Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Parenting

For free parenting resources please check out the Early Years Alliance's Family Corner.

Original poster

This feels like financial abuse, how is it legal?

91 replies

Hirtui · 01/02/2023 12:12

i am in a good career but working my way up so still on a low ish salary. The career has lots to go at though and I invested a lot of money in uni courses to get here.

my ex partner is ten years older and established in the same industry and earning 100k. He is refusing maintenance and now has taken a sabbatical for 12 months, due to start in a month which is two months before I am due to go back to work. I literally cannot afford to go back to work with the childcare costs. I am not eligible for help and my rent is as cheap as can be for the area. I am stuck. I am devastated as I will be able to re join the career at a later date but my career will also be extremely damaged by taking time out, not to mention I have no idea what other work I will now do, probably nothing? Am I supposed to get a loan out while our child’s father keeps his money? It feels like financial abuse and yet this is legal?

OP posts:
TheShellBeach · 01/02/2023 23:26

So you can't claim UC because of your investments.
I agree that all men should pay toward their children, even if not married.

However - you're in a secure financial position, so you'll have to spend your own money if you're ex will not pay up.

hopeahead · 02/02/2023 06:30

You dont receive benefits until all your own resources get drained. Don't rely on CMS but make the application so that he builds up arrears and you have a chance to get something back later on. If he is financially secure and has a mortgage he will likely go back into work as a consultant or self employed so then he doesn't declare his real wage and his contribution will be pennies. His "sabbatical" is likely to prove to you he does as he pleases, if you give it attention he'll keep doing it as he's getting the attention / reaction he wants from you. I will assume you left him!? Based on his behaviour you are probably better off not being married as he would have used the court system to play cat and mouse and exhausted all your investments just to get out of the marriage at least your in a position to use your money for you and not to get away from him. Whilst you're in a shit position- it could be a lot worse.

Inca22 · 02/02/2023 07:22

@TheShellBeach this isn't the OPs point though. What if you're a high earner and get divorced?

Your ex-husband decides to not contribute to their kids upbringing so you pay for everything because you can. But should that be the case?

This is why the OP is right - the system is a joke. Why should I have to marry and split my assets? Why should you get away with paying fuck all.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

General parenting
monitor1 · 02/02/2023 07:35

Hirtui · 01/02/2023 17:20

Not had chance to read the whole thread yet but those saying marriage would provide financial protection… yes of course it would. What I am saying it is shouldn’t be the case that a woman must marry to ensure a father pays for his child.

i actually have my own reasons for not marrying. I have significant financial investments. I shouldn’t have to alter my life to pay the father’s share of finances towards his child.

those saying marriage is a contract that protects you, yes it does. But it shouldn’t be that way. Please look beyond this and stop imposing women to be bound legally to men to ensue men step to THEIR responsibilities towards THEIR child.

The very expensive childcare years are limited so just use your savings to top up what you need. This is a complete non-problem and "I literally cannot afford to go back to work" is rubbish.

IDontWantToBeAPie · 02/02/2023 08:28

Sounds like you can pay for childcare with your wealth of investments... yes it's annoying he won't pay but you won't have to beg will you? Be honest OP you're rich

Original poster
Hirtui · 02/02/2023 11:22

monitor1 · 02/02/2023 07:35

The very expensive childcare years are limited so just use your savings to top up what you need. This is a complete non-problem and "I literally cannot afford to go back to work" is rubbish.

Show quote history

@monitor1 its a massive problem. Just because I may be able to amend and use up some of my own money to resolve this (and it may not be possible within this timeframe anyway), doesn’t mean that the next woman can. So yes, it’s a problem. Or are you someone that only sees a wrongdoing if it affects you personally?

OP posts:
Original poster
Hirtui · 02/02/2023 11:24

IDontWantToBeAPie · 02/02/2023 08:28

Sounds like you can pay for childcare with your wealth of investments... yes it's annoying he won't pay but you won't have to beg will you? Be honest OP you're rich

@IDontWantToBeAPie as above, that’s not a resolution to the problem which is men should pay for their children.

