Is it her business?

[FruitOnPizzaNoThanks]

Recently lost a pregnancy and have really struggled with feelings of embarrassment and loneliness.

I saw a few posts online about pregnancy loss awareness and how we need to be talking about it so people don't feel it has to be hidden and so with DHs consent I posted on social media that we have been through this and if anyone feels alone, they aren't and that I will be there to listen and talk to them if necessary.

I never put personal things on social media but I just felt like I should offer support because I really could have done with it when it was me.

Anyway, someone has screenshot it to husband's ex who he has a child with and she has messaged him to say we should have told her, she shouldn't have had to find out that way etc...

AIBU to think that actually no, we didn't have to tell her that I'd miscarried?

I'd understand if we announced we were having a baby but are we really obliged to share news of a pregnancy loss? It hasn't affected DC in any way. I went to the hospital with my mother so that DH could still have his contact day etc... I'm always very conscious not to be upset in their presence and other that the odd day where I've been 'poorly in bed' they have been none the wiser.

Both our families and close friends already knew.

All those people on social media know before the mother of my kid kind of thing.

Sorry but being the mother of someone's kid means nothing except that they both have responsibility for the same child. She doesn't get some kind of special pass to know everything that goes on in his life just because she once had a child with him.

She had absolutely no right to send that message.

What I would say though is the fact you have put it on social media where you presumably have mutual friends means there was a chance she was going to find out.

But OP has no issue with her finding out, presumably? It's just that she never felt the need to inform her specifically and the ex has taken issue with that. It's nothing to do with her at all.

ChilledBee I’m sorry, but even money matters or anything else are still not a big enough reason. There is no reason at all why the ex should be given that amount of say over what another woman does with her body. End of.

It's not about asking permission. It is about the fact you have shared responsibilities with one person and will reduce your contribution to have shared responsibilities with another.

Imagine me and you go halves on a car so we each pay half of the monthly payments. Then I decide I also want a car with another poster but to do that, I'll have to change from paying half of our joint payment, to only paying 40%. Now you'll have to pay 60%. Is that fair?

Or what if I'd decide not only to purchase an additional car with another poster, but also help them pay for the other 2 cars they have already, even though someone else is also helping pay those monthly payments. So instead of 60% of our shared monthly payment, now I'm paying for 3 more cars, I pay 30% of our monthly payment that still needs to be paid in full, but still enjoy sharing the ownership of said car with you.

That's how child maintenance works. My husband could leave me with my 3 kids, shack up with someone else with 5 kids and have a kid with them and claim all 6 of those kids were his dependents. Even hers. Even if she gets support from their biological father. So not only would any CM be reduced for his decision to have another biological child, the 5 kids he has taken on as stepkids would reduce the support he gives me.

I'm sorry but on no planet does that render TTC none of the RP's business unless there will be no change to contact or financial support.

You can’t compare buying a car to something personal like ttc ffs. I get what you’re trying to say, but ttc is a very personal matter and not something you should have to run by anyone else.
Yes, existing children are a shared responsibility (for the man and his ex), but the woman who is ttc with the man has no obligation to disclose her reproductive choices to his ex. And he doesn’t really to be honest. Because she doesn’t own his penis.

@Chilledbee There is NO WAY that OP and her partner should be under any obligation to let his ex know that she's had a miscarriage!

I could understand a bit more if they had kept a pregnancy secret until just before the baby was born and then sprung it on the ex along with any financial changes - but there is no way they're obliged to inform her that they're TTC or that they're in the very early stages of pregnancy. It's absolutely no one's business but their own.

Maybe OP's partner wasn't planning to reduce payments or contact at all anyway? I know my OH wouldn't be. If we were having a baby together, he would tell his ex either shortly before or the same day he told his kids, just so that if there was any upset or worries from them she'd be prepared to field that when they're with her. There is no way he'd feel the need to tell her before that point.

Exactly, a car is just property yet you wouldn't be allowed to renege your agreement to pay a set amount just because you want another car. Yet you can do that with children! Disgusting isn't it?!

