Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Step-parenting

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Step parents and maintenance

430 replies

Anon197 · 01/06/2018 15:58

Just a quick one...

My DH recently lost his job and is struggling to find work. My income is the only income (no support benefits wise).

We have two very young children together and he has a child with his ex.

They share custody and when my step child is at ours I pay for everything.

His ex has thrown a wobbler because I won’t pay a proportion of my wage to her.

What would you do?

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
funinthesun18 · 01/06/2018 19:53

Personally, I don't agree with it. I don't think Step Parents should be liable for anything, but what I don't agree with is that one is expected to be fully responsible whilst the other not at all.

Each stepparent is responsible for their own respective household, each with different circumstances. If one chooses to be in a relationship with a resident parent then that's their choice, but the other stepparent (the nrp's partner) shouldn't have to match up to it by giving the other household money.

Anon197 · 01/06/2018 19:54

swingofthings so he should pay for his own kids when they are here but I should pay for his child when they are with their mother?

OP posts:
Anon197 · 01/06/2018 19:54

You don’t receive pay when you’ve been unfairly dismissed. Dismissed being the operative word

OP posts:
swingofthings · 01/06/2018 20:02

. If one chooses to be in a relationship with a resident parent then that's their choice, but the other stepparent (the nrp's partner) shouldn't have to match up to it by giving the other household money.
Sorry but that's a ridiculous statement. Both the pwc's partner and the nrp have a choice to be with their respective partner. An pwc's could be working away for the week and so have even less contact with his step-children that the nrpp, yet he would be liable to take over financial support when the nrpp isn't. It is just easier to work it this way for the government, but it certainly doesn't make it morally right.

swingofthings so he should pay for his own kids when they are here but I should pay for his child when they are with their mother?
If he has them as often as you claim (which would mean that you both are entitled to more than 6 weeks holidays a year), then his maintenance contribution would be low unless he earned a very high salary.

As said, I don't think you should be paying, but I think your OH should get another job, any job, around your working hours to try to continue to contribute.

Still don't get why he isn't being paid currently if he hasn't been sacked yet.

swingofthings · 01/06/2018 20:03

Sorry, you mean that he is taking his company to court? Well let's hope he wins, get a good pay out and then he can pay the maintenance that he couldn't pay out of it.

funinthesun18 · 01/06/2018 20:04

Sorry but that's a ridiculous statement. Both the pwc's partner and the nrp have a choice to be with their respective partner. An pwc's could be working away for the week and so have even less contact with his step-children that the nrpp, yet he would be liable to take over financial support when the nrpp isn't. It is just easier to work it this way for the government, but it certainly doesn't make it morally right.

What do you think should happen then?

swingofthings · 01/06/2018 20:05

What do you think should happen then?
As said above, I don't think any step-parents' income should be taken into consideration only the income of both parents.

swingofthings · 01/06/2018 20:06

And that to include student finance and child benefit. Oh and being fined if a parent takes a child on holiday during term time!

Anon197 · 01/06/2018 20:11

swimgofthings I feel like you haven’t actually understood the post.
We used to pay maintenance and have SD every weekend and all school hols. We have 2 children together who are below school ages (meaning we have to pay for childcare).
We have lost my DH salary. So I am having to work over time to try make up the difference (equalling his salary is physically impossible so our children have had to come out of childcare). He needs a job that will cover childcare costs and the overtime I am currently working or it is pointless him working.
I earn enough to cover rent, clothes for the kids, bills, fuel and a basic existence for our family.

Husbands ex expects me to pay her to raise her own child.
I am currently paying for SD food clothes and a roof over her head while she is with us.

Would you expect your ex’s girlfriend to pay his maintenance? Would you brand her a vile soulless human being if she didn’t? Or would you put an extra shift in on a weekend when you dcome not have the kids and make up the difference yourself?

OP posts:
funinthesun18 · 01/06/2018 20:11

When it comes to benefits though they will be taken in to consideration like they are for any household. Both parents could be claiming housing benefit, which pays towards a big monthly expense and it may go down as a result of a new partner moving in. It's just part of that choice to move someone in.
Both stepparents' incomes are left out when it comes to maintenance though, as it should be. It doesn't go up because of an nrp's partner's income and it doesn't go down because of an rp's partner's income.

swingofthings · 01/06/2018 20:34

Sorry but it is you who is not getting it OP. My point is that legally, you don't have to pay support towards your SD. Not a penny. As your OH isn't able to pay his support any longer, the responsibility falls 100% on his ex to make up the difference somehow. If she can't, it's not your or your OH's problem.

Yet if it was her losing her job, your OH, or you wouldn't be expected to pay more. If she has a partner though, he would be expected to pick up the difference. She wouldn't be able to claim anything to support her children if he earned enough even if he has maintenance to pay towards children from his previous relationship.

You don't have to pay, so you don't have to worry about it, but I personally find it disgraceful that you're the one working overtime to make up his loss, meaning that all of it goes to your family rather than him working some hours when some of this would then have to go to his first child.

When my ex stopped paying maintenance, it put me under massive stress. The money didn't go on luxuries, it went on essentials. Like your OH, it started with him being sacked. I didn't see it coming, I suddenly had £300 less a month (two children) and with high childcare and a mortgage to pay, I had sleepless night worrying how I would pay both. In the end, I had to count every penny and use my credit card until I was able to go for a higher paid job. When that happened, I decided to never rely on maintenance any longer because I couldn't do through this any longer, and so my ex never paid a penny after that and I didn't pursue him.

So however much I respect how his loss of a job has affected you, I sympathise with the ex, especially as in your case, at least you don't have to pay childcare any longer, whereas she might not have an obvious bill that she gets to cut.

