way of looking at things if you’re married. My husband earns considerably more than me - he run his own construction business and I’m a teacher. He pays all our mortgage, and our sons nursery fees. I pay for smaller utility bills. Why are you so obsessed with 50/50 if you’re supposed to be a team? You honestly sound like a horrible wife and awful step mother.

So why is it stupid to pay for this child to go private but not your children? Why not save your money and save for the future instead?

HE's NOT.

He's contributing 50% of the fees for ALL 3 of his children.

Also, no one on MN has an issue when the children from the first relationship have an advantage over the second children. That’s fine. It’s only ever when it’s the second children have something that the first children don’t, that people scream that it has to be fair.

You made this up.

Thanks to opportunities created by me, he has recently begun a higher earning career

Project managing his career are you?

What?

why should the ex wife decide how the money is spent?

the father us saving it, he can decide.

Opposite scenario people would be shouting financial abuse.

If he could actually afford 100% ss and then his half if he went without his fun/savings pot.

Then he is even cheekier asking you to pay I feel. Because he could but then he would have no fun so his asking you to pay so he can still have fun funds.

You’re not unreasonable to want him to pay half. And he’s not unreasonable to not want a situation where two of his children have an advantage over another.

You’ll just have to find a way that works all round - that’s marriage and blended families I’m afraid…. If he doesn’t agree to pay half then no one goes, unless you pay for your two. That frees him up to pay for the oldest. Theres not a hard and fast rule on what’s fair in this situation I suppose…

just be thankful that you’re talking about something that is a huge luxury and not literally food out of their mouths.

Neither did the ex, assuming her and your DH were in a long term relationship.
I struggle with your attitude tbh. My DH has taken on full responsibility for my eldest, the same as for our shared children. You could argue the money he's about to pay for eldest's uni accommodation could be saved for our children's future, but that's not what families do.

That's not correct.

Both your kids will still be in nursery next year, so not really 'school' fees.
So i think you could get awsy with it whikst they are pre-schoolers. However,if this is going to continue into actual school proper, you cant expect that any decent father is going to pay school fees for 2 of his dc and not the other.
It would be very unfair of you to put him in that position
, so there are 2 choices.
1 He pays for none and you pay 100% of 2 sets
2 you pay 50%,of 3 sets

How come this issue has only come up now?

Surely when you had your first born 3 years ago… you chatted about intentions re whether he’d go to same school as DS and you said…. Oh, I’m planning on private for our children? Surely?

You talk a lot about split finances OP. Is there a way you could loan him the money, or he could have a lower share of a joint asset in order to pay 50% for each, plus the same again to your kids’ savings and his kid’s schooling? So 3x annual fees?

That’d mean your shared kids still end up better off, but that’s life.

This.

He’s already at school, if they were happy with his school before then they are only wanting to move him because your children are going to private school

Hang on, I've made a stupid mistake here, @Bournetilly
I somehow thought DS1 was already at private school, but your post prompted me to check and you're right ... it's state, and now both the already heavily subsidised mum and OP's DH want him in private because he married a woman who can afford it

If OP had agreed to this it rather begs the question of what else they'd both want to tap her for, but either way I'm afraid it wouldn't be for me

I don’t think it’s reasonable for your DSS’s mother to expect to choose a private school and then have you pay for it. I don’t find the expectation of step parent = cash cow to be reasonable, nor is it linked to whether you love him or not.

What if you separate? Will you then be left financially liable for his school fees? I do think you have to be a bit self defensive here.

DD’s father is remarried - she has, quite sensibly imo, been very clear from the start that she’s not a substitute parent when he didn’t feel like changing nappies (she clocked that coming a mile off!) and also that she’s not going to be financially responsible for my child. I agree wholeheartedly. As it happens I can (and do) afford private school on my own but the initial financial discussions did not include her (and yes she has her own kids).

OP I don’t believe most of the people posting would be paying for your DSS’s school fees if they were in the same situation. As DSS’s mother obvs knows - it’s much easier to spend someone else’s money!

I can understand that your husband wants all his children to have the same educational opportunities.
It is pointless to argue whose "fault" it is that this is not possible, who can't afford it etc.
In your position (as you say you can afford it) I think I would pay for the two children you have together as a couple so that he can pay for his son.
It is in the best interests of all of you as a family if you can pull together on this - because your husband's son IS a member of your family, right?

Op YANBU and I doubt any person lambasting you for daring to prioritise your own children would or could spend tens of thousands on a child with two living and involved parents and for whom they have no PR when it actually came to it.

Ex doesn’t get to make demands on your money. DH has a responsibility not to prioritise one of his three children and that includes investing tens of thousands in one and not the others. He should have thought about that before he married someone with higher earning potential. He was the one with the obligation to consider the impact on his existing child.

You can afford to pay for him, you just don’t want to.

Isn’t that the answer then? Job done all move on…?

If the DH doesn’t want to pay for private school, he should still be saving/investing what he can afford (50% of fees) for each child.

In OP’s shoes I’d accept that and pay for school myself.

If her DH refuses that because he wants to pay for SS’ private school, it’d be divorce territory.

I'd pay for 1.5 of my children in this situation. Then he pays 1.5 including his first ds.
It seems petty to say your dc will lose out in this situation. You are the higher earner and your dc will be privileged not disadvantaged