If you don't want to have to run it by anyone else,you should make sure you can afford to have other children without reducing your support to your existing ones. That is the ONLY way you can justify it.

I'm in my first marriage with 3 kids that we can comfortably support. A 4th wouldn't change our lifestyle terribly. But imagine if I came on here saying that we are struggling to feed and clothe the 3 we have but awwwww, I so want another baby. Even things up! How many people would tell me that I have enough kids and shouldn't have more because I cannot adequately support them? This isn't something that is just unfair to 2nd families. All of us have to contemplate how we will support additional children before we go around making them.

What I do know is that hubby and I didnt have those sorts of commitments when we met so our decision to have children was just between us. The people who were going to parent the children we have. We didnt have any financial commitments or entanglements with others to consider. We didnt even have pets. Maybe those who don't want to have to think about these things stick to partners who are as free as we were when we met.

Plus to be quite honest, when you split up with someone there has to be an awareness that they may move on and your financial agreement could change, in the same way that if you were in a couple and you had another child your financial circumstances would change.

Yeah it's shit because you have no control over the number of further children they may have, but it's just one of those difficult things about splitting up with the other parent.

@bidiby

I've said several times that as long as you dmarent planning to reduce contact or money, you can keep it secret. Most will though. And include any existing children she has as dependents too.

I've read it all now!

No way on this Earth is it anyone's right to know when any other two people are TTC. Those suggesting this have exceeded my MN expectations beyond belief.

This is a married couple. If the ex had such concerns about maintenance as is being suggested as a possibility here, why didn't she just make the assumption that a new baby would be on the cards eventually and plan accordingly?

When my ex and his wife had their new baby, nothing changed - no drop in maintenance, no request for me to keep DC when in labour (which would never have been an issue for me), no reduction in contact. But as soon as he even got engaged, I knew a new baby was highly likely. I never once expected to be told when they were actively working on it.

I'm sorry for your loss, OP. Now the ridiculous ex knows there will hopefully be a new baby at some point in your future. She needs know nothing else now until it's safe arrival is as confirmed as can be.

I think if NRPs did not have the opportunity to reduce the payments for existing children or take on SC as dependents which reduces payments, there would be fewer second families.

Couples do have to take into consideration how further children will affect finances. Or they bloody well should anyway.

@readitandweep

Um... why should the ex have to plan for less financial support from her co-parent? The system shouldn't be that way at all. He agoukdnt be able to reduce his support if he decides to have more kids or take on step kids. The first kids do not magically eat less or grow less because daddy and his new girlfriend want a baby.

I absolutely know that @ChilledBee. I don't agree for one minute that NRP's should be able to cut maintenance on the arrival of new kids, or any partners kids.

But if she's not going to plan for the reduction in maintenance, what exactly would be your point that she should be told in advance?

Bee i absolutely agree with what you’re saying

I’m not massively sure this is the right thread to be saying it on

Op i am sorry for your loss and that you tried a way of coping and it caused tension and stress

Reading the OP, I very much doubt the ex's problem was financial anyway. More like she felt like she should have been told first rather than finding out via social media.

It might have felt harsh to her but she doesn't have any right to demand that.

Wow she's got some nerve and I would be unimpressed with your DH to. This is your personal medical information and you can choose to share it or not. A lot of people choose to keep pregnancy or loss private prior to 12 weeks. She is making this about herself and using it to guilt DH which is quite frankly disgusting given your loss. Could you take some time away from them and stay with your mum? I'm sorry for your loss and well done for having the courage to share your experience of SM.

I'd make sure everyone we knew understood the choice he was making and how it would affect our children. I'd make sure the partner knew because many people who do not have children have no idea how CM works. All they know is that "he pays what they tell him to pay" and they don't know what the agency believe he earns or what that really amounts to. Therefore they don't understand what it means for that to be cut,even by a relatively small percentage.

I've known several women who thought their DP was a "great dad" until it got to their end of their relationship and they saw the reality of how things like support and contact work out.

