Is there something on internet explaining, reasoning with a mean/thick deadbeat why he should, morally, pay maintenance?

[LiffeyKidman]

Just wondering?

My x is maggoty rich and doesn't contribute. He genuinely believes that he has no moral obligation to give me money towards the children because I left him, and therefore 'implicity undertook to pay for their upbringing'.

I can't argue or reason with that level of idiocy and denial, and I don't try anymore.

I am just wondering if there is anything on the internet, aimed at deadbeat fathers, to make them understand and face up to the fact that they are in the wrong not to contribute,,,

just wondering, because although for now I'm not persuing x for money, I will next year. (long story, legal issue).

If you have sex and there is a child you are responsible for it.
All the other circumstances are just distractions.

doesn't matter if you're male/female gay/straight rich/poor 14/40 sober/drunk one night stadn/married etc. If you had sex, that was your decision, you are responsible for the consequences. emotion shouldn't come into it. if you made a bad decision in who/when/wher etc to have sex, that is your issue, not the childs'

the only possible exception is rape, where one person didn't make that decision.

it's called accoutability, and has nothing to do with what the other partner is like.

does n1 think it is better to stay in abusive relationship then???????????????

Well, he didn't say that, but he feels that by breaking her vows to him his xw has to pay the entire cost of their child's upbringing.

As though a child were a pay as you go mobile or a pay per view channel.

N1, so when you married her she already had children with somebody else? If that didn't put you off then, you can't judge her for it now!

I feel sorry for you really. Cos if you think your son is going to pack his bag and move in with a man who would let him sit in the cold, then you're almsot certainly in for a shock.

Nobody ever lies on their death bed and wishes they'd given less money to their child.

I don't think a woman should remain in an abusive relationship at all. What I am saying is that at the point of separation, the parents should agree to separate and an agreement should be formed regarding the care of the child, sharing of possessions, etc.

As far as I can tell, a big part of the problem is one person starting an agreement by agreement then terminating the agreement without an agreement. The start is accepted by both, but the end isn't, so automatically, one person might feel undermined.

The undermined person (Usually NRP) gets further undermined and targeted by the PWC through the CSA. Things tend to get worse, not better. Though my last point is opinion, I don't know the facts, but I do know that few people think the CSA is helpful.

My ex didn't have any children when we married.

For the record and as far as I know, my son is not in the cold. The care he is given is questionable parent to parent but not so adverse that I could make a referral or make an offer of help.

Perhaps I could have been more clear, my apologies.

If my son were in a cold house, my ex is the sort of person who would rather hang onto the child and keep him in the cold to better herself than think more importantly of the child and let him live with me.

My ex is the sort of person who would rather keep the child because having a child helps her get a house and more benefits.

Whilst I agree with some of the points made on N1's posts and I think he expressed himself very frankly at first and is backing down now,could I just ask What is he supposed to do?

N1- honestly I would say that your judgment is clouded. It is much easier to be bitter and resentful than to acknowledge that despite the fact that someone did not want to stay with their partner, they are nevertheless doing a good job of parenting the child involved. You have said yourself that you do not believe that your child is being badly looked after.

Everything you say about your ex is pure conjecture and refocused through your evident dislike of her. This kind of statement may wash with the guys down the pub or the other bitter blokes at Families need fathers, but frankly in this context it just makes you look sad.

As others have said, the mature thing to do would be to withhold your judgment on your ex and privilege instead your relationship with your child. If you insist on using your child as a pawn to get at his mother, it will not contribute to your long-term relationship with him, nor does it make you look in any way mature and rational. Nor can you expect her to allow you confuse and disturb your child with your low judgment of his mother. This is not fair, when she is 50% of his parents and his main carer. At the very least, if you cannot feel in any way supportive of her, you should not make any negative comment about her to your son. From what you've said so far on this thread, I'd surmise that you'd find that quite difficult.

Honesty to me is more important than lieing to cover for his mother.

If my son asks a question, I try to answer in a way which causes no further questions.

For example, if my son asks for money for food at school I take steps to get money to the school so the money is available for use. My son hasn't asked if his mother could manage the money but if he did, I would say that the idea might be good for some people and I am not one of those people. I doubt he would ask why, but if he did, my reply would be that my possessions get given to people I choose, in the same way he chooses who to share his toys with.

