Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Step-parenting

Connect with other Mumsnetters here for step-parenting advice and support.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Advice for my daughter

77 replies

NotthespecialONE · 16/02/2016 08:04

I will be drumming this into my daughters head.

DO NOT get into relationship/marry a man that already has children, run for the hills! Too much hassle than it's worth. There's always some crazy, bitter ex to deal with! (Very rare you don't)

You and any children you have with him will lose out because society has it that 'first families' are higher in the pecking order.

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Auti · 16/02/2016 17:18

NNalreadyinuse · 16/02/2016 17:20

Obviously the answer to that varies from family to family, but it is usually a shed load more than the CSA calculates!

When a couple split, the kids still need to housed, fed, clothed, swimming lessons paid for etc. That doesn't go away because he (usually) has acquired a second family. If the ex wife was a sahp, her career has bern affected while his has continued, so she is financially disadvantaged. I think most men know that if, when they were living with the ex, their salary was used up on family expenses, then why do they think it will be okay to just hand over a small percentage, once they have moved out?

My belief is that if you cannot maintain your first family properly, then you have no business getting a second one.

DontCareHowIWantItNow · 16/02/2016 17:23

My belief is that if you cannot maintain your first family properly, then you have no business getting a second one.

Works both ways. Neither parent should in that case.

RudeElf · 16/02/2016 17:27

I hate the way these threads go. Too many people not willing to see that their view is coloured by so much bad feeling and possibly lies somewhere along the line. Either lies to themselves or from their partners about some aspect or another. Its awful to see.

Matilda2013 · 16/02/2016 17:39

When a couple split, the kids still need to housed, fed, clothed, swimming lessons paid for etc. That doesn't go away because he (usually) has acquired a second family

Can I just say the only thing that bothers me here is that yes they still need housed but why should the dad foot the bill for both a house for him and his kids to live in and contribute to another house? Other than that and possibly the food I agree all of these should be shared between the parents although we foot the bill for all of dsds dance activity so it isn't just one way

Matilda2013 · 16/02/2016 17:41

Oh and for what it's worth I never pictured falling in love with a man with a child who does? but it's how it goes. My parents weren't thrilled at first but they love both now. And he doesn't have a crazy ex. Yes we probably all have things that annoy each of us but we get along and all parent very well together

swingofthings · 16/02/2016 17:44

I think if everyone could somehow put their own negative feelings aside if only for one day and try to step into the person they feel aggravated by, they might get a better idea of how the other feel and therefore be more understanding, that is on both sides of the coin.

I agree Unerved that you have to have been there to understand what it is like for someone to go from sharing a happy family with your partner and children to suddenly though no fault of yours have to accept that you are out of that picture and someone else is taking your place in that frame.

Saying that, there are also resident parents who chose to go to someone else taking the kids leaving an aggrieved partner who is in an even worse situation as only seeing the kids every other week-end, but who can't cope with them getting on with their lives.

If my kids even get with someone who already has children, the advice I would give them is to just be themselves and not to try to hard to make everyone happy because the more you do, the more you'll be resented. That and if things get difficult, before trying to validate your feelings to the other party, try to gain understanding as to why they are feeling and acting the way they do.

NNalreadyinuse · 16/02/2016 17:59

Matilda, if the ex wife was a sahp then as a couple they made choices that will gave a long term impact on her earning potential. If they split up, I think he still needs to fulfill the financial commitment he made to support the family. It is very unfair that in a divorce sahp are financially disadvantaged. Until she can earn what she would have, had she not sah, he should continue to support her. If he cannot do so and have a new family, then he should forego the new family (and vice versa if the sahp is the dad).

Where a couple both work and have decent incomes I think the nrp should still pay towards the house his dc live in and 50% of what it genuinely costs to support them. Their lifestyle shouldn't worsen so that either of their parents can move on to the next family. The priority should be the kids each person already committed to having and it is selfish to cut what is paid to the first dc in order to have more. It is hard because divorce does mean that 2 houses need to be paid for but there is no more money.

Obviously there is no hard and fast rule because all families have differing incomes and needs. I'm just saying that the first family doesn't become less expensive just because one of the parents wants a second family.

DontCareHowIWantItNow · 16/02/2016 18:02

Where a couple both work and have decent incomes I think the nrp should still pay towards the house his dc live in and 50% of what it genuinely costs to support themWhere a couple both work and have decent incomes I think the nrp should still pay towards the house his dc live in and 50% of what it genuinely costs to support them

That would have to be an extremely good wage to maintain 2 homes and pay 50%.

Should the RP also then contribute to the NRP and their home as they may also have the DC staying there?