As said, let's hope that he wins his case and if he does, let's hope he pays some maintenance back out of it and more importantly, let's hope for everyone that he finds another decently paid job very quickly.

Namethatchange · 01/06/2018 20:46

Don't give her anything. When my ex lost his job I didn't get anything for a year, but my children are also my responsibility and even if we had still been together I would still have had less money coming in and would have had to step up accordingly. Completely different scenario if you choose not to work but this isn't the case.

TwoDots · 01/06/2018 20:50

Swing you are coming across really badly. I understand what you're saying but you're basically agreeing that op isn't responsible but giving her a hard time (finding it hard to believe no redundancy, having the kids all of the holidays etc).

We are on the same page though. I think you agree op is not responsible and playing her part

The bit you do t seem to get is that if iOS partner works, their kids will have to go back into childcare so he needs to earn enough. So picking up a few hours here and there on a low wage is t really feasible

JesusChristonabike · 01/06/2018 20:53

Swing understands entirely, they just have a different opinion.

I agree with the premise that if I could continue to contribute then I would.

You obviously can't and if I was the ex I wouldn't expect you to. However, I would be likely to be pissed off if my finances were also affected even if it was no fault of yours or your dp.

I doubt his ex knows the ins and outs of your financial situation and probably presumes you have savings or you make more than you do.

swingofthings · 01/06/2018 21:00

The bit you do t seem to get is that if iOS partner works, their kids will have to go back into childcare so he needs to earn enough.
That's the part I have an issue with. Indeed, I don't think OP should have to pay, but I totally disagree that her OP should do what suit his new family without caring about the impact on his other child. OP has said that she is working extra hours but instead, her OP could work when OP isn't (so no need for childcare) and then send at least something in maintenance.

It comes across from OP though that she thinks the priority is to make sure to take step to lessen the impact of his loss of salary, but doesn't seem to have any care of the impact of the other child. That's the issue that I have in this case.

The other issue that I brought up, which is nothing to do with OP is the social double standard between pwcp and nrpp. One instance was one that made the new locally when a nrp decided to take his kids on holiday outside of school holiday. The pwc didn't agree, but he said he would take them anyway. This resulted in a fine, not only to the pwc, but to the pwcp too. What has he got to do with it? He would have had absolutely no right to stop the children going with their dad, yet he is the one punished for it. pwcp get all the crap when it comes to paying, but absolutely no rights.

swingofthings · 01/06/2018 21:02

Sorry confusing my OPs and OHs :)

Pleasebeafleabite · 01/06/2018 21:03

He needs a job that will cover childcare costs and the overtime I am currently working or it is pointless him working

Good luck to DH finding this well paying job whilst being sahd to 2 pre-schoolers. Whilst also pursuing his unfair dismissal claim

This thread is one big polished turd imho and I’m fairly certain it’s a recent maintenance avoiding scenario presented differently

swingofthings · 01/06/2018 21:04

By the way, just to add that I totally disagree with her threatening stopping/reducing contact, unless you've said that she would then have to do all the travel if she didn't before because you/your OH can't afford to any longer.

swingofthings · 01/06/2018 21:09

We have suggested his child move here as DH is currently a SAHD. This was refused point blank
And just another point on this. This really wouldn't have helped communication. For one, that's assuming that she lives in the same town and going to school would have been as easy because otherwise, that's a risible suggestion.

Even if it is the case, the most likely expensive cost to the ex is her mortgage/rent. Is she expected to put her house for sale/give notice to her landlord to look to find somewhere smaller to lower her costs when your OH is looking for another job and so hopefully the situation is only for a few months and the child would then return to her mum, so she would again need to move to a bigger place?

However much the ex has no choice but to accept the situation, a bit of sympathy for how it might be affecting her too would have probably helped communication rather than suggesting that the solution is for the child to move with her father.

swingofthings · 01/06/2018 21:12

This thread is one big polished turd imho and I’m fairly certain it’s a recent maintenance avoiding scenario presented differently
I really hope this is not the case. nrps who give up their job to become SAHD whilst feeling no shame that it means stopping supporting their children from another relationship are the lowest of the lowest.

funinthesun18 · 01/06/2018 21:19

swing That fine was obviously meant for the dad. They send 2 fines (1 per parent) to the house where the child lives. The pwcp should have disputed having to pay it and told them to send it to the father instead.
The mum shouldn't have had to pay either really, but they still fine each parent when one parent takes the children on holiday even if the other parent disagrees. She maybe should have put it in writing to the school beforehand that she didn't agree.

TwoDots · 01/06/2018 21:20

That isn't the case at all. A man has lost his job, looks after his kids to lower childcare and is looking for a job. There is nothing untoward in this at all

TwoDots · 01/06/2018 21:20

And it's probably hard to communicate with a person when they are throwing insults like a child

TwoDots · 01/06/2018 21:26

Swing I completely understand. In an ideal world that would probably work. But finding a job (and quickly) which works perfectly around ops hours that will pay enough for the shortfall in their house, plus paying maintenance isn't as simple as you might think

Anon197 · 01/06/2018 21:30

pleasebeafleabite He has no issues paying maintenance, hence why he has done it for the past 8 years. And why they share custody. But we have ended up in a situation that may seem impossible for others.
Let me guess you’re a single mum who’s ex doesn’t pay you so you assume all dads are the same?
If we were trying to avoid paying for my SD then surely we’d be the ones tapping his ex up for money to pay for SD whilst she is here.
What I am saying is that why can she say I have a moral obligation to pay for my step daughter so that she doesn’t have to?
She can afford to go out every weekend and go on holidays with SD so why can’t she tighten her belt a little for a few months?
Or should I just bow down to whatever she wants because she had a child to my DH years before I even knew him?
If we had money to spare then we would help out but instead I am being berated for not paying for someone else’s child.

OP posts: