Refuse to make financial sacrifices for DSS

[usernc76482]

NC but regular poster. Cannot sleep as I'm drowning in a sea of anxiety.

I'll keep this brief: we (DH and i) can no longer afford to send DSS (Yr 12) to private school. ExW and husband comfortable but I don't think in a position to pay till he finishes secondary education next year. ExW and husband also have DC together who are also at the private school), but I mean, why would the step dad pay for his step son to go to private school when that is my DHs job and part of the original court order? ExW does not work.

At the same time, our DC1 has started at private pre prep (Reception) in September last year. It's looking unsustainable being able to send her there now and we will have to pull her out next term.

We could afford to send one or the other but not both children.

So: we COULD continue sending DSS to school if we take our DC out. I just don't think that's fair? If the children's are going to suffer it should be all of them?

It's been a very financially rocky few years but we had made it work, sold our car, no holidays etc. to continue sending DSS to school. We rent so cannot get a loan or anything against a property.

I'm fed up of making sacrifices.

Bringing back memories now. My dad paid court ordered private school fees for the school
he had insisted we went to. Then refused to contribute a penny towards our university education. Slightly different as our DM had no new partner and no money. Following a huge argument about the cost of DSIS railcard neither of us have ever spoken to him again.

I can’t believe you think that all the children should suffer if one of them has to. It would be disastrous to pull your stepson out of school before his last year.

If the op can't afford to help DSS through uni the can't help

But they can afford to, they just want to spend that money on another younger child instead.
Would you ever tell your child "sorry, you're on your own for Uni, if you can even manage to do it that way, I have money but I'm spending it on private preprep for your infant half sister"? I know I wouldn't.

@RedToothBrush

Bottomline her is the precious daughter can't go to private school because her parents can't afford it.

What an utterly vile thing to say about a 4 year old. "Precious daughter"?

You should be ashamed of yourself. But you probably aren't.

Dreadful.

@OwMyNeck

If the op can't afford to help DSS through uni the can't help

But they can afford to, they just want to spend that money on another younger child instead.
Would you ever tell your child "sorry, you're on your own for Uni, if you can even manage to do it that way, I have money but I'm spending it on private preprep for your infant half sister"? I know I wouldn't.

As opposed to your younger child asking why they've not gone to private school like their big brother and saying oh sorry we had to pay your brother through uni....

That's fair though?

It sound like the op can not afford to send either and they will have to downsize to keep paying for dss they lost everything including there house what should have happened was dss be pulled from school when that happened I would return to court and get this all reassessed and you are worse off then when the arrangement was made or try and come up with a solution with ex wife either way you cant afford it are you payment extra to the ex for maintenance too

Given there is more than one younger dc I doubt private school for them is realistic anyway, even should ss be out of the financial equation.

This posting could just as easily be stated as, " I knowingly married a man with a substantial amount of court ordered debt and now I am tired of the lifestyle that I have to live because of his debt. I knew the ratio of income to debt when I married him , but after several years it is tiring to have to live on a restricted budget. "

What advice would we give to a poster who made those statements? The scenario is exactly the same. They OP married knowing the husband's Court Ordered debt and the amount of time for which he was obligated to pay. The situation takes on a heart tugging aspect because it touches on children, but actually when distilled it is only about the debt to income ratio of which the OP was fully informed prior to adding additional debt.

Sorry I’m late to the thread but 100% keep DSS in (if you can afford to).

As long as you are reading to your DD then I can’t see her being at much of a disadvantage to starting private school a few years later as the early years are mainly play and socialising anyway.

As she is so young DSS may also be in a position to volunteer to help out financially in the future with her education. So the more opportunities he has now the better. Your situation may also change in the future where you can’t ago it’s to send DD in anyway so maybe it’s better to find her a decent state school now and then see how your situation is in a couple of years time.

As opposed to your younger child asking why they've not gone to private school like their big brother and saying oh sorry we had to pay your brother through uni....That's fair though?

They can go to private school in a couple of years when the brother has finshed Uni. That would be fair.

My point in a nutshell is that you should treat your children in two families the same as you would if they were in one, as much as is possible. I think that makes for the fairest outcomes. Children don't have to get exactly the same of everything for it to be fair, its normal that things change over time. It's the essence of fairness that matters.
There is no scenario where cutting off your oldest child to pay for totally unneccessary private school for a very young child could ever be considered fair.

You, DH and his Ex have to decide how to allocate the available funds. None of DH's children can have an entire primary AND secondary private education because you can't afford it.

It's a choice. Private primary ed, OR private secondary ed.

In your shoes , facing that choice for your own DC, I'd choose the latter.

But leaving aside the whoel step child v. your child thing. You sound as if you are going to ridiculous lengths to pay for private school
I think it owuld be worth sitting down and asking why?
Where do you want to be in 15 years? Owning a home? Holidays? What sort of life?
Is it really the best thing for you as a family to sacrifice everything for this education?
Have you even been to or looked at the local schools? Once you aren't paying school fees, and as you arerenting, you could move to any area you like to be close to a good state school

Absolutely this. I cannot understand why private education is so important to OP and her DH that they would choose it for their dc at the expense of everything else. To put themselves under that kind of pressure when it’s not necessary to do so is crazy to me and burying their heads in the sand while hoping it somehow all works out as they’ve done isn’t indicative of financially savvy people.

