Thinking of Abandoning your Wife and Child? Here’s what you need to know.

[Adviceshop]

1 – will I have to pay maintenance to my ex?
A: Yes – you will have to pay 16% of your gross salary (after pension deductions)
2 – So if I increase my pension contributions my maintenance will go down?
A: Yes.

1. My child is in nursery as we both work – will I have to pay half towards childcare?

A: No, not at all. If your ex wishes to continue working she will have to pay it all.

1. But won’t I have to have the child half the time and pay for my half when I have them?

A: Not if you don’t want to, no. You can just see the child at weekends and explain you can’t have them in the week because you work.

1. Is there a minimum amount of time I will need to see my child?

A: Again, no, you can see your child as little as you wish.

1. What if my ex won’t let me see my child?

A: You can take her to court to force her to allow you to see the child

1. Can my ex take me to court to force me to see the child more regularly?

A: Not at all, no, this is not available as an option.

1. Can I move away from my ex and child?

A: Certainly. In fact, if you move a long distance away you can apply for a “variation” to your child maintenance so that you pay less. You can say this is because you are incurring costs in visiting your child.

1. So I would have to prove that I was incurring these costs to get the variation?

A: Not really no. Keep the receipts from one trip and say that you’re making that same trip every month, even if you’re not. 10. Can my ex move away with my child? A: Yes, but you can apply for a court order to stop her. 11. Can she apply for a court order to stop me moving away? A: No, of course not. 12. Won’t my leaving have an adverse effect on my child? A: Probably, but your ex will probably do everything in her power to minimise the ill effects. 13. How can I be sure my child will be looked after? A: If your ex neglects your child she will be punished by the state. If it gets really bad your child will be taken into care and looked after by the state. 14. Can the state make me take my child back? A: No, not at all. 15. Won’t society think badly of me for doing this? A: Possibly at first. Explain how unhappy you were. If you see your child a few times a year and pay the minimum maintenance then eventually you will be called “A Good Dad”.

@DecomposingComposers child maintenance isn’t very much and is calculated according to income. It won’t take his entire salary - that’s for sure. That will be all he is obliged to pay from income. He may give her a bigger share of equity as part of the settlement but that will be all he is obliged to pay. He won’t have to continue paying the mortgage unless he chooses. She will have to rent a place with the kids. He might not feel comfortable about it but that is what happens.

So what you are saying is completely distorted. In fact the law leaves many women and children unsupported.

She will he expected to work. If your friend wishes to support her he can share childcare so she is able to take on employment. Then he won’t have to pay any child support!

If you have children they cost money. Fact.

decomposingcomposers you keep stating you don't actually know what is going to happen but are using that as fact.

You also only know what the one person is telling you. I realised very quickly my ex wasn't looking at the divorce settlement as i was. I was looking at what would be fair and best for the children. That never entered his head. I had to protect my family.

To his family and friends i was the vile ex eife who made him homeless and took all his money. They didnt know that he had had affairs and lied for years. The only knew of the last affair. That hed let himself into the family home and taken the family tv and kids x box because they were his and he was entitled.

That he let himself in and read my mail as he was looking for my pension details. That he threatened to move himself and the OW in to our family home with us because me and the kids would not move out and give him what he wanted.

The facts were i paid off his credit card debt, i paid for the divorce. I paid for the fees to take him off the mortgage and i gave him the biggest lump sum i could afford so we had a clean break. It cost me tens of thousands. I was lucky i had an ok job and family that lent me money.

Ah decom you're listening to an NRP sob story, it all makes sense now.

you keep stating you don't actually know what is going to happen but are using that as fact.

I'm not using anything as fact. I'm explaining what is happening in one case that I know of and I can see that this can easily be happening in other cases, especially living somewhere where rent and property prices are so high. I can see how one wage cannot cover the costs of 2 households so I can understand how both households, post separation are going to struggle financially. That's not blaming anyone. That's just the reality of 1 wage not being enough to pay for 2 households.

There is nothing more to this situation. The wife has no income so isn't paying off any debts because she only has the husband's wages for income.

I don't know what will happen here. He's not going to see the children made homeless and can't afford a solicitor as it stands now.

Of course there are feckless selfish parents who do everything that they can to avoid paying for their children. I don't disagree with that at all. But it isn't right to say that all ex husbands are like it.

Ah decom you're listening to an NRP sob story, it all makes sense now.

See it's statements like that that are just ridiculous. By saying that you are inferring that all nrps are at fault and that all rp are blameless and that is just blatantly untrue.

And for the umpteenth time he isn't a nrp. They continue to live together. How does that make him non resident?

Was he happy for her to entirely give up work to be a SAHM? Was it a joint decision? It always seems a reckless decision to me. If he has lost his job the family would be in a similar precarious position. Families need two incomes these days. Did he encourage her to stay home so his life would be easier and he wouldn’t have to do the childcare?

At it's peak I was paying £14k per year in childcare - so I could work & keep my family friendly job I love.

XP - who also works - paid £240pcm to support his 2 dc. He's still paying that grand sum now. Thankfully my childcare costs are now hugely reduced as I WFH.

Yes and there is also the argument that this man has put this woman in a position where she has three children and no obvious means of support so he should compensate her for her loss of earnings!

What a shame about this thread being derailed by a scenario about which very few actual facts are being given, and to which there doesn't seem to be any point except to undermine the experiences of the many women who have posted here.

The system is hugely biased against RPs, the vast majority of whom are women. It's actually really fucking outrageous and it's hard to understand how this can exist in modern times.