If this was the other way around I would be called a gold digger. Whether I am rich or not is not the point, but I suspect you know that.

OP posts:
Turmerictolly · 02/02/2023 12:12

I agree with you that it's all kinds of wrong but if you have 'significant' investments then use those to get your experience/finish qualifying (as galling as it might be to do so). You'll be investing in your own and your dc future and can then stick two fingers up to him. Once he starts working again you can claim CMS.

monitor1 · 02/02/2023 15:25

Hirtui · 02/02/2023 11:22

@monitor1 its a massive problem. Just because I may be able to amend and use up some of my own money to resolve this (and it may not be possible within this timeframe anyway), doesn’t mean that the next woman can. So yes, it’s a problem. Or are you someone that only sees a wrongdoing if it affects you personally?

Show quote history

but if you didn't have savings you'd probably be entitled to UC......

Inca22 · 03/02/2023 00:06

Crikey OP. This thread is full of martyrs who just don't get it. Yes we can do everything and pay for everything but why SHOULD we just because some men can't be fucked

Rahrahrahraah · 03/02/2023 07:29

Absolutely agree it's a shit system, and you shouldn't have to get married to ensure that a father takes joint responsibility for his own child.

Dragonsandcats · 03/02/2023 07:35

It is a shit system, he should be forced to pay for his child. Maybe they should look at 3 year average salary and savings for those dads who deliberately manipulate earnings/take sabbaticals to avoid paying for their children.

piggijg · 03/02/2023 09:53

Yes but who do you think should pay for what will be the huge cost of enforcement?

daretodenim · 03/02/2023 11:22

I have a friend who just got divorced in The Netherlands. I warned her about her ex stopping working to avoid making payments. She said it's not a problem there because if spousal or child maintenance is paid, it's calculated based on his (let's stick with man/woman here) salary. He's expected to pay that for the duration (4-5 years I think for spouse). If he quits his job, he's still supposed to pay. He's seen as being capable of earning a certain income. If he's made redundant he's also still liable because redundancy state benefits are about 80% of former salary.

It seems a fairer system, at least in theory.

taxpayer1 · 03/02/2023 11:34

daretodenim · 03/02/2023 11:22

I have a friend who just got divorced in The Netherlands. I warned her about her ex stopping working to avoid making payments. She said it's not a problem there because if spousal or child maintenance is paid, it's calculated based on his (let's stick with man/woman here) salary. He's expected to pay that for the duration (4-5 years I think for spouse). If he quits his job, he's still supposed to pay. He's seen as being capable of earning a certain income. If he's made redundant he's also still liable because redundancy state benefits are about 80% of former salary.

It seems a fairer system, at least in theory.

How is that fair? In the UK, the jobseeker allowance is like 100 a week. How do you suggest him/her continue paying? It would be fair if both parents are forced to work for a living, not one paying and the other living on benefits and child maintenance on top.

musingsinmidlife · 03/02/2023 11:41

Hirtui · 01/02/2023 12:23

im just amazed that as her father he is not obliged to pay half her childcare?! Even if that’s ‘how it is,’ it shouldn’t be.

I do consider it abuse as he has an obligation to his daughter and my life and future is now impacted greatly because he is not meeting those obligations.

the public should not be funding my life via benefits or universal credit because my daughter’s father thinks he can have a baby and not pay for their care.

Did you think you could have a baby and not pay for her care? Both parents should realize upon having a child that they cost money and that they need an income stream to be financially responsible parents.

You seem to think that either her father is responsible to pay for her care or benefits and government is responsible to pay for her care. You leave yourself out of that equation of responsibility.

How have you been paying for your share of the household costs and for your child all along? Surely you didn't abdicate and avoid financial responsibility for yourself and your child? Whatever income you had that was paying for your housing, bills, food, basic needs and costs all along will give you a foundation and if dad doesn't provide HIS share then you will need to get benefits to cover that portion. If you also don't cover YOUR share, then you will need even more benefits to cover both parents share of costs for the child.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page