I can’t help thinking this is more an aspirational/lifestyle matter than about what’s really best for them as a family. I sympathise with anybody whose business fails but trying to maintain the standard of living as you once had/envisaged when you cannot afford it is just foolish. Like everyone else they need to cut their cloth to suit their measure.

@OwMyNeck

As opposed to your younger child asking why they've not gone to private school like their big brother and saying oh sorry we had to pay your brother through uni....That's fair though?

They can go to private school in a couple of years when the brother has finshed Uni. That would be fair.

My point in a nutshell is that you should treat your children in two families the same as you would if they were in one, as much as is possible. I think that makes for the fairest outcomes. Children don't have to get exactly the same of everything for it to be fair, its normal that things change over time. It's the essence of fairness that matters.
There is no scenario where cutting off your oldest child to pay for totally unneccessary private school for a very young child could ever be considered fair.

Ah right so as long as it's the second child losing out, it's fair. I see.

As opposed to your younger child asking why they've not gone to private school like their big brother and saying oh sorry we had to pay your brother through uni....That's fair though?

Yes it is. They can help find the older sibling through university and then pay for any others to go to private secondary school. Perfectly fair.

I do wonder why they are spending money they can’t afford on a small child to go to pre prep when they are so clearly struggling though-seems very odd.

@Tiredoftattler

This posting could just as easily be stated as, " I knowingly married a man with a substantial amount of court ordered debt and now I am tired of the lifestyle that I have to live because of his debt. I knew the ratio of income to debt when I married him , but after several years it is tiring to have to live on a restricted budget. "

What advice would we give to a poster who made those statements? The scenario is exactly the same. They OP married knowing the husband's Court Ordered debt and the amount of time for which he was obligated to pay. The situation takes on a heart tugging aspect because it touches on children, but actually when distilled it is only about the debt to income ratio of which the OP was fully informed prior to adding additional debt.

Presumably she didn't expect to lose everything she had

@Howshouldibehave

As opposed to your younger child asking why they've not gone to private school like their big brother and saying oh sorry we had to pay your brother through uni....That's fair though?

Yes it is. They can help find the older sibling through university and then pay for any others to go to private secondary school. Perfectly fair.

I do wonder why they are spending money they can’t afford on a small child to go to pre prep when they are so clearly struggling though-seems very odd.

So it's perfectly fair that the first child is privately schooled from day 1 and the 2nd only gets secondary? Why?

It's just one more year, OP and I think it could do him a lot of harm to have his education disrupted now, as well as damaging his relationship with his father. I think the earlier advice to talk to the school was good - there may be a way to do this without it being painful. I also wonder that the ex would be ok with her DS's being potentially damaged while her younger children are hunky dory. She and her DH may well want to contribute.

DS's education

We don't know that dss did have primary in private education though. The family circumstances have changed. This seems more about maintaining appearances than reality.

Ah right so as long as it's the second child losing out, it's fair. I see

What are they losing out on? The first child lost out in other ways...the younger ones have their 2 parents together for a start, the older one does not.

I suspect massive snobbery about state school (even good state schools) and massive resentment towards the "old" family. As if a child is scarred for life by not going to a "pre-prep"!
FWIW, OP, it's quite common for aristocratic types to send their children to state primary until they get to prep school age.
Meeting "ordinary" children won't hurt your DD - more likely the opposite.

So your DH is the father and you're the stepmum? And DSS is not living with you?

In that case, Not. Your. Problem. It's DH's son not yours. DH, not you, should be the one making sacrifices.

You mention him trying to do a business and already having failed. Well he should fuck right off with that and apply for salaried jobs in order to pay for his obligations. It's not right that you're being put in hardship because your DH is full of wishful thinking.

Ah right so as long as it's the second child losing out, it's fair. I see

You think that removing the eldest child at this time is a reasonable course of action?

So it's perfectly fair that the first child is privately schooled from day 1 and the 2nd only gets secondary? Why?

It's not fair. But removing a child at a crucial point in their education isn't fair either, is it? Not least because the chances of him being able to pick up his education exactly as he left on in a state 6th form or school is unlikely. The younger child wouldn't feel it in quite the same way and could go back to private education once the eldest has left.

And of course, the situation is such that a commitment was made, in court, to the elder child's education and any opportunity to rescind that hasn't been taken. By the time it gets into court now and is sorted, he'll more than likely be into year 13 and if the courts see it's one child or the other, they're not going to rule in favour of the younger.

Does it suck? Yes. But equal is rarely about getting the same. Sod all to do with being 'second'. And 'second' in this case, has a slightly different set of parents to the first and a different set of circumstances which perhaps could (or could not) have been forseen.

In your shoes I would send your child to state primary, then look at private for secondary. Some private schools also have provision for years 6, 7 and 8.

@OwMyNeck

Ah right so as long as it's the second child losing out, it's fair. I see

What are they losing out on? The first child lost out in other ways...the younger ones have their 2 parents together for a start, the older one does not.

BINGO!! that makes up for everything doesn't it!