I had a friend who got pregnant for a guy who she insisted "doesn't pay money but he's always buying them clothes and things". His ex took him to CM when pregnancy was discovered and he had to pay regular money instead of the shopping trips and all the plans they made about her going PT and taking extended leave had to go out the window to accommodate his existing obligations.

So my reasoning for telling is so these guys (because it is mainly dads) cannot repeat this pattern of slacking on parenting duties. It only hurts women who carry the load when the man doesn't bother.

The thing with CM is it's murky at the best of times.

Children all across the UK live differing lifestyles based on what their parents can afford, obviously there is no solid figure of what it actually costs to raise a child per year. It just depends doesn't it - you cut your cloth. After a split, what's affordable for the NRP will fluctuate up and down through life, as it does in all circumstances for all families.

Chilledbee your posts assume that the father in this case is paying the minimum. It may be that he has been paying well over the official CM amount (as my OH does) as he has been able to afford to do this. Just because that has been the situation thus far doesn't mean he will always be able to sustain this, and if OP's OH wants to have another child with her then he should be able to move some of that money back into his own household - which in most cases benefits the existing children too when they are with their NRP.

(Obviously the above assumes that the NRP has regular contact and spend money on his children in his time with them too.)

I'd hazard a guess that the reason NRPs pay above the minimum is because the minimum is a pittance and they are aware of the lifestyle they helped create for those existing kids. Expensive hobbies like ballet and football. Or meat for tea most nights. Stripping that back to have another baby isn't okay. Parents should be aiming to maintain as near as possible lifestyle for the children as they had before the split. It isn't their fault that you a) had them b) got them used to a certain way if life and c) couldn't keep your relationship together.

So no, giving your ex 1k a month for the kids and then taking that down to £200 because you've decided to sprog up is irresponsible and selfish.

So no, giving your ex 1k a month for the kids and then taking that down to £200 because you've decided to sprog up is irresponsible and selfish.

But you're assuming that a parent having a new baby would want to strip that much away from their existing children, when most loving NRPs worth their salt would never want to do that. They might have to make a reduction in order to cover their own rent and bills etc due to their partner being on maternity leave or whatever, but I doubt many would snatch away hundreds just because they're having another child.

Plus pressure from the SM to give what the government says is okay. It happens often. Look on any lone parent forum. You shouldn't have a baby unless you can do it without changing how you support your existing children. That means that you need to be able to make up for NP maternity leave AND still pay what you were paying before. You paid that because you felt it was necessary to raise those kids. If you can't do both then drooling the ball with the older ones isn't an option. You tell your partner that babies just aren't an option because you already have children to support.

Do you also know there are a lot of 2nd partners (again, usually female) who find out way too late that they will be paying the majority of the costs for DC with their partner because they simply do not have the funds to properly contribute to the expenses of having another family.

That means that you need to be able to make up for NP maternity leave AND still pay what you were paying before. You paid that because you felt it was necessary to raise those kids. If you can't do both then drooling the ball with the older ones isn't an option.

I think a lot of the time the guilt the NRP feels at not being around 100% of the time anymore dictates the payment agreed upon at first rather than the actual cost of the children. Also, again assuming the NRP is a fair parent and loves and treats all children equally, the new child will be living a similar lifestyle to the older ones so I wouldn't say it's necessarily dropping the ball on the older kids, unless the new baby will have a massively superior lifestyle.

Do you also know there are a lot of 2nd partners (again, usually female) who find out way too late that they will be paying the majority of the costs for DC with their partner because they simply do not have the funds to properly contribute to the expenses of having another family.

Agree with this though.

Absolutely chilledbee. DHs ex works minimum hours with a teen following several years off work to be with DSS. I went back to work when DD was 10 months and actually work more hours with a toddler than ex does. I have to say, I had no idea it would be this tough but DH cant physically afford to run two households. That, however, doesn't make my family planning any business of his ex providing her level of maintenance remains the same (which it does because they have a long standing private arrangement).