Why is that so hard for some people to accept?

Exactly @tottalynotsosure

Instead of people saying I don’t behave like this the people who do should be ashamed they then go on to defend all nrp because they consider themselves hard done to.

These threads always end up the same main reason I suspect many don’t post in this forum

The system is not biased against RPs. That's a ridiculous statement.

I don't know if anyone is trying to undermine the experiences of women. I noticed some people are undermining the experienced of NRPs. "You're listening to NRP sob story ha ha!"

Both RPs and NRPs have something to complain about. RPs have a lot of bills to pay and a lot of responsibilities. NRPs have to pay maintenance and their ex mortgage and usually they have to move to a smaller apartment. They don't get to have a meaningful relationship with their children.

It's not a ridiculous statement. Did you read the OP and following comments? I'm not saying that NRPs have nothing to complain about. I don't think anyone is saying that. But the fact is that it is possible for one parent to leave and to give minimal to no support to the remaining RP and that there is very little protection for the RP to stop them from doing that. They are therefore left with the main financial, physical and emotional burden of their joint children. If the system does nothing to protect them against that, how is it not biased against them?

NRPs have to pay maintenance and their ex mortgage

Most of their "maintenance" payments wouldn't maintain a properly kept dog.

And don't even get me started on the 'but ex has to pay maintenance' as if this is the biggest burden in the world. It's a small percentage of their salary. Who calculates the RPs expenditure on the children as a percentage of their salary? Trust me, it's going to be a lot higher. Is that fair? But nobody says 'poor her, she's paying for her children, of course she has to work hard and can barely see her kids. She's such a good mum.' That never happens.

Mum56347 have you got the statistics to show most NRP are paying their ex mortgage?

Just because some men are deadbeats doesn't mean the system is "biased" against RPs. You have more responsibilities but you also get to make almost all the decisions regarding your kids. You have a meaningful relationship with your kids. NRP who doesn't pay maintenance will be arrested.

If being RP is so bad would you rather be NRP? Would you rather just see your kids EOW and pay maintenance?

It's also not true that all nrp are the ones who instigated the divorce is it?

There are currently 2 threads running where the ops are mothers of toddlers. 1 the mum wants to move 400 miles away in order to be closer to her parents, meaning selling their house and getting new jobs. Dad doesn't want to move. But if mum decides to go, she will no doubt take the child with her.

2nd thread woman is 25 weeks pregnant with on child and has so far led her DH to believe the baby is his. She is now contemplating telling the DH. If they split up she will no doubt have custody of their toddler that they have between them.

In neither of those cases would the divorce be at the wish of the dad, who will still likely become nrp.

There’s also the thread where the mum has moved an hour away to be with her boyfriend, and now the 50:50 contact isn’t working as well and the hour drive to school means the kids are often late..

She is thinking of just seeing the kids at w/e. A poster has suggested she moves the kids schools closer to her...

She has no job so no reason at all not to move back.

Who said being an RP was so bad? That's not what I'm saying at all. And yeah, if you don't like the word 'biased' let's say the system often leaves the RP disadvantaged with very little legal protection. How many NRPs get arrested for non payment? That's only if they haven't used other means to reduce their payment which aren't technically illegal.

As for making decisions and having a meaningful relationship with your kids, there is nothing at all to stop NRPs from doing this.

Anyway, I'm going to stop engaging with you now because I think you're being goady.

That was to @Mum56347 but actually I think a lot of people are just derailing and being goady now. Yes, we know some women are shit too. What's your point? It remains that most RPs are women and the legal system doesn't support us as well as it should. Are you all disputing that?

my brother is one of those rare beasts who has the kids 50/50, pays more maintenance than he should and is involved in all aspects of parenting, drs appts, play dates, hobbies..etc.

My ex however, isn't sigh
doesn't pay a penny and only see's them for 4 days a month.. sometimes less!

It remains that most RPs are women and the legal system doesn't support us as well as it should. Are you all disputing that?

Not disputing that at all. But what’s the solution? How do we get men to step up rather than just complain about our lot?

i think there is a compromise to be reached where women don’t accept the default sah/pt parent and both parents look at 50:50, right from birth, before there’s any thought of separation. Then if there is a split you aren’t suddenly expecting men to start taking on bigger parenting roles, or women to start earning more...

It would require a huge societal shift though. Men’s employment would need to be more open to pt, employers of women would need to stop paying minimum wage in exchange for “family friendly” and expectations women with kids can’t or don’t want to invest in their careers.

If I am honest with myself, as a woman, in some ways I am resistant to that as in a separation I want to be the main carer. I don’t want to see my kids 50% of the time, or weekdays or weekends only. So in lots of ways I would not want the current default of mum= primary carer to change. I would not exchange a deadbeat dad for NRP.

You could criminalise men who don’t step up. But what good would that do? Then you definitely wouldn’t get cs or a hands on dad if they’re imprison. Same logic for women who won’t allow access- that should not be criminalised either.

It’s an impossible situation. As someone who grew up in a single parent household long before csa, tax credits or any sort of benefits, i made sure that i was in a good position before I had kids. If dh walked out or dropped dead tomorrow and I never saw him again I’d be fine financially and logistically.

Divorce is now more likely than not. So why don’t we plan for it in the way we plan for unexpected death? Savings plans, equal parenting from the beginning...

@Mum56347 find me one NRP arrested for not paying maintenance. Just one.

And making all the decisions regarding the kids is exhausting. Im crying out for a co parent to share that load with.