would you be mad at this?

[mummatotwo]

DH and I agreed an amount of what we could afford in a change to his maintenance due to change of job and much lower income. He is dire with money BTW and for years I've bailed him out several times,but never learns I've even taken his bank card off him so he doesn't go over his overdraft

Not a great relationship with dss always texting and asking for money and he obliges. He never discusses it with me and everything is sneeky and behind my back. Our wages and money are our household income and we should discuss and agree these things I think.

We are going on on Hols soon we agree for me to pay hol and for him to provide the spending money, he's very OD at the bank again so now I've got to use my wages for spending money, which is going to leave us very tight for the next couple of months also I worked loads last month extra as we have lots if bills coming up to pay

I've just found out again by accident he's given hundred pounds out to the dss, I'm gobsmacked

[Petal02]

Typo! Should read "can neither afford nor accept"

[ChippingInHopHopHop]

Drastic?

Nope, the only way you can get through this. But as I said, I'd be LTB for his lying and 'not giving a shit about you'.

[Petal02]

What does LTB stand for?

[catsmother]

"leave the bastard" !!!

[wrinklyraisin]

"Your" contribution to the family finances shouldn't be paying for his son's maintenance surely?! He needs to be doing whatever is necessary to ensure he can afford to support his child. Your money shouldn't come into the equation at all as its not counted in the eyes of the CSA in determining maintenance is it? So I would go back to separate finances. He's shown he can't be trusted with your money to be spent on your family. He should grow a pair and say no to his son. It's not your personal income that should be used in maintenance and handouts for your stepchild unless you specifically agree to it, or at least that's how I see it. To take your income from the family pot and use it that way is tantamount to theft IMO.

[Arisbottle]

The deceit and lack of money management would annoy me . I couldn't be angry at my husband giving money to his son.

[Petal02]

Arisbottle - but what if your DH gave a sizeable chunk of money to his son, without telling/asking you, which then left you short of money?

[Arisbottle]

As I said the dishonesty would annoy me. When I met my husband, I had to support him because he was supporting his ex and son, I made that choice to settle down with a man who had a previous more important commitment and therefore chose to make sacrifices.

[wrinklyraisin]

I'm with a man who has a child and he pays a size able amount of maintenance. But it's from HIS salary not mine. My salary supports the two of us, plus we buy treats etc for my dsd from the joint pot. But as far as maintenance goes, that's his responsibility. I'm not sacrificing my salary to support his child or ex wife, why should I? I'm more than happy to contribute to new shoes or an outfit or a book. But the maintenance is nothing to do with me and I don't agree that just because I'm choosing to be with a divorced man who has a child, I should sacrifice any of my salary to fund their day to day living. My OH would NEVER ask not just assume my money could be used for that. My salary funds OUR family life, which includes incidental expenses for my dsd but certainly not maintaining her and her mother.

[Petal02]

Wrinklyraisin, I'm in the same camp as you. Just because you marry a man with an ex and children, does not mean you become a martyr to the cause!

[Arisbottle]

It is not about being a martyr, far from it I chose a man who looked after his wife because statistics show that is likely to be me one day!

Perhaps it is linked to the way that money is viewed, we don't have separate finances and so there isn't his money and my money but our money - and our money has to support our stepson as well as the children who live at home full time.

[Arisbottle]

Wrinkly but you are supporting your stepchildren because if you did not support your biological children to the extent that you did, your DH would need to, which would affect the amount of maintenance you he could pay his children.

Supporting your stepchildren is not just about money directly coming from your wage, it is about your life choices. For example when DH and I got married, we could not have the wedding we wants because he had a family to support already. When we had our first son together, I had to go back to work within weeks, because he already had a commitment to his original family.

[Petal02]

when we had our son, I had to go back to work within weeks, as he already had commitments to his original family

That's dreadful! Do you honestly not mind that your husband clearly prioritises his 'first family' over you and your son? I'm not saying either side should come first or second. But surely there should be parity, at the very least ?

[Arisbottle]

There is parity, with our later children I have taken years of maternity leave. We wanted a large family, we have four of our own and hope to have more so we needed to get breeding quickly .

My husband had made a commitment to his ex and their son, it would not have been fair to have said to her that because my new wife wants lots of children we have to forget that arrangement. I know that if my DH made a commitment to me he would honour it and not forget it because something new or exciting came his way. (Not that I am that exciting!) He shows that same respect to the mother of his first son.

