Do dads that won't pay maintenance care about their children?

[donners312]

Just that really, I have posted a few times about my STBXH.

I would be interested if there is a way to see that men who won't pay do care and love their children as it is very hard to live with the fact that they really just don't seem to care?

I would like to amend my last post. If childcare is after school club the one by me is fifty pounds a week. So if it's fifty pound maintenance per child per week, that's the maintenance wiped out already! Bringing up children is very expensive and maintenance doesn't just cover bloody clothes as some people seem to think.

What people are saying is that parents should split the total costs of the child 50/50 not the NRP pay for their time and 50% of the costs for the PWC's time.

If NRP is £400 then why shouldn't the resident parent contribute the same?

Not bitter at all . How many times do I have to say that?

And of course a father has a right to ensure that maintainence is spent on the children - it's for the children. Not the mother.

Exactly offred! Which is what happens in my DH's case. He pays for our half of the time - and also for the majority of their mother's time. Meanwhile she pays very very little.

She has categorically stated that he should pay for a roof over their heads when they are with her - but also when they are with him...

As a feminist I struggle with this idea - we need a man to look after us?! I certainly don't expect (not do I want!) my ex paying for the roof over our children's heads when they are with me.

Sorry - I should add - assuming that care is 50/50! Different if it's not.

santyclause

"Not single fathers, though. Single fathers are seen as heroes."

Not in my DP experience. He was completely dissed by the "mums" at his children's school, nannies he tried to employ could not understand why he had full custody. They have moved schools it is easier.

Their mother walked out on them, he has been treated as an obviously abusive husband who "stole" the children. Despite her having all the legal rights prior to the court case. Despite doing this she maintained all rights until the court case was concluded 24 months later.

the "mother" in question has never paid a penny towards her children.

What people don't understand is that saying the NRP should pay 50% of the child's costs to the ex is crazy as (in cases where contact and maintenance is established) they are probably already paying MORE THAN 50% of the total as they pay for everything for the kids at their house (NRP) and a significant contribution to the RP.

I think the majority do understand that but are talking about situations where the child resides with the resident parent the majority of the time. If the resident parent has the children 12 days out of 14, they're usually the one paying for clothes, after school club, school dinners, etc. If the NRP pays for these separately then of course, maintenance would be adjusted accordingly. I don't think anyone has said NRPs should be contributing to all of those types of things as well as giving 50% of the overall costs.

Happy are you being deliberately daft?

happy because generally speaking £400 would not cover the costs of living arrangements - let alone feeding, clothing, entertaining....

If myself and my partner "gave" what the NRP in this case contributes our kids would have nothing!!!

£400 would not go far in giving them the things they need.

Happy did you read my breakdown read my breakdown of costs. If afterschool club was used that would have used all maintenance.
It's not loads and kids cost loads.
Of course she's bloody paying for her kids.

Say if they did go childcare. That would mean she pays for every other single thing.

Or are you one of those people who think maintenance is just for clothes?

Oswin you are spot on!!

Happy my Ex does pay £400 for Cm. I work full time my take home of £1400 goes 100% on running the household for the kids. I don't save any money. I run a car and spend a fortune driving kids to clubs. I wish I could contribute ONLY £400.

Exactly!!!

If the RP contributed the same amount to the household as NRP (sometimes do, or rather don't) we would get prosecuted for neglect! We wouldn't be able to buy food etc

A fairly cut and dry example of a RP I know...

A couple with a toddler split up. The child was planned. The 'fault' in the breakup lies with the NRP. The RP was a SAHP but goes back to work after the break up in order to support them self. The RP stays single. The NRP turns their back on the child and pays the CMS minimum while getting on with life (social life, new partners, able to work without considering childcare, etc).

RP's rent is 600 PCM. 1/4 of that should be covered by NRP as that's 50% of the cost of keeping a roof over the child's head while not contributing to the RP's rent. NRP should therefore pay £150 PCM to house their child alone.

Child is in full time childcare as both parents work. This is costing £160 a week after the government's contribution of 10hrs. £80 a week of that cost should be covered by NRP. That's £320 a month.

That's £470 alone that the NRP should be paying. They're actually paying £250. RP is however getting some tax credits to top up the money they don't get from NRP so that they can afford to go to work.

That still leaves the child's share of food, water, heating, electric, council tax, as well as toys, nappies, entertainment costs, birthdays and Christmas, transport, furniture, shoes, etc. All of these are covered exclusively by RP. When the child gets older this will also include gifts for friends' parties, clubs and activities, school meals...

And as if that isn't unfair enough, should RP want any form of social life they also have to pay through the nose for babysitting. And their career suffers because when the child is sick, they can't go to work.

I don't see how the RP could be called a money grabber, bitter, etc, considering the circumstances. But that's what they get called if they have the nerve to complain.

Understand what you're saying above about how maintance money doesn't always cover everything. However saying the child's rent is half that of the total rent is bonkers.
If your friend didn't have a child her rent wouldn't be half of what it is now... One child doesn't cost half the total household budget. A two bed home isn't double that of a one bed home.

Not that it really makes much of a difference to the total scenario but a single person could quite easily rent a room for half of what he (my friend is a resident father) pays for his 2 bed place currently. He could get a studio flat with the bills included for not very much more.

That's a fair point korean - I hadn't looked at it that way

Oswin no childcare costs at all and mortgage paid off.

She also had a live in partner that paid 50% of all bills.

Her partner is irrelevant - before he moved in her bills were split between her and the children (so if there were two kids, 1/3 was her costs and 2/3 was theirs) your DH was paying towards the kids' share of the costs. When the partner moved in, his income goes towards his share of the mother's costs and any increase his presence causes. Crucially, the children's costs are still the responsibility of the mother and your DH. If the new partner chooses to pay towards the mother's share, that's up to him. The father's share doesn't change. What does happen is that the partner's contribution frees up some of the mother's income and also adds enough to then have a better lifestyle. This does not mean the father ceases to have a responsibility towards his children.

Anyway, I agree with Offred upthread. Whether parents who dodge maintenance "care" is irrelevant really. The truth is that parents who act in ways to avoid paying maintenance are not able to act as good parents - they do not act with the best interests of their children in mind nor are they able to accept the responsibility of parenthood. It's neglect, pure and simple, and it should be dealt with as such.

Yes Happy and your DP also has a partner (you) that can contribute towards 50% of his bills. You really are jealous of your ex's partner. You need to focus on the children and not the mother.

Is better - I'm really not jealous at all - and as an unknown person to me on an Internet forum you really are in no position to state that and clearly have not read the full thread.

Firstly we finished paying maintainence years ago so this is all in the past.

Always happily paid maintainence and far more - which is partly why I have such a good relationship with my DSC.

I have reaped the benefits of putting them first - by taking them shopping for clothes etc etc when their mother clearly had the money but chose to spend her maintainence on upgrading her people carrier umpteen times .

Certainly never jealous - that's laughable. There is nothing to be jealous about. Even her own children say they never saw any of the maintainence their father paid.

Funnily enough now maintainence has stopped so have all her grand holidays. And car upgrades. Now we can support his children directly and actually see it make a difference to them.

The difference is we always put the children first - their mother didn't . So I clearly have nothing to be jealous about as she is reaping all that now.

You sound charming Happy

I bet if you ask my Dd in a few years time what her maintenance money was spent on, she wouldn't be able to tell you.

Day to day living expenses aren't memorable. Replacing outgrown shoes, lost pe kits etc, is never even thought of.

Im lucky in that I get on with my Ex and have gotten along with most of his gf. Lucky for Dd and me, none have the attitude that you have.