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.

@frazzledasarock

To the pp who’s thinks there aren’t urgent cases being seen in court due to the pandemic. They are, there are being cases being heard remotely and via telephone.

Must be some very serious cases then.. www.bbc.com/news/uk-55712106

That’s criminal courts. Family courts have been operating throughout and emergent applications (that require approval) can still be heard pretty quickly. Including regarding financial orders

*emergency

That being said, huge backlog in family courts too. All 2 day hearings in certain areas not being heard until July/ aug.

The eldest sons education is court ordered, and anyone would know a year twelve student continuing in his current school is way more important than a child going to private reception
Depends on your relationship to the children. If they were both mine then yes I’d prioritise the Y12. If only the reception child was mine then that’s the one I’d prioritise.

@sassbott

*emergency

That being said, huge backlog in family courts too. All 2 day hearings in certain areas not being heard until July/ aug.

In normal circumstances it would have taken 6-12 months anyway. Even more so now. Stopping/decreasing payments and then applying to vary is not at all rare. That's exactly what people do when they loose their job or get a less paying one.

The application to vary is not urgent.
If the OP’s DH unilaterally stopped payment immediately however, the EXW could put in an emergency application (especially if DSS risked being removed from school) and that application would most like be expedited, listed as an emergency interim hearing and heard (possibly) within weeks.

RTFT. I have advised that the Op not stop payments (as another poster suggested). Otherwise this could be hauled in front of a judge by the EXW.

I think any court would be very unimpressed with the I can’t afford it argument while you are paying for a small child to attend private school. And given the absence of an answer on that point I suspect the necessity of moving house etc is all based on paying two fees and they plan to keep up the younger child’s enrolment.

@sassbott

The application to vary is not urgent. If the OP’s DH unilaterally stopped payment immediately however, the EXW could put in an emergency application (especially if DSS risked being removed from school) and that application would most like be expedited, listed as an emergency interim hearing and heard (possibly) within weeks.

Ok perhaps you are right. How would that change anything? Even better as there will be a new legal document in place. If OP is not lying and the funds are simply not there, the judge can't simply rule to take dd out to allow to pay for dss. The judge will have to find a consensus and may as well rule both women to work (they can't rule - recommend I believe) or exw's household to contribute to the costs

We get it, you’re selfish
Prioritising your own child is perfectly acceptable and not selfish.

If you have not yet given notice to either school, fees will be payable until the end of summer term now.

You can't pull a year 12 out of school!!!! It will be so disruptive for him.

I don't understand why you think everyone should suffer. It certainly isn't going to effect your preschooler the same way it will effect the older one is it? Surely you know this.

Let the year 12 carry on and take the preschooler out. Surely?

This does come across as a stand back and light the touch paper kind of thread.

OP needs to come back and clarify a few points but on the face of it her DSS has a greater need to stay in school and for the sake of one more year I like to think I'd prioritise that over my own child attending a pre prep. I wouldn't move house for it though.

I've not read the whole thread.
But if I was your husband I could not live with myself paying for a reception age child whilst shafting a year twelve. It's what, 2 years till he finishes. I also wouldn't want my husband to do it.

Yes the ex should be contributing. But if she's not it was still your decision as a couple to have a further child when there was a court ordered payment thing.

If Corona changed income then either both children should be withdrawn or the least affected educationally. There's a lifetime resentment building up there for the elder child.

Agree with everything you've said @TrustTheGeneGenie and @Glenorma.

@Owmyneck You're right. It shouldn't be the step parent's responsibility to pay for uni but sadly the government will base it on his income anyway. I'm in my final year of uni and I've seen many friends shafted in this way. Step parents (or even just parent's new partners who didn't bring them up at all and have only been in their lives a few years) don't want to support a child through uni but their income being a part of the household income calculation means the child gets the minimum loan only. Due to this some of my friends really struggled through uni, some even working 2 jobs and still getting into debt.

Weird though, as @FedUpAtHomeTroels mentioned, there's a total double standard here. Claims up and down this thread that it isn't the step father's responsibility to pay for private school or uni but somehow it's OP's (the step parents) responsibility to find a way to pay for private school, even at detriment to herself and her own child? And no, I don't think it's important that any child goes to private school at this age - if ever - but I can understand why OP is aggrieved. I think the issue is more why shouldn't a Dad treat his 2 children the same and why shouldn't the 2 children have the same opportunities, not even just re private school but having to move all the time, not having a car and being able to go places easily, not being able to afford any extras for child 2 because child 1 is a priority. Obviously the best solution here is not to remove DSS at a critical time but it's still going to feel shit for the mother of child 2, and child 2 as they grow up, to realise it seems Dad's favourite is child 1, even if this is not necessarily the case and it's court ordered so Dad has no choice but to give luxuries to child 1, he should do everything he can to give the same to child 2!

