Stay at home dad... who pays CMS??!?

[Britsmums11]

We are in a predicament. Childcare costs are out of control and we literally lose an entire wage on childcare and more . I am the higher earner and we can survive off my wages and at least DD aged 18months isn't passed from pillar to post and can have some stability . My husband thinks being a SAHD is the best option. But then do I have to pay for his son? If CMS do the calculation on my wages we'd be hand to mouth. Husband seems to think that's not the case .... but is it ?

What does your stepson want?? I assume the arrangement has always been EOW and one night a week because that was in his best interests. 50-50 does not work for all kids. Many need the stability and security of one primary home.
Will there be issues getting him to school and keeping up with his usual activities and friends? Will you be expecting your H to focus on your child while DSS fends for himself?
What about DSSs emotional needs? How do you think he will feel knowing that his father was happy not to be 50-50 for years until it benefited him financially.

This feels like a real knee jerk reaction. I’d be exploring other options. If DSS mum does not agree, it could be up to a court to decide.

Honestly having tunnel vision for your baby at the expense of your stepson is dreadful. Your husband has two children equally.

Seems to me you can:

1. Discuss with his ex-DP whether your DH could reduce her own childcare costs by being a SAHD, if this works with DSS's age and ex-DP's current childcare arrangements or

1. Your DH becomes a SAHD but you both agree to continue paying the (honestly laughable) £250 he pays now, probably increasing it each year to account for the fact that his earnings would probably have increased over time had he remained employed (if this is the case).

@Ylvamoon completely agree. For some reason mum's aren't given the same amount of grief if they want to be SAHM or work part time and rely on the maintenance. I think if a mum decided actually I would rather just have my kids eow and focus on my career they would get some nasty comments.

If you do this then hopefully you won't suddenly stop paying CM

Most people don't have jobs where you can suddenly increase your hours and mum may need time to find a new job.

I think it's pretty shocking that your h wants to become a SAHD rather than consider him working around OP's job until childcare costs decrease so there's some child maintenance payable.

I hope that you live close to ex so that dc1 isn't having a long commute to school.

@Britsmums11

Okay thank you, I know I'd be heavily judged. I'm just doing what's best for baby. I agree DSS should come more often or even go 50:50 that way no CMS payment needed.

50/50 sounds like a good solution to me.

You aren't going to get an easy time on this thread OP.

Threads like this turn into total derailed carnage.

DH becoming a SAHD and you taking on DSS 50/50 (obviously including 50% of all his expenses like uniform/school meals/activities too) sounds like a perfectly fine and logical plan.

I do worry that the increase from the amount you currently have DSS to this ^ though will be more than £250.

Understand you were worried they would take significantly more than the £250 currently being paid in CM if they calculated based on your wage, they won’t do this. Might make more sense for you to just pay the £250 as currently agreed and stay in the same agreement with DH at home.

Obviously DH opting out of working to look after your child and then you both abandoning his DS financially isn’t an option and would be the actions of monumental selfish ah xx

It sounds like 50:50 care would solve this, particularly with your DP being at home, he could then use this to the advantage of both his children. The other alternative is that he gets a job around your working hours so he is still contributing the same to his other child.

Why is ok for a dad to only have eow then? If mum can't possibly only have 50%?

Is a mum a higher grade of parent?

Certainly are. SAHM's are saints/martyrs SAHD's are slackers. Dads get a pretty raw deal here, but then many Mumsnetters seem to like playing house with deadbeats.

So many assumptions being made here, its what makes me love Mumsnet. We don't actually know if OP's partner is the villain or the victim in the previous relationship yet we're out to tar and feather him. The poor ex may be living in luxury for all we know.

@Checkingout811

You’re doing what is best for you baby, who is doing what’s best for the step child? Shocking.

The child's parents?

The OP is only actually responsible for her own child.

A friend of mine has done just this - she has a well paid career with long and unreliable hours. Her ex was a SAHD for years (works p/t during school hours now the kids are a bit older) as childcare was more than his wage. When they split, they agreed my friend would have the kids EOW and a weeknight - the standard arrangement for many fathers. It works well for all of them and means the family as a whole are much, much better off financially with as little disruption to the kids as possible. You'd think she had abandoned her kids and was the worst mother on earth according to many friends and family though. People have shunned her as they don't understand how a mother 'can leave her kids'. It's hard for her, but this is what works best for the children involved and will benefit their futures far more than her quitting her career just because that's what's expected of women.

But yeah, if your DH isn't earning then he won't have to pay maintenance. I had this issue with my ex when he gave up his job to care for his new child with his wife. His wife is very well paid, so they can still afford a pretty luxurious lifestyle compared to me - big house, another house they rent out (in her name so not his 'income' officially), nice cars, holidays, savings and investments. And I was left skinter than ever, because on paper he was penniless. It's not his wife's job to pay for children that aren't hers, I get that, but it still grates that he didn't consider how his other two kids would be affected.

Why is it ok for women to be SAHP but not dad?

@PlanDeRaccordement

He might not leave, but he already has one broken relationship to his name, and from that you know what kind of person he is

What do you mean by this? If single fathers are so terrible, then wouldn’t that also apply to single mothers? How does having “broken relationships” in your past determine what kind of person you are?

