Opinions on child maintenance when the NRP is a SAHP

[CrashesOverMe]

Just what the title says? NRP (Dad) has remarried and their wife is the breadwinner, thus their own income is zero as they are a SAHD. Legally they aren't required to pay anything but should they? (which would actually mean step parent paying!) In terms of child contact everyone is in agreement so although they could see their Dad more often, everyone is happy with him having the lower % of time.

I've been told this when discussing the inconvenience of suddenly realising there's two in there. "Oh well you chose to have two". "No, we tried for 18 months then the egg got excited and I got twins" "well you could have chosen to abort and try again, so you chose it"

That’s absolutely vile. Was that said to you on Mumsnet?

@MustardMitt

Out of curiosity
How long was your husband out of work and you providing CM for?

Alot of entitlement here. The pracrical circumstances of the SAHD and his family are not the concern of the OP. There is no income on his side. The children have different mothers and both mothers are not getting financial benefit. There is no wage and he wasn't paying a life changing amount a month. What will affect the older kids is if they are told their dad doesn't care , visitation restricted and used as a weapon. That will affect the kids more then losing the pitence they got a month originally.

@Userwoman1990

Alot of entitlement here. The pracrical circumstances of the SAHD and his family are not the concern of the OP. There is no income on his side. The children have different mothers and both mothers are not getting financial benefit. There is no wage and he wasn't paying a life changing amount a month. What will affect the older kids is if they are told their dad doesn't care , visitation restricted and used as a weapon. That will affect the kids more then losing the pitence they got a month originally.

Of course it is a concern of OP. Her income has been cut due to their decisions. Who wouldn't be concerned by that?

And who are you to decline whether it's a life changing amount or not? That money could be the difference each month of OP having a car and getting to her own job. Tell me how that's not life changing.

£250 could well be a life changing amount.

Blendiful, it's not really a valid option to suggest he become the RP. Why should the OP be without her DC - she didn't move 70 miles away from her own tiny DC,or give up work or have additional children that she can't afford! Would you entrust the ft care of your babies to someone who didn't prioritise them in any way? Also she would end up paying him CS to loaf around and look after his 2nd family.
Although I do suspect that a man who leaves his very young DC and makes morally bankrupt decisions would find a million excuses not to be RP anyway!

@MustardMitt Admirable of you to do it, but presumptuous to say that is the duty of a step parent.

OP it's shit but you are going to have to pay the long game. My siblings (I have two siblings with twins*) and friends with twins went back to work full-time from when their twins were 5. Only one of my sisters worked part-time before then and my friends' didn't at all.

I don't agree with what he's done e.g. earning nothing but unless he is lucky enough to have a job which he can easily go part-time then unfortunately due to the "luck" of having twins if he's the lower earner then it makes sense not for him to work until they start school.

*Twins run in my family both sides hence my refusal to have more than one child.

* The pracrical circumstances of the SAHD and his family are not the concern of the OP*

The practical circumstances of my ex are very much my concern

His other family. Not my concern unless I am concerned about my child’s well being around them. And then most definitely my concern.

Those saying this SM should pay
Presumably you think she should also be involved with non financial decisions re the children? Just as the father is? Be able to attend parents evenings for example?

I’m a single RP

I don’t think my ex’s partner should pay in the event he couldn’t
I wouldn’t want to take money from a third party
And I would be very concerned that if she was legally required to provide CM for my children, that this also go hand in hand with additional involvement and rights re my children. No. Bloody. Way.

On mn income of the wohp is always “family money” when it’s a man earning it. But I agree that a step parent shouldn’t have to support their partners child. So it’s difficult.

I very much doubt the dad in this situation even concerns himself with parents night, never mind the SM being interested.

I don't think the SM should legally be made to pay. But I'd have made damn sure my husband did something to contribute, either now by working PT, or having saved up enough when he was earning so that he could continue contributing.

It's shitty of him, but no, only he should be paying for his kids, not his wife. Can't understand why any woman would have any respect for a man like this but there you.

If ExH used to pay £250/pcm that's, what, 6hrs/wk @ min wage? He should get a job either couple hours per day or one 6hr day, leaving his new DC with either another relative (grandparents?) or his new DP (she must get a day off work?) so he could still provide the £250 for his older DC.