You wish, Glenorma. There isn't a parental duty to prioritise your child above all other human beings on earth, regardless of all circumstances. You think there's a parental duty to see your husband's child have his life very seriously affected so that your child can live a slightly more luxurious lifestyle at private school for a year? Putting your child first is very often a smokescreen for putting yourself first. In this case, it's highly selfish. And would likely lead to major fallouts within the family, to the detriment of everyone, including OP and her daughter. If OP behaves as you recommend, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that her DH no longer wanted to be married to someone like that.

@flowerycurtain

I've not read the whole thread. But if I was your husband I could not live with myself paying for a reception age child whilst shafting a year twelve. It's what, 2 years till he finishes. I also wouldn't want my husband to do it.

Yes the ex should be contributing. But if she's not it was still your decision as a couple to have a further child when there was a court ordered payment thing.

If Corona changed income then either both children should be withdrawn or the least affected educationally. There's a lifetime resentment building up there for the elder child.

I agree with the last sentence very much. I could never understand though why a woman can move on and have more children - in this particular case the exw remarried and had another child (which potentially resulted in her continuing to stay at home and affected her ability to work) whilst the exh can't possibly start a new family as he already has obligations.

And note that there's no indication that she's doing anything to earn any money herself.

@Goingtothebudgies

You wish, Glenorma. There isn't a parental duty to prioritise your child above all other human beings on earth, regardless of all circumstances. You think there's a parental duty to see your husband's child have his life very seriously affected so that your child can live a slightly more luxurious lifestyle at private school for a year? Putting your child first is very often a smokescreen for putting yourself first. In this case, it's highly selfish. And would likely lead to major fallouts within the family, to the detriment of everyone, including OP and her daughter. If OP behaves as you recommend, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that her DH no longer wanted to be married to someone like that.

You know what, a few years ago I would be agreed with you but when your child is the "new family" you have to put them first. Because the "first" child already has to parents to advocate for them. They generally don't need a third. In my personal experience, 2nd children can get a really shit deal, and it's often seen as ok because that's the trade off for your parents being together. I will always put my child first because he is my only child. I will always want what is best for him. I expect dp to put both his children first, but he completely understands why I don't feel exactly the same.

@Goingtothebudgies

And note that there's no indication that she's doing anything to earn any money herself.

Ok for mum tho eh.

There isn't a parental duty to prioritise your child above all other human beings on earth
I do, and so do most people.

If OP behaves as you recommend, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that her DH no longer wanted to be married to someone like that
I wouldn’t want to be married to him either if he was putting another child before mine. Treating them equally is fair enough but no way would I settle for my child coming second.

I will always put my child first because he is my only child. I will always want what is best for him. I expect dp to put both his children first, but he completely understands why I don't feel exactly the same.

This was exactly my point upthread. I always have my children’s needs/wants/wellbeing/happiness at the forefront of my mind as their mum.
I had exactly the same thought process when I was a stepparent too. Probably heightened in those circumstances to be honest as other people were influencing their lives and it was my job to advocate for them if I felt something was unfair. Former dsc had their own mum to advocate for them so they really didn’t need me as well. The shared father had a responsibility towards both.

No one is saying the youngest should come 2nd. But when the eldest has less than 2 years to go, no way does a very young child need to be in prep school at the detriment of the a level student!

There are some very selfish people on here. Her DH's child isn't just "another" child, that's her stepchild and sibling of her youngest. Don't get with a man with financial obligations to get his eldest through private school if you're going to be bitter and resentful to the point of screwing the eldest DC over just for the sake of "fairness" (when really it's not fair at all to whip the eldest out now).

My DS is the number one person in my life, no question.
But I wouldn’t put something not that important for him ahead of something of critical importance for DSD on my priority list.
DSD is not my child or responsibility but if all the approx. 2 billion kids in the world who aren’t mine, she is number 1 out of those.
The DDs benefit in staying in private school is minimal when weighed against the cost to the DSS of being pulled out. That’s just a fact.
However, if continuing to pay for the DSS means further erosion of the quality of life of the DD on top of missing out (for now at least m) on a private education, uprooting her to move to a cheaper area (with worse state schools perhaps?) well I’d say that’s where any mother would be within her rights to say “no more, the cost is too great, other arrangements will have to be made”.