My ex wants to take our children 50% of the time

[Shakespeareandi]

Can my ex just decide to have children 50% of the time? He moved out following an affair with a mutual friend whose children would often play with ours. He has recently moved into a new place and is now claiming he can have the children 50% of the time.

I feel the children should have one stable home, and I never wanted to have a broken family. His name only on the deeds and mortgage for the house that the children and I still live in. He has kept paying the mortgage since he moved out. I cover all other expenses. My wages would not cover the mortgage. My name is not on the deeds or mortgage because he said we got a better mortgage deal that way. I have paid for bills and he has paid the mortgage. Yes, I know what an idiot I have been, so please be gentle. I am in so much pain as it is.
Currently, I have about £3,000 in savings, so I have to be very cautious about how I spend it. I've been in touch with a solicitor to see if it's worth spending £350 an hour (for context, I earn £15 an hour), but they haven't been back in contact yet. Our children are 6, 10, and 14 years old.

My family all live abroad and while I have supportive friends, there's only so much they can do.
Rents are very high. There's no chance I could privately rent. Maybe a 1 bedroom place but letting agency's have said singles or couples only. Council houses are pretty much non-existent and with long waiting lists. If he makes me homeless (he has threatened), he says he could have the children 100% of the time as he can provide safe housing with him.
To make matters worse, he was an alcoholic for years and has started drinking again but seems to be managing things at the mo. I feel so alone and sick with nerves. I am trying to keep things amicable and scared what he can do.

I know how stupid I have been. I feel rubbish and sleeping very badly but keeping it together for the children. If I could turn back time I would. I also still love him and want our family back. He doesn't.

See a solicitor.
Find out your rights - and his. They are his children too.

They often demand 50 50 not because they want as much time as possible with them but because they want to hurt, frighten and control you and prodding the thing you dread most - losing the children - is the easiest way to do it.

All the best.

Investigating rather than dreading will start to make you feel more in control.

It’s not “his” house, it’s the family home. Your example is nonsense as no, I wouldn’t give a stranger my house and pay the mortgage for them but I would make sure the mother of my children was provided for and I certainly wouldn’t threatened to maker her and my children homeless. As soon as you have children things change. If you are completely lacking in moral fortitude and can’t see that then that is a you problem.

You do know it’s possible to split up from your partner/wife when children are involved without being an a-hole? You don’t have to threaten to maker her homeless, you don’t have to insist on 50:50 to avoid CMS, you don’t have to keep her off the title deeds when you’re not married, let her pay for everything bar the mortgage then enjoy the increase in your investment which has come at her expense.

Well he should have thought about that then shouldn’t he? Instead of thinking with his dick. He is the one who split the family up and now he’s demanding he has them 50/50.
he’s selfish and broke his family up and he really should have thought about this before threatening the mother of his kids.

Legally though she doesn’t even have a right to occupy it. She never has had - it’s been at his invitation. This is why we need new cohabitation laws as people don’t realise this stuff and assume it’s the family home. It’s not - it’s his house and only his.

Hello OP,

I’m afraid that I don’t have any practical advice, but I just wanted to say that you’re going to be ok. It will be ok in the end.

You are at a dreadfully low point, and that the moment it probably feels overwhelming and awful (and rightly so). I’ve been in these low points and whilst you maybe can’t see it now, things will get better.

You will sort this out with your ex one way or another, you might find a new home that’s happy and safe, your work will continue and you’ll be successful. You will have real life support and friends to help. You will have your lovely children with you and will watch them grow. Your ex will have less and less impact on your life. One day you’ll wake up and things will be normal again.

And for all that time you have us here to support you, a team of women on your side offering advice or just moral support or just a listening ear.

I hope that isn’t too soppy or OTT. Just wishing you all the very best and sending a virtual hug.

'The child benefit goes straight to my exes account' why?!
Please try and get this changed perhaps tou need to do a counter claim as whoever is registered for child benefit is considered the main parent

I do agree with this.
not helped that on some online forms there is often a ‘common law’ option so no wonder people think they have rights.

Fewer people are getting married these days and having children.
And I am one of them! However,in our circumstance I am the home owner. I have a Will which states that DP can stay in our house till death so he would not become homeless.
It doesn’t help if you split up though!

No you don’t have to agree he’d have to take you to court.

Having experience of a 50:50 arrangement (not mine) I firmly believe that it is not in the best interests of the children and they actually do better with one secure home and lots of contact with the other parent.

Being forced to go between two homes every week is actually quite stressful for the kids.

Yes. Unless his drinking makes him abusive or a danger to his children, it's not illegal to be dependent on alcohol.

We really don’t. Legal contracts around sharing assets including property should be opt in not opt out. We have a perfectly good system and if people choose not to enter into the contract of marriage it’s not the government’s fault.

50/50 is what many of the children at my school have-it seems to be far more common now.

Unfortunately you are in a hugely vulnerable position-this thread is yet another warning to women who don’t get married before having kids/buying a house/going part time/giving up work.