NNalreadyinuse · 16/02/2016 18:11

The point is too maintain the standard of living that the dc have always had. It is not about paying for the house of the RP, it is about paying for the home the children live in. The RP has to maintain a house that is suitable for the dc to live in full time, whereas a nrp has flexibility. If the dc are with each parent 50/50 then both need an appropriate house. For me it hinges on what the financial position was of each party at the time of divorce. Often it is women who are left with the children and no money.

NNalreadyinuse · 16/02/2016 18:12

To maintain. Not too!

Shutthatdoor · 16/02/2016 18:22

The point is too maintain the standard of living that the dc have always had.

As pp has said. Unless the NRP is an extremely high earner this although a nice sentiment isn't possible.

Not many people earn enough to maintain 2 homes fully.

NNalreadyinuse · 16/02/2016 18:25

Which is why, if they can't do so, they have no business adding a second family to the mix.

Shutthatdoor · 16/02/2016 18:26

Which is why, if they can't do so, they have no business adding a second family to the mix.

Neither should the RP either though.

RudeElf · 16/02/2016 18:26

This is going round in circles. As it always does.

NNalreadyinuse · 16/02/2016 18:27

Agreed. The kids who already exist should be the priority of both parents.

AcrossthePond55 · 16/02/2016 18:36

You know, that was a decision I made for myself in my 20s, that I would never get involved with a man who had children. Not because of any bad experiences on my part, but just because I didn't want the additional 'hassle'. I don't think it was a particularly selfish decision, but it did 'narrow the field' a bit.

I admire people who can take on the blessings and burdens of stepchildren. But I don't think there's anything wrong with saying it's not for you. Nor do I think that the OP is wrong for advising her daughter not to do it. But from the looks of it, it sounds as if her daughter is probably going to discover that for herself since it appears OP is in a situation that she feels is unfair to herself and to her child.

Unnerved · 16/02/2016 18:56

I like to think i tried to see both sides of the coin here and each situation is completely different. I always try to see it from ex partners view and mine and come to some common ground where possible.

I think people tend to get blindsided by one aspect of a situation rather than seeing the situation from both points of view. However in regards to maintence issue whether its a man or woman should contribute to the cost of an up keep of a child, it should not fall totally onto one parent regardless if that parent is well off. I do find it annoying when some begrudge maintence being paid. My DH works FT so provides for DS and the household. Children are extremely expensive and the costs increase as the number of children increase. I believe DS DF should contribute which he does.

A breakdown of maintence

School dinners 10.25 a week per child
Complete school uniform 70-100 per child
School shoes ( if there anything like my DS his lasted two terms) 20-25. So you could be replacing them every few month
Clothing
Footwear
Gas/Electric
Food
School trips
Activities
Bus fair ( as they get older)
Childcare ( which a solictor told me is classes as seperate to maintence)

If the children are younger additional expenses.
Nappies 4.50-6 per week
Forumla 10.00 -15.00 1 drum and half a week
Clothing 30 a month
Baby food 20 a week

I might of missed some other stuff

Matilda2013 · 16/02/2016 21:15

Well if no one is a stay at home parent and they earn around the same I believe they should both provide their own housing and then split the costs from there. Obviously sahp are different but I didn't realise we were talking about that as not all rp are sahp.

No one wishes step families for their kids I don't think but people do go on to fall in love even if it isn't easy. And then everyone should hopefully get along and try keep things as settled as possible for the children. All we can do I guess is hope for the best!

Unnerved · 16/02/2016 21:20

I dont understand the whole provide their own housing statement. Maintence isnt used to pay rent or a mortage but for the stuff i have listed above. The allocation of maintence most likely just covers half the costs let alone rent or mortage payment. Unless the DF is a high earner

Matilda2013 · 16/02/2016 21:26

Sorry I don't mean they shouldn't pay for all the stuff you listed I agree with all of that plus anything else for the child. Just if they both have to pay a mortgage/rent it seems a little strange to add that in? Maybe just me though.

Matilda2013 · 16/02/2016 21:27

Also I realise most don't pay anywhere near that I was just talking about in the ideal world where they do pay for what it costs this isn't coming across how I wanted so I may just stop

RudeElf · 16/02/2016 21:29

I've never understood why childcare costs arent deemed a bill of the NRPs for CSA calculations.

Unnerved · 16/02/2016 21:31

I get 112 a month maintence for 1child works out approx 28 a week for my child. Not much in the scheme of things

Unnerved · 16/02/2016 21:33

I never asked for help toward my childcare costs but working full time as a single parent even with help from tax credits it was a big bill to foot.

Flip

1 2 3 4