AIBU to worry about managing financially after separation with two children?

[Therewegothen]

DH and I are in the very early stages of separating. We have 2 primary age kids.

I've absolutely no idea how I'm going live on a single income. Please can people give my head a wobble?

I work full time, earning £46000. I work in a regulated profession (Social Work) so moving jobs won't improve pay and I haven't got the headspace for a promotion at the moment (plus there are no vacancies in the next level up).

I bring home £2600 a month. Having done a benefits calculator online I will receive £190 in child benefit, £424 UC and then, hopefully £638 in maintenance. But I'm guessing I shouldn't bank on that?

Stbex will have 50/50 custody. Is it reasonable to expect he pays half child care costs and half kids activities and needs? Or is that what maintenance is for?

We currently own and I should get around £100k equity once fees etc are taken out. The cheapest houses in my area are £300k for a 3 bed (kids are b&g, 10&8 and the houses are kitchen and living room, no extra reception room).

I could move to a cheaper area but then costs to get the children to school and my commuting costs go up significantly.

I need to buy a car as I need one for work and does DH, the current family car is his.

I'll need to buy furniture etc.

We have about £40k in savings, I'm guessing I'll get half? Even though it's all money DH got from redundancy and work shares?

Having looked at mortgages, my mortgage will be £1300 and my income will be £3214 plus maintenance.

Is £1914 enough to live off? Gas, electric, water, broadband, food, dog food & insurance, house maintenance, Christmas, kids birthdays, childcare (no non-paid support), kids clothes, uniform etc, kids hobbies? It doesn't seem like much but I'm guessing plenty of people manage?

I did look at reducing my hours, but it's half time or full time, no in-between and the income difference would be too big even accounting for reduced childcare costs.

AIBU to be worried about the finances?

Exactly.

I'm not sure why I shouldn't claim when I'm entitled to and my children's lives would be poorer for me not doing.

The alternative is the children live with exDH and I'm not entitled to anything. But then I'd be able to buy a smaller house and so wouldn't need any extra money.

My point is the ex H who earns a very good salary should be forced to ensure the needs of the ex W and the children are met.

It shouldn't fall to the tax payer.

It doesn’t and couldn’t work like that, both parents are equally responsible for their children.

It becomes very complex if you force one to provide fully for the kids after seperation, as some people would take rhe piss. Not work, not provide anything. So it would only work if the parent with the money took full custody and gave the other visitation rights. And many don’t want that,

as parents we are equally responsible and have ro provide in our time, if the op is not able to provide for herself and her share of her children then the tax payer has to step in\

if ypu force one to pay fully then you will see them take rhe kids fully.

And he’s only responsible for his kids, not the ex wife, marriage is not a meal ticket for life.

Agree. There’s no way she should be able to claim UC on that salary and if she can I can now see why this country is in the state it is in! There is a mother and father who can more than easily support their children and more, even if they are separated. Absolutely no way they should be asking for handouts from the taxpayer, this makes me so angry.

It probably doesn’t even cover her childcare bill. The country gets more from her working and claiming UC than it does from her not working and claiming UC. Can you understand that?

The only morally dubious bit is if she’s claiming for two kids when actually if it’s 50/50, she should be claiming for one. Otherwise, it’s what she’s entitled to.

Maybe you should be angry that £46000 a year isn’t enough to live on for 1 adult and 2 kids (not even full time) in 2026, rather than benefit bashing on the thread of a woman reaching out and asking for help on a parenting site. It’s a joke that some people think it’s ok to behave this way when someone’s just asking for advice

It is crazy that £46k is not considered enough to live on, so someone gets UC top ups, but now someone who is considered unable to work is expected to live on just over £600pm. Make that make sense.

What’s that got to do with OPs thread? She can and does work? Maybe start your own thread for that

How is it fair that I have to give up my time with my children because my ex husband earns a lot?

Can't you see how that would keep women in marriages they shouldn't be in? Abusive marriages?

And what if my ex decides just not company me? So I have to take him to court, each and every time? Who pays for court? Who houses me when I lose my home because he's not paying and the court system is backed up?

My point is that they both earn good salaries and can cover the childcare bill between them, even if separated, it’s not only her childcare bill!, it falls on both of them, same that we all had to do even on lower salaries, makes no difference if married or divorced, it’s still a joint expense.

The issue is the £600 (plus rent and money for children). They should be receiving more.

You missed the point but I don't have the time or crayons to explain more.

She already said they’d split the childcare bill, she’d only be claiming for the childcare on her time.

I didn’t miss the point, it’s just not relevant to Ops thread. This isn’t a benefit bashing/debating thread.

It could be viewed it's not a joint expense - the child care I need is to allow ME to work, which does not benefit him in anyway. The UC only covers my childcare expenses, not his.

Apologies as I may be wrong but are you sure you are entitled to UC if you own a property and are you sure you are entitled to maintenance if you only have the children for 50% of the time?

Yes, it’s more than enough.

OP is the care of the children actually going to be 50/50? Because I only know one ex couple that actually do this; one week on and then one off.. every other that has shared custody it always falls on the Mum. And I hope everyone here realizes that it isn't the per annum figure of the salary it is the take home figure that is used by Universal Credit... OP, get your calculator out and work out the sums because there will be a sweet spot somewhere to maximize your pension payments and get the maximum UC you can. Everyone here is also right about the Maintenance if it is shared care. My advice would be do at minimum 60/40 because that's likely how it will land and mainly resident with you, you claim CB and free school meals if you can, there's fuck all shame in that. And get a lawyer or take some advice because his pension and yours are in the pot, everything is in the pot including the car no matter in what name it is registered in. Whatever you do, and you should know this as a social worker, do not give up percentages of time with your children. No amount of access to activities or being stretched for money will make that ok in the long run. Have you got a kick arse woman around you to keep you a bit grounded because you seem to be , in your understandable anxiety, making concessions that you shouldn't. Stay in the house if you can, use his worry about his pension to your advantage to stay in the house or gain more equity and do not give him 50/50 shared care of your children because I can bet my arse, with the best will in the world, you'll be doing more than half. Be cool, eat properly and gather your women around you for support.

It sounds like you will be reasonably comfortable as long as you track your finances sensibly.

Then you should be cross with the toothless CMS system, not OP.

Which I wasn't aware of when I started this thread!

Part of the reason for starting it was for this sort of info.

What leads you to that conclusion?

I've always been lead to believe that your mortgage/ rent shouldn't be more than 25% of income as an absolute max. Mine will be 40%. Seems very dangerous to me.

That may have been realistic 20 years ago, but nowadays 40% is not unusually high at all.