To think this is more than enough maintenance to raise a child? (Friend conflict)

[Bessyioo]

My very close friend was left when her dc was 1. It was brutal, he was having an affair with one of our other friends in our group.

She is now paid 1,050 in child maintenance. However, all I hear is how she is on the ‘back foot’ financially as she is on her own and a lot of our conversation is about how he should be providing more as he is a high earner. She has her own home and I don’t even have a mortgage yet! I may be being sensitive as I feel i struggle financially but surely surely anyone can see that that is a lot of money and pays for everything the child needs?!

So she should give it to these other women then?!

No.

🤣🤣

It's comical.

One of those "my husband works away so I'm basically like a single parent, aren't I? Should I join single parent groups?" type of people.

No. Is always the answer. But they don't accept it and keep going.

Thank you. Somebody needed to say it, because the people most affected often have no voice at all. I am glad some other view it the same way as me.

And I am also shocked. I knew such attitudes existed. But to see such prevalence if them here of all places is depressing.

Also this will stand here in perpetuity, unless the OP asks MN to delete it and and they oblige. I do wonder how some of these posters might feel looking back on the horrific things they have said, in 20 or 30 years. Or if their children or grandchildren stumble upon it later in some cultural study, what they will think of it.

It may be as incomprehensible to them as the Tudor attitudes to marriage or the Victorian attitudes to sex or child labour. These types of views, I suspect, will eventually be seen for what they are by everyone: barbaric, misogynistic, backwards, callous, ideological, illogical, counterproductive, ill-informed and rather obtuse (to put it politely). And fundamentally, massively damaging to society.

As a family we have also received a pittance of maintenance (£26 a week) so I also know what it's like paying a much higher percentage for a child than the other parent, but because the other parent in my situation was a woman, it was absolutely fine.

Ahhhh so then it is explained, finally. You are a step-mother who hates that her husband pays out maintenance for his child (probably still nowhere near of his 50% share of their costs, as very, very few do) but are furious that he pays more than your ex pays for your own child.

🙄

I could be like you and say well, at least your ex pay something! We lived in a paper bag, and were chuffed with that!!

Or: women could stand together and say this is unacceptable and all parents should pay 50% of the costs of raising any children they have.

Or have been injected with a near-fatal dose of misogyny.

Neither is good.

Was the child planned by both parents?

Do you have the statistics to back up your assertion that "very very few" do or did you conclude that with your crystal ball?

Many adjectives with no substance.

Except of course all the data from elsewhere in the world, and the fact that countries where absent parents are forced to contribute a sensible amount towards raising their children have far lower child poverty rates generally.

But pah! Who needs evidence or cares wha! This is Brexitland after all.

*cares what experts think

Going to mute this thread now. These defenders of deadbeat dads are just too depressing to engage with further.

Do you have the statistics to back up your assertion that "very very few" do

Aside from the fact that google is easily accessible even for those who can't be bothered to move much, CMS rates in the UK are 12% income for one child or 16% of income for two.

How many couples do you know, who have a child and have 88% of their money each as disposable? Or even 84% Don't think there'd be a cost of living crisis if that was the case. And that's with two adults in a household.

An average salary in the UK is £38k. For one child that would mean £380pcm maintainance, for one child. So, even on the average salary the maintenance amount required by law is nowhere near half of the average cost of a nursery place. Not even a quarter of it in many places. And that is IF the CMS is paid which we know it often isn't. And if there is only one child. Love to see nursery's reaction when people go along any say "when my second baby starts I'll pay you 4% more, to cover them both". No? Unreasonable? Why? Because apparently that's perfectly acceptable from a father, not just for his share of childcare costs but for everything. Poor second child, worth only 4% of his income apparently.

And even if this pathetic percentage is paid for the first child (which it often isn't and ko penalties for non payment are applied), it would pay what, 1/4 or maybe 1/3 of nursery costs if you live somewhere very cheap, then the resident parent is still paying 2/3+ of the nursery cost plus extra mortgage/ rent, utilites, food, clothes etc etc.