Our children are all treated equally , but equality does not mean the same. our eldest son has special needs, so in some ways to treat him equally with the other children means that he needs more time. Our third child is quite challenging in her behaviour , she is treated equally but probably differently to the others. In a similar manner my stepson has needs that my biological children do not have , because his parent's relationship broke down - so although he is treated equally he is sometimes treated differently.

[wrinklyraisin]

My OH and I don't have children together, so I don't have any financial obligations at all other than to working hard so my OH and I can enjoy a good standard of living. If we had children then I would still do/say the same thing though. My OH has a responsibility to his own child to pay maintenance, and that financial arrangement is nothing to do with me. My salary funds my family which includes dsd when she's with us. But I'm not financially responsible for her or her mother at all.

[Arisbottle]

But you do subsidise, because if your husband did not have to support his family he could pay more into your standard of living. Also as you say than the stepchildren are with you, you can't help but find them. They eat your food, live under your roof, they need clothing entertaining etc.

[Petal02]

I don't have children either Wrinkly, and whilst I've got no issue with DH spending an appropriate amount on his ex/DSS, I have no financial responsibility for either of them.

Ok, so DSS is now too old for DH to pay maintenance, but if there had been a time in the past when DH's income had dropped, then the maintenance would have been reduced accordingly, I would not have been topping it up!

[Arisbottle]

If something happened to my DH I would want to carry on supporting my DSS as much as I could, although he is now really a young man so whilst he will need surpporting at university and maybe setting up home, our days of formal maintenance are reaching an end.

[wrinklyraisin]

I agree Aris. I am happy to support dsd under our roof. But I'm not supporting her mother nor am I directly responsible for their maintenance. My OH pays this then the rest if his salary goes into our family pot. He still contributes more than I do. But he also covers more expenses than I do. My understanding is that I don't even see the maintenance money in his bank account, it's not part of our family income that we are "losing" so therefore I can't lament the fact we could have a higher income. The fact is, he's a responsible father, he pays fair and generously for his daughters upkeep, he also works hard to ensure he pays fairly and generously into "our" family pot too. I'm not subsidizing anything. He takes care of his own obligations and I enjoy a good standard of living because I also work hard to take care of my family. Which is me and my OH, and my dsd when she's with us. There's no sacrificing any of my salary to do this. My dsd has a mother and a father, it's up to them to pay for her day to day living, not me.

[Petal02]

I don't mind supporting DSS when he's under our roof either.

[Petal02]

Wrinky, you echo my thoughts in your latest post.

[wrinklyraisin]

Oops I meant to say I agree PETAL not Aris.

I just think the fact OH has a child doesn't automatically mean I should be paying to support her just because I'm with her father. I support MY family very happily. My dsd included in my family when she's staying here. I don't see why I should contribute to her mothers rent/bills/food when the child is legally not my responsibility. I'd hate for her to go hungry or anything. But I'm not going to hand over my hard earned pay to support someone else's child. It's not my responsibility and my OH treats me with respect enough to not assume he can help himself from our family pot to maintain his child. The maintenance never even enters our family pot in the first place.

[Petal02]

I think the majority of us have no issue whatsoever with our DH's paying sensible maintenance - but going back to the OP, most posters would be unhappy to see an un-agreed lump sum being given directly to the step child.

[brdgrl]

My daughter is entitled to the same level of support from DH as his older children. He had two kids before I met him, and I married him. So what? His previous commitments are no more important than his subsequent ones. The children from his first marriage have no right to a higher standard of living than those of his second marriage, and there should be no greater expectation that they be shielded from downturns, either. If the household income goes down or there are money problems, every child in our household will feel the pinch.

Frankly, my DSCs are getting more of the money I earn than my DD is, at present, because my DH is underemployed while he finishes a degree. I tolerate this because it is a temporary situation and my DH needs the support. If he started lying about it and essentially stealing from the household account to give presents to his older children (or anyone else), or if he were not including me in the decisions about our money, that would be unacceptable to me.

Whether a couple has separate accounts or shared ones, there ought to be agreement and full disclosure about major or repeated expenditures, especially in homes where there are financial concerns.

[Petal02]

Brdgrl, you make an excellent point that ''first family' children should not be shielded from financial down turns if their father's income etc drops. I think this is really important otherwise you end up with a 'ring fenced' figure which may become totally unaffordable. If the family was still intact, everyone has to deal with fluctuating fortunes, it should be no different if that family is separated.