Does anyone here believe CMS should take into account a step parents earnings and if so, why?

[PutItInYourPocket2]

Just curious as to people's opinions. I know the majority, or so it seems, believe they shouldn't take into account SPs earnings when calculating CMS or that SPs should be responsible if the bio parent cannot pay for whatever reason.

However it seems from reading another thread that there are those who believe they should.

If you do, what are your reasons?

I don’t think the step parent’s income should be taken into account.. However as the RP if I moved in with a partner, my benefits would be reduced or stopped based on his income, and my older son would lose part of his university payments, as these are calculated on the household income of the RP. So the system needs to even things up..

What do you think should happen that would even it up?

The NRP also loses income when they move someone in. The only difference is that they aren’t in receipt of any child related benefits. I’m not sure why someone should receive the same amount in benefits whether child related or not, when there is someone else living with them subsidising the rent and all other bills. And I say this as someone who receives child related benefits which would go down if a partner moved in.

Funfair you were snide no point denying it.
You do make yourself sound holier than thou mocking her 'poor life decisions.'

"She's not as well off as me because she made poor choices like having three children"

Does your DP know that you think his kids are 'poor choices'..

She doesn't have to be well off either..

This also isn't about judging step mums I am one myself.

I’m not pretending anything about her life.

My post actually had nothing to do with her.

It was all about you and the unnecessarily low level you stooped to in judging a 15 year old.

There was no need to bring that into it and you know it. But hey, if it makes you feel like the superior person then enjoy...

@JustLyra

I’m not pretending anything about her life.

My post actually had nothing to do with her.

It was all about you and the unnecessarily low level you stooped to in judging a 15 year old.

There was no need to bring that into it and you know it. But hey, if it makes you feel like the superior person then enjoy...

Whatever. I don't feel like a superior person but then I don't alienate my own children, kick them out and threaten people so.

I note you ignored all that.

Like I said @Funfairballoon my post was about you. Not her.

Her actions as an adult don’t change the snideness in you judging a child.

@JustLyra

Like I said *@Funfairballoon* my post was about you. Not her.

Her actions as an adult don’t change the snideness in you judging a child.

Of course not. All the things she did were acceptable. Saying you wouldn't have a baby at 15 is much worse than threatening death, lol.

As much as I can see that it could be perceived as unfair in certain scenarios, I just don't think it's fair to organise CM in any way except that the two parents alone are financially responsible for their child.

I don't have any children but my partner has two. Our finances are totally separate and it would be ridiculously unfair if his CM was calculated on our combined wages as he couldn't afford to pay it without input from me. Why should I have to hand over my money to another household to support a child that isn't mine?

I already indirectly financially support them when they are with us as I'm paying towards the home they stay in, the food they eat, the bills that increase when they're here, the things we buy for them like games, treats etc. Not to mention the bits and pieces I end up covering for my DP because he has less disposable income due to his CM.

I just can't see how a step-parent can be seen as more responsible for picking up the financial slack than the child's other parent.

You’re deliberately trying to twist the point @Funfairballoon

I wasn’t commenting on you saying you wouldn’t want to have a child at 15.

It was your sneering at a child of 15. But you know that.

@JustLyra

You’re deliberately trying to twist the point *@Funfairballoon*

I wasn’t commenting on you saying you wouldn’t want to have a child at 15.

It was your sneering at a child of 15. But you know that.

I didn't sneer. I said it's one of the reasons she is not as well off as I am or as she could have been. That's a fact, isn't it! I also said it was a decision I wouldn't have made, also true.

You then questioned why I obviously hate her and I told you. Nothing to do with her children and when she had them. More because she is a vile human being.

@ColdTattyWaitingForSummer

I don’t think the step parent’s income should be taken into account.. However as the RP if I moved in with a partner, my benefits would be reduced or stopped based on his income, and my older son would lose part of his university payments, as these are calculated on the household income of the RP. So the system needs to even things up.. either SPs are responsible or they aren’t. And yes it galls sometimes watching my ex and his partner splashing the cash, while he barely pays towards his dc, but at the end of the day, that’s his conscience not mine.

Yeah but that's the same for the NRP if they moved in with someone too thought isn't it? They would also lose income if they were relying on benefits and moved in with their partner.

I do think it's bad that university bursaries etc are done on the household income rather than the parental income though. Who's to say that your partner would be covering any costs at all for your son? It should be based on the RP's income (including CM) alone.

I didn’t remotely question why you hated her.

I don’t care why you hate her. It’s irrelevant to the point I made, as I’ve said several times.

You made an unnecessary sneery comment about a 15 year old. That’s the only thing I’ve commented on.

@JustLyra

I didn’t remotely question why you hated her.

I don’t care why you hate her. It’s irrelevant to the point I made, as I’ve said several times.

You made an unnecessary sneery comment about a 15 year old. That’s the only thing I’ve commented on.

You said my derision for her, as if that's because she got pregnant at 15. I was putting you right.

Keep telling my how sneery I am, if it makes you feel better. It wasn't, it was a factual comment and remains one. If anyone is being sneery it is you.

@Ylvamoon

But then, often it's the lower earner that will give up work to be the SAHP. So if that happens to be the NRP at the same time then that's it. Not a loophole par say. Just a financial decision. RP could actually benefit from this by having a better childcare arrangements. A lot of RP choose to work pt or not at all. They are not exactly meeting their final responsibilities either.