On an average salary the payment for a second child would be £126 per month. Which would not even cover two days of nursery, and nothing else.

Does not take a genius to work out the maths and that this is ridiculous and designed - very deliberately - to stitch up the responsible parent who actually sticks around to raise the child(ren).

Slow hand clap for the cheerleaders of misogyny. Well done. 👏👏

And the IFS states that 36% of the children in relative poverty live in single parent households. While only 22% children live in single parent households. Ergo, the absent parents (almost all men) are not paying enough to support their children.

I thought you muted the thread :) It is 12% gross. More like 20% net. There are no statistics to show because what you are saying is not true (google it). You try to bully everyone that doesn't share your extreme views as misogynists and brexiteers (go figure) and a lot of adjectives. Do scientific research, back up your wild assertions with numbers, and stop tainting everyone due to your own experience.

I thought you muted the thread :) It is 12% gross.

The figures quoted in cash terms were the gross amounts. But never mind, maths isn't^^ for everyone.

He should be paying 1/2 the childcare costs and 1/2 of everything else for the child. Therefore it doesn’t sound like £1,050 is going to cut it.

My DP is a high-earner and I’d also be annoyed if we split and I got £1,050 a month given I know what it is as a proportion of his income.

I think it must be upsetting to think of the kind of life the child might have had with a high earning father, nice holidays, potentially private school, etc v what you can practically do with £1,050. It will hurt more if he has other children who enjoy those privileges while hers doesn’t.

You don't understand simple sentences. Quoting 12% of salary seems low but people don't get the gross salary but the net salary. If you take the net salary, it is more like 20%. Never mind, you are extremely bitter about your situation and try to bully everyone that doesn't agree with your extreme views. No wonder your ex left. He must be a happy man now. I don't blame him.

Disgusting comment. What an unpleasant thing to say.

You don't understand simple sentences. Quoting 12% of salary seems low but people don't get the gross salary but the net salary. If you take the net salary, it is more like 20%. Never mind, you are extremely bitter about your situation and try to bully everyone that doesn't agree with your extreme views. No wonder your ex left. He must be a happy man now. I don't blame him.

Oh dear. No.

I translated the percentages into monetary values in my postto avoid any confusion and quantify them, and compare them to actual costs. So it was an absolutely transparent and fair comparison of how much that contribution would be compared to the actual costs of raising a child, and demonstrated that - even if CMS is paid at the appropriate rates - on any salary even close to the average it is completely insufficient. Hence the child poverty issue in single parent households, as I described earlier. This basic maths shows why that happens: the non-resident parent is not required to cover anywhere near half of the costs of the child. To fix this poverty, they need to be forced to do so.

I am not bitter. I have a lovely home that I own, a great career. I am very lucky. As I've said repeatedly I have been on this thread to speak up for women and children in a less fortunate position than me. I have seen how broken this system is, how it lets irresponsible and feckless parents (almost all men) leave people in poverty. Just because we were lucky that I have a good job, does not mean I have no empathy for others who couldn't manage to do it all on their own.

And why should they have to? Actually to be fair why should I have had to, either? All fathers should pay half of the cost of raising their child. But it's even more important for the families where that is needed. It's disgusting that you're arguing so vehemently against this and one had to wonder why.. then yesterday you revealed the motives behind the agenda you've been trying to push here. So I doubt anybody will give much credence to your opinions anymore.

I am not a bully. I have challenged damaging misconceptions with facts and statistics from reputable sources. Accusing people of things like that is not ok. Neither are the things I've said, backed uo by those facts and statistics, "extreme".

As for this:

No wonder your ex left. He must be a happy man now. I don't blame him.

You are clearly an extremely spiteful person and this is not acceptable, just because you disagree with someone's views.

Disgusting comment. What an unpleasant thing to say.

Thank you. Someone celebrating a man walking out on two babies on a parenting forum is just beyond the pale really.