If your son is still in primary school, surely he will be billed half termly for lunches? In which case you can of course pay the bill. Just ring his school and ask to pay it directly.

Sometimes you have to tell white lies to children , or not tell the full truth, especially on topics that might lead to you saying more than you intend(example- "Why don't you like Mummy, Daddy?"; only a monster would answer that question truthfully to any child below the age of 16). Parents do this all the time, and frankly "telling the truth" should not trump your child's happiness- that is simply valuing your own principles over your child's wellbeing.

I'm slightly confused... If your child is NOT living in the cold, then who is paying the bill for him not too ?? I assume he is not walking around naked ?? Who pays for his clothes. He is fed surely ?? as if he were not it would be a negelct case ?? Who buys his food ??

No matter how much you couch your argument in clever words you are just anotehr man shirking his responsibilities to his child

This is probably going to be a deeply unpopular view, so i've namechanged.

I completely disagree that every time anyone has sex, they are agreeing to pay for any child that results from it. If there is no commitment between two people, how is there any agreement about money?

In a case where two people have a one night stand, neither of them have any thought about having children, but the woman gets pregnant and decides to keep the baby, why should the man, who has had no say whatsoever in it,then be liable financially?

N1 are you willing to tell us how much the CSA asked you to pay?

Because the man is well aware that sex can result in a child, ergo, if you are ready to have sex with someone you should also be ready to face up to any consequences whether or not you get the outcome you want.

I think also, that N1 would find that the CSA would not be making quite so many waves in his life if he just paid up.

Naymee- this is what contraception was invented for. If a man wants to have sex without a condom or a vasectomy or similar, then he must accept that a child could result. That is the point of sex. When you boil it down, there is no such thing a recreational sex- biologically it is always designed for reproduction. Obviously contraceptive failure does happen, which is why having sex with someone you know and trust may be a more sensible tactic for for partners.

If you are going to have sex with strangers, best to make sure you do not know each other's names or anything about each other, if you are worried about a paternity case biting you in the bum later. (just playing devil's advocate there). Also, I would like to point out that it is almost without exception the woman who ends up holding the baby in this kind of situation.

I'm getting cross now.

My partner has paid maintenence from day 1 of the split with his ex.
She was an utter cow. He caught her shagging his best mate in their bed whilst his dd was left crawling around the living room on her own.
He lost literally everything including his home other than a bin bag full of clothes.
He had to fight through the courts for access yet he has never missed a maintenence payment.

We actually now pay well over the amount the CSA asks for because we feel that DSD will benefit.
We have DSD more than 50% of the time by the way.

My partner has always been able to separate supporting his child from any opinions he may have on his ex ( and beleive me he has voiced many over the years.)

N1, you are such a poor example to others. Shame on you.

How ridiculous you are N1.

If money was your x's first motivation, she would hand him over to you, because there is no bigger money pit than having sole residency of a child. Loss of earnings, putting a roof over their head etc..

Nobody who loves their child ever sees them as a 'means to a house'. You sound immature, steeped in denial, judgemental and very mean.

You chose to marry this woman at some point. As mean as my x is, he knows that the children are in good hands with me. He takes advantage of that fact, takes advantage of my selflessness to line his own pockets. For all your huffing and puffing, and judging your ex, that's what you're doing too.

You are safe in the knowledge that your x (ooooh such a baddie) will when the chips are down provide for your son, which conveniently leaves you free to spend your money on yourself!

And free to be a martyr and complain too!!

I rarely rarely say this, but you're a more deluded sad knob than my x! Congratulations.

I already get clothing for my son, on request from the mother. Sometimes I have to save for a month to get the entire list of cloths, so the process takes 2 months, not ideal, but I get there. School food is paid for.

The CSA calculation for me seems to vary. It started out at about £180 odd a month, then went down to £20 odd a week, then up to £35 odd a week. Then the CSA went quiet for a while (I know the reason - not relevant) That was about 2 years ago. A year ago the CSA demanded a grand from me. I don't know what the CSA are claiming at the moment. Regardless I will not be paying. Those are the figures I can remember. There were a few more variations not to far off what I said. All this over the last 5 years.

I think you have some very interesting and valid points N1. Your posts have certainly made me look at all of this form a different perspective. I feel very sad for you people caught in such a bitter situation.