@AmberItsACertainty

If ExH used to pay £250/pcm that's, what, 6hrs/wk @ min wage? He should get a job either couple hours per day or one 6hr day, leaving his new DC with either another relative (grandparents?) or his new DP (she must get a day off work?) so he could still provide the £250 for his older DC.

I doubt he was giving 100% of his income!

@Chewingle
I’m a SM who would pay something in this situation if possible.

My reasoning being that if I’ve taken sole responsibility for funding DH and our children, henceforth referred to as “the family”, then part of the familys expenses would be my husbands children.
I’m earning family money and the family money pays for family expenses.
I wouldn’t pay for DSD out of my own personal spends.
Nor would I pay if I couldn’t afford to and DH had suddenly lost his job.
But I wouldn’t make a calculated financial decision for our family budget to not include DSD if it could be helped.

@Userwoman1990

Alot of entitlement here. The pracrical circumstances of the SAHD and his family are not the concern of the OP. There is no income on his side. The children have different mothers and both mothers are not getting financial benefit. There is no wage and he wasn't paying a life changing amount a month. What will affect the older kids is if they are told their dad doesn't care , visitation restricted and used as a weapon. That will affect the kids more then losing the pitence they got a month originally.

The "entitlement" is that of children who should be supported by their father. He should get some income on his side. Why does he get to check out financially and the OP doesn't.

he wasn't paying a life changing amount a month...That will affect the kids more then losing the pitence they got a month originally

I'm very glad that you find the £250 a month the OP mentions a 'pittance'. You are very fortunate that your finances are not finely balanced and losing that amount won't cause you any difficulties. Assuming the OP is on her own, however, I suspect it will make a big difference to her, particularly over what could be many years of non-payment. In turn, that will have an impact on her children. The OP has given no indication whatsoever that she intends to mess about with contact and in the time, the children will come to their own conclusions. No doubt the father at that point we seek to lay the blame elsewhere because they always do.

[quote Youseethethingis]@Chewingle
I’m a SM who would pay something in this situation if possible.

My reasoning being that if I’ve taken sole responsibility for funding DH and our children, henceforth referred to as “the family”, then part of the familys expenses would be my husbands children.
I’m earning family money and the family money pays for family expenses.
I wouldn’t pay for DSD out of my own personal spends.
Nor would I pay if I couldn’t afford to and DH had suddenly lost his job.
But I wouldn’t make a calculated financial decision for our family budget to not include DSD if it could be helped.[/quote]
By doing so - do you feel you have a right to be involved in, let’s say parents evenings?

Irrespective of whether you want to. Do you think that you have a right if you are paying CM for the children

No I’m not her parent and I have minimal interest in that side of things.
As I said, I wouldn’t view it as me personally paying the child maintenance.
My family would be continuing to meet its financial obligations, like the mortgage and council tax.

but as a person I would find it very hard to procreate with & respect a man who felt no financial responsibility towards his two very young children

I agree with this, but many will be fine as long as it doesn't impact them. That's the selfish nature of some human beings unfortunately.

It's like saying .. as long as it doesn't affect me I'm alright jack

He should pay but by getting a job and paying!
His wife is absolutely not responsible in any way for maintenance to his ex.

@Youseethethingis

No I’m not her parent and I have minimal interest in that side of things. As I said, I wouldn’t view it as me personally paying the child maintenance. My family would be continuing to meet its financial obligations, like the mortgage and council tax.

But if you wanted to be more involved Do you not think your stance means that the SM has wider additional rights?

No the family set up is not your concern its their choice you can say whatever you feel but the OP has no leverage to change the circumstances of the SAHP or the working SM hence what this is legal . Likewise they cannot change her circumstances. Both sets of children are in the same financial circumstances from their father as in getting zero money. Thats the bottom line. What the earning mothers do with their cash is their business. The child care they pay for is their business. If they work or on benefits it is their business. The OP is not with the dad any more and therefore cannot do anything about his choices. If the SM should fork out are you willing to give parental responsibility... allow input on how the kids are raised. Become a mother figure. Or is this a pay up and shut up situation. Any woman regardless can have kids and if you fall for a man and marry why not. If there are other kids involved create a blended family. But you cannot put this on the step mum. She has done what is right for her and all kids get the same financial support from their dad. Fostering a great relationship with your kids is not all about how much you pay every month.

No, which is why I also don’t believe that a step parent should be legally obliged to make financial contributions to their DSC.
That’s different from saying I wouldn’t personally deliberately arrange things to suit my family at the expense of my husbands child.