And honestly, a father wanting to get the maximum contact of 50/50 with his elder child is the opposite of that child being put below the new child in “pecking order”.

Ah have you forgot?

Men leave because they're dicks who hate responsibility and just want to move on to shag new women. Women leave because they need to to make the best life for them and their children.

Women asking for 50/50 deserve some freedom, time to work and relax, to have their useless ex step up. Men asking for 50/50 are useless dicks trying to dodge maintenance who will ignore their child the entire time except to throw the occasional meal cooked by the new woman at them

Nobody says it isn't ok but he has to consider his responsibilities to his other child as well! 50:50 is a good solution IF his DS wants to?! He might be perfectly happy with how things are. EOW isn't ideal for any parent but the wishes and needs of the child are the most important thing. He might not want to go 50:50. OP has left out a lot of relevant info so it's hard to assess but based on what she has told us, I don't think people are unreasonable in telling her that it's not ok for them to make a family decision which precludes her DH paying towards his DS

How old is the DSS - if he is used to EOW then suddenly imposing a change may not go down well with the poor child.

OP - the selfishness from your posts is palpable. I get you are looking out for your baby but as a couple your DP needs to consider both DCS equally. Obviously EOW was sufficient for your family but now you want both the child and his mother to bombshell their lives because it suits your child better.

Flabbergasted at both of your arrogance to your DSS, total disregard for a woman who has delivered the parenting for your DPs other child when it suited you and your total lack of awareness of how much time , effort and monies are going to be needed for this child.

Sad sad situation which shows SMs in a piss poor light tbh.

@Outbutnotoutout

Why is it ok for women to be SAHP but not dad?

It's not ok for anyone to want to be a SAHP if one of the main reasons is because they want to stop paying towards their child.

Asking for 50:50 straight away when separating because you know it's best for your child is not the same as asking for it years into an arrangement because your new wife wants their child to have a SAHP, which leaves you unable to pay your maintenance.

This thread is so like a previous one, except that one most people waded on saying the opposite to posters on here - fairly well implying it's tough shit on the child and his mother.

As far as I stand - I really hope your DH doesn't leave you and your baby in the future, set up another family and become a SAHD because it's suits them...

the ex didn’t have a choice of whether another child was brought into the mix

Quite. And yet somehow she is expected to do what is best for her ex’s family, regardless of whether or not it works for her. This thread is pretty much pointless until the ex has been able to have her say about what she thinks would work in this situation.

I'm sure your DH will eventually go back to work but for now, the situation is what it is and everyone will need to adapt

Why should the ex have to adapt over what is, essentially, a lifestyle choice?

@Devlesko
He is not working by choice. Are there not men in the UK who work 2_jobs? If your expenses require you to work 2 jobs to generate enough funding to meet your financial obligations, how or why is that problematic?

In this case his additional expense came in the form of a second child .My assumption is that he was a willing participant in the creation of this new life, and he should do what is required when you voluntarily add to your financial obligations.

Why is becoming a SAHD a more obvious solution than getting a second job? Many men and women work 2 jobs.

His older child may already be in a day care or preschool setting benefitting from socialization with his peers and instruction from trained providers. Why would his mom choose to forgo those benefits for her child simply to let the OP's husband opt out of the workforce?

All of the benefits would accrue to the OP's husband and not so much to the older child.

In the real world providing in-kind services in lieu of actual financial support to your children is usually a non- starter.

OP watch yourself with this one. You might think all is well with your relationship and he's a good guy, but he's already supporting another child and is now trying to position himself as a SAHD to his other child with a higher earning partner (you). If you're not careful you could find yourself separated and having to pay him child maintenance while seeing your own DC once a fortnight.

He can't afford not to work as he has another child to support, and you can't afford to take the risk that it could all go wrong, as it did with his last partner. Besides, the idea that he would even contemplate not paying for his other child is abhorrent, you need to think about what kind of man he really is

Would you also allow him to claim child benefit to keep his ni record?

@Throwntothewolves

OP watch yourself with this one. You might think all is well with your relationship and he's a good guy, but he's already supporting another child and is now trying to position himself as a SAHD to his other child with a higher earning partner (you). If you're not careful you could find yourself separated and having to pay him child maintenance while seeing your own DC once a fortnight.

He can't afford not to work as he has another child to support, and you can't afford to take the risk that it could all go wrong, as it did with his last partner. Besides, the idea that he would even contemplate not paying for his other child is abhorrent, you need to think about what kind of man he really is

100% this! He latched onto this idea of being SAHP and told you, because he already knows, that this means he thinks he doesn't have to pay a bean towards supporting his kid (he has no intention of payinga penny because he thinks 50/50 means he provides 50% of childcare and 0% of the upkeep of his own son).

His being SAHP means if you split up (and, as pointed out, the best indication of future behaviour is past behavior), you will be the one paying maintenance.

@Outbutnotoutout
It is ok for anyone to be a SAHP if they have a way to meet their financial obligations to their children

Morally, he should not stop paying. If you are funding other essential costs for him such as food, phone bill, petrol etc, then his CMS payments are just as, if not more essential.

If you are not prepared, or cannot afford to maintain the payment, then him leaving his job isn't a good choice.

Him taking on his children to 50% shared care is the legitimate other option.