Unless he is a massively high earner, he won’t be able to pay (be expected to pay) two sets of housing costs and bills so the family home will need to be sold and you will have to claim benefits. Or if he doesn’t want to sell, maybe it’s best for the children to stay in the house with him and you find somewhere small just for you and they come and visit.

I would strongly suggest looking around for other full time jobs as well if there isn’t any career progression in this one.

I think you need to talk to him and find out what he wants to do with the house.

Yes and you don’t have to get married (for you it’s better if you’re not were you to split). The better and stronger protection is being financially self sufficient. But if you earn a lot less than your partner and you depend on them financially, marriage will offer you some protection.

It’s not “his” house, it’s the family home.

That may be the case morally, but it's not the case legally. They're not married and her name isn't on the deeds or the mortgage. He could change the locks on her tomorrow if he wanted to.

IF it gets nasty you can report his tax doge to hmrc don't tell him it was you

It’s not perfectly good at all. It fucks women royally and most other civilised countries have protection for cohabitants who have children (and in some abusive relationships, pregnancy isn’t necessarily a free choice). Opt in doesn’t work does it if one person refuses to opt in - you give them all the power. How about if you both don’t want to be bound by cohabitation protection you both enter into a contract saying you don’t want to? That way vulnerable people are still protected.

Absolutely not @Startinganew32 - all contracts should be opt in, not something anyone can just sleepwalk into because they happen to have been living together for say, 500 days instead of 499.

The fact that women could end up trapped in legal commitments they don't actually want to be in is reason enough for that.

I agree. Why should a man (namalt, iohoawwdtt*) be enabled to live in a family at the great expense, financially, physically and emotionally, of the mother of his children?

And blaming mothers for SAHMing, when it’s often best for the kids and frequently the only viable option, is arse-about-tit.

(*not all men are like this; I once heard of a woman who did this too)

They really wouldn’t. The protection would be for women who have children with a man (or are otherwise dependent) and would allow them to make a claim for property rights. Countries where this operates perfectly well with no major issues:
Scotland
all of Scandinavia
australia
New Zealand
Canada
lots of other European countries

It wouldn’t operate in cases where people had just lived together - there would have to be some dependency there.

Do you honestly think it’s fair that the OP’s DP can get away with no obligations at all simply because he refused to get married? Because I definitely don’t. And what about men who promise they will marry their partner and then refuse and by then they already have kids? What realistically can that woman do about it?

Exactly. The current system allows men to basically have all the societal and emotional benefits of marriage and a family (because society no longer cares if people are married so there is no stigma) but with zero obligation. It’s beyond unfair. I can’t believe people think it works really well when stuff like this is a daily occurrence.

@Startinganew32 but cohabitation laws work both ways and protect both parties, just as marriage does.

If a high-earning woman falls pregnant and ends up in a contract with the father who then totally screws her over, she could end up paying him money.

Contracts should always, always be something both parties go into with their eyes wide open. Women who don't have the means to support themselves independently shouldn't be having babies with men who haven't married them.

Low earning women still have biological clocks and the overwhelming urge for babies. We are still mammals, just like you.

As you are going to start soon with practical conversations, you'd be best off clearing your head ready....

You cant POSSIBLY love him. He has treated you like absolute shit. Used from the get go. Lied from the start (of course it wasn't better for the mortgage to be just him, well it was for him). Had an affair. Is an alcoholic. Threatened to make you homeless. There is absolutely nothing to love there. Make a list of how awful he is and just keep looking at it until you realise you don't love him. Maybe you did at the beginning when your low self esteem meant you missed the red flags so you're clinging on to that? He certainly doesn't love you and never did.

If that paragraph sounded harsh, please realise I'm trying to help you. Get your crying done now and move on. You need to go in to all your negotiations with a clear unemotional head. Otherwise you will do his bidding in an attempt to prove to him how much he still loves you and he will trample on you even more.

Good luck op, in X amount of time, you'll be skipping down the street. It'll come.

Only if the dad had given up work or gone part time to care for their children. In which case I think it’s fair enough that she’d have to pay him something because she’s benefited from him doing that, letting her get on with her career.
Basically if you have a child with someone and you carry on your career unencumbered, you accept that you now also have an obligation to the other parent who has allowed you to do that.

And your example is very very rare. About 95% of people fucked over by the current law are women.

It’s not “his” house, it’s the family home

Not legally. It’s his house, which the family have been living in. The OP needs to get some advice quickly. Could you get an appointment with the CAB? You need to find out what support you might be entitled to.

Can my ex just decide to have children 50% of the time?

Usually, yes, if that’s what he wants.

he says he could have the children 100% of the time as he can provide safe housing with him.

This could also be true. It sounds like he is trying to push for a solution.

Talk to him, find out what he wants? Does he want to sell his house so that he has money to house himself? Does he want you to move out?

How much is the mortgage?

50/50 works great for me and people I know, dad has to step up and becomes a better parent, you get a break to just be you, kids should see both parents equally (unless abuse etc) and you end up being a better mum as you've missed them a bit and have more patience, spend more quality time with them as you've had a break.