Agree with this.

Lots of RPs work part time or not at all but that choice doesn't seem to be OK for NRPs, even if they are doing so to care for children too.

Don't get me wrong, I know there are probably some NRPs who purposely give up work in order to stop paying CM and I absolutely don't support that.

But I do think that once you split up and parties move on into new relationships, events in their lives may mean that circumstances change and they end up out of work for whatever reason. I think too many RP's rely on financial support from their exes as if they were still together, without considering that actually their ex's circumstances could change at any point without consultation, so they really need to do what they can to become financially stable themselves.

No its a parents job to pay not a step parent and if this was the case people would just not marry new partner to avoid

But I do think that once you split up and parties move on into new relationships, events in their lives may mean that circumstances change and they end up out of work for whatever reason.

I think this is an appalling view. People don’t just end up out of work like your saying so casually no more than any working person could loose their jobs. I’m all for people wanting to start a new relationship.

However when it comes to producing more kids this is a no no in the sense of this should be given deep thought as the person has kids already!! So if you really want another child with someone new.... fine but consider the finicial aspect too!

Maybe that's because she has been nothing but vile to me for years? Maybe it's because she's threatened my life several times? Or maybe because she smashed my car window? Stopped dp seeing his kids?

Christ. She makes my DP's ex look like the loveliest person in the world. And that takes some doing!

I think too many RP's rely on financial support from their exes as if they were still together, without considering that actually their ex's circumstances could change at any point without consultation, so they really need to do what they can to become financially stable themselves.

Totally agree

People don’t just end up out of work like your saying so casually no more than any working person could loose their jobs. I’m all for people wanting to start a new relationship
However when it comes to producing more kids this is a no no in the sense of this should be given deep thought as the person has kids already!!

You can't control your work situation. You could be having a 100k / year job one day and be mede redundant the next and be reliant on benefits 3 months down the line.

As for having more children, again, this is something existing children or ex partners can't control. The NRP parent might feel that they are able to support all children contary to what the RP thinks.

Ther is always a financial impact when having more children and its false economy to assume that the RP will always get X amount in child maintenance.

@Funfairballoon

Essentially what you're saying is only mum's time counts, and only dad's money.

All too common a theme on this sight.

That’s not what I said whatsoever. Both people take responsibility for the decision to have children, your choice of partner and the choices you make whilst you’re together. It think many of us have made mistakes but you do need to take responsibility for that. If someone doesn’t have or want a career before you have children it’s not unpredictable that it won’t happen afterwards. Whilst many people wouldn’t respect it maintenance payments are the same whether the RP works or not. Courts absolutely recognise that not all work in the relationship is rewarded by income, unfortunately some individuals think it’s the only factor

Imagine being that bitter to ask your ex for money from their new partner. Instead of looking for ways to better your own situation. I'd be dammed if someone decided to ride my coat tails after I have grafted and expected pay for other people's kids no bloody way. Why? I didn't decide to have them ? This is a silly thread and this will never be law. Because it is immoral and totally ludicrous.

Agreed and summed up very succinctly

@Bul21ia

But I do think that once you split up and parties move on into new relationships, events in their lives may mean that circumstances change and they end up out of work for whatever reason.

I think this is an appalling view. People don’t just end up out of work like your saying so casually no more than any working person could loose their jobs. I’m all for people wanting to start a new relationship.

However when it comes to producing more kids this is a no no in the sense of this should be given deep thought as the person has kids already!! So if you really want another child with someone new.... fine but consider the finicial aspect too!

Tbh I am speaking specifically about a couple of recent threads on here where an NRP has genuinely ended up out of work due to redundancy/job loss. People DO end up out of work that way and their partner doesn't owe the ex money because of this.

What I mean re new relationships is that once two adults split up they know that they have no sway over the other's choices any longer so they need to be prepared to finance their own life to a large extent.
Either of both parents can choose to become a SAHP or change/give up their job at any point and there is nothing the other can do about that any more because decisions will be made with a new partner or alone if single.

Also, both parents can go on to have further children, financially impacting the older kids. It's not just the NRP who does this, often it can be the RP as well, but their choices don't seem to be considered as much, even though it will impact the children financially too.

Ther is always a financial impact when having more children and its false economy to assume that the RP will always get X amount in child maintenance.

This is my point too. CM is not a solid bill that stays the same no matter what, it is very much based on the paying parent's income in the same way that if the family was still together finances can fluctuate.

Absolutely both parents should financially support children, 100% agree with this, of course. But I do feel that some RPs still want to maintain the same financial reliance on their exes that they had when they were together, which just isn't realistic when there are now 2 separate households to pay for.

@funinthesun19 I’m not sure what the solution is.. I absolutely believe university bursaries shouldn’t include a SPs income. That’s ludicrous, and I imagine there are very few people willing to finance an unrelated adult that way, especially if they haven’t been involved in raising that child. But that could create a barrier to higher education for many young people. I do agree that non child related means tested benefits should be done on household income, but I’m not so sure about child related ones. I just think what we have at the moment isn’t a fair or equal system. I also think the cms could be a lot tougher in terms of chasing up non paying NRPs.

What amazes me is when my DSD leaves something behind like clothing my partner always gets a message stating the item of clothing was paid for by the ex should be returned immediately. What is the child maintenance paying for?