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.

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.

I agree with your dh. Especially as you earn more than him. Normally the person who earns more pays more

Send your two to private school and save the half school fees for the oldest in a bank account for him to have when his older etc uni ,gap year etc

I would agree if the father was the major breadwinner. However, it is NOT right for him and his ex to decide that his current wife should be paying.

(Is this by any chance a reversal?)

Should Op’s earnings also be considered for maintenance?

The mother can't afford it, and had probably never thought of sending her son to private school until...she discovered that you were planning on sending your children.

The father needs to sort this. Not you.

Was he going to pay maintenance for his son as well as half of the schools fees ?

@EvangelicalAboutButteredToast what a load of bollocks. She could afford to do it. She is just using her money to help her kids. If there was real intent on the side of the mother who was a bit short but working and doing all she could I might have a small amount of sympathy but the mother of this child is palming responsibility off to someone else cos she wants what the OP has without the effort.

OP, why don't you pay the full fees for your two and your DH puts what would have been his share in savings for all three DC? Or, he contributes his share for your DC to to the family pot, so that the shortfall of you paying the full fees is covered? That keeps it all within your household. Then he can say to his ex that you decided to pay for your DC's fees yourself so his ex can't say anything.

The Ex doesn’t want that.

No of course not.

Is it also cruel that the Ex wife takes her son on holiday & doesn't take the OP's too?

is it also fair she only works part time?

I’m trying to understand how far a SM’s financial obligation stems if people are so insistent she has an obligation to cover schooling.

She will find herself single soon and trying to make those school fees herself.

So what that she earns more than him? His son is the financial responsibility of his parents, neither of which is OP.

A higher earning partner may choose to pay a greater proportion towards joint expenses, but his child is not a joint expense.

She can afford them herself

Presumably she only works part time because she otherwise would need childcare... because the child lives with her.

Only the holiday part... no obviously, because she didn't choose to marry and have kids with the OP 🙄

It sounds like she’ll be fine. He’s the one that seems more likely to struggle without her contribution.

But it will be more expensive than what her DH is suggesting now.

However, I do think it'd be in DH and his eldest best interests if he did leave the OP.

Not when she is a single parent having to foot the full price of a home etc. She can do it now because husband helps. When she has to pay for everything and gets a token amount of CM, she will soon see the bottom of her purse.

Me too. And got at least 50/50 on the kids with her

sweetie You're his step mum .....

If you love him as equally as you do your own, or at least honestly try, he will reciprocate in full measure and may even be the most loving and caring of the three to you when they are grown. And vice versa

I would send all three to private from high school /secondary years. Or move DSS to private in a couple of years from now when your own kids start the feepaying school. Take at least a small cut off maintenance I do agree with you that birth mum may need to forgo any mani pedis and blow drys so you dont have to paying for both your son.

Is not MN always advising on separate finances though to avoid fin abuse?

It’s perfectly clear it isn’t about the expense itself, it’s about the principle of the DH funding 100% of his child at the expense of making equal contributions to his shared children

Hello, I appreciate your answer and I think it is fair position from your perspective and what your family mutually value. Thank you.

Personally, I apply the same equal spending principle to my children. Outside of living expenses, which is proportional to the age and needs of household members, I have an amount reserved for the schooling and savings. From there, I’d pay their fees and save the rest. Because of this, I wouldn’t have another child if I couldn’t afford to maintain the investments of the older two, to provide for the youngest.

For my husband, when we discussed this, prior to marriage and children, he was fine with saving the entire amount for the eldest. But this has changed following backlash from the mother and the subsequent guilt - this is why I feel betrayed as he reversing from our marital agreements to placate his guilt, despite all the children are receiving the same from him overall.

So while I do understand him, asking me to pay £100k+ for years of the eldest’s school fees, is unfair, while the biological mother contributes nothing and my children lose out. This is on top of me offering to pay an extra percentage, and agreeing to help him with extra expenses associated from private school. Those expenses would be in the aforementioned joint account, where we split household expenses. You also have to consider that because I’m the step-mother, I don’t have a say a major decisions making in the eldest’s life. And in that scenario, why should I be expected to fund decisions I can’t influence - this is where the sentiment of being used comes in?

So it is not fair that the eldest does not have the same parents as his siblings. Neither he, nor the father, can control what resources each mother has financially and what arises from that as a consequence. But as the father, he can only compensate by doing the best he can to afford equal financial support for all his children. So paying more in favour of one child, may equalise opportunities on the surface, but in practicality it means that he offered less to the youngest two. The same way the oldest didn’t ask to be here, the same applies to the younger two.

And in regard to my nieces and nephews, I actively helped raise them from birth, prior to my own; I sincerely dote on them as my own children. With my husbands child, I care and love him, but I have no active role in raising him nor have I been allowed any meaningful say in his upbringing - for him I’m just an adult figure who shares a home with his father. Of these two, how would it be reasonable for me to pay for the schooling of one and exclude the group?

The child lives with his grandparents too. Plus, he goes to school. The ex isn't working full time because she is hugely subsidised and very probably doesn't want to.

However, she wants her ex's new wife to help pay towards her son's private education. That all sounds fair to you?

If he's being 'disadvantaged' it's because player 2 is choosing to prioritise part time work & holidays.

if player 3 hadn't entered the game, private school would never have been a contemplation.

it only is now because player 1 & 2 are CF who think P3 should bank roll it.