Page 11 | Stay at home dad... who pays CMS??!?

Britsmums11 · 2021-04-30T19:04:51+00:00

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 ?

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

vivainsomnia · 01/05/2021 13:50

Many threads going on about 50/50 being an option if they shall wish totally missing the point that unless the step child’s mum agrees, that’s not an option at all.

Most rp are so because that’s what they want. If they wished for a 50/50, it’s usually agreed at the time of the separation.

If she says no, it leaves the court. Potentially expensive for an unlikely positive outcome, because he would be unlikely to convince a judge that his sudden interest for 50/50 is not to do with finances. Judges don’t like to support changes unless there is cause to believe that the current situation is not stable.

ExitChasedByABee · 01/05/2021 13:52

@Britsmums11

I am torn, I think my baby would greatly benefit from a SAHD especially as I had a maternity not long ago. 50:50 - contact is an option Or my husband going part time and reducing CMS payments. I was more concerned if my wages are considered as then it would be a massive chunk. Im glad they are not. To be perfect honest I can't think about what's best for absolutely everyone. Like I said I've got total and complete tunnel vision and want to do what's right for My baby.

I think going part time might be a better option as he then can reduce childcare costs for the baby and possibly his first child for the days he’s at home. Would it help him in the long run career-wise if he takes a significant time out from working?

Part time, reduced CMS, increased contact might be the way to go for now. Your wages won’t be considered when it comes to CMS but when it comes to gifts, I would have thought it would be nice to chip in so each child has the same quality of gifts and there’s no disparity between each child.

If you’re finding child care expensive, how’s your step-child’s mother coping with it? If she’s also struggling, it would be nice if your husband could also help with that whether it means his job is part-time, from home, or not working as he would be at home more often.

ineedaholidaynow · 01/05/2021 13:54

Did you not think about all the costs before you became pregnant?

Mummyoflittledragon · 01/05/2021 14:40

@Roomba

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.

All of this is deliberate to deprive you. I’m not surprised it still grates. Here is an op wanting to financially abuse another mother. What happened to sisterhood?!

ThatIsMyPotato · 01/05/2021 14:43

@vivainsomnia

Many threads going on about 50/50 being an option if they shall wish totally missing the point that unless the step child’s mum agrees, that’s not an option at all.

Most rp are so because that’s what they want. If they wished for a 50/50, it’s usually agreed at the time of the separation.

If she says no, it leaves the court. Potentially expensive for an unlikely positive outcome, because he would be unlikely to convince a judge that his sudden interest for 50/50 is not to do with finances. Judges don’t like to support changes unless there is cause to believe that the current situation is not stable.

Nope I didn't miss that point. Of course their mum gets a say in if she wants to reduce her contact.

Mummyoflittledragon · 01/05/2021 14:45

@Outbutnotoutout

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

In a nuclear family, it’s fine if both parents agree. Not when you are a NRP for children from a previous relationship and bring another child / children into the relationship and become a sahp for a child / children from that subsequent relationship.

LaceyBetty · 01/05/2021 14:45

He can't afford to be a stay at home dad. End of story. Makes me so angry that anyone would even think of this when they have a child to support. So gross.

ThatIsMyPotato · 01/05/2021 14:47

What happened to sisterhood?!

Why should OP not go out and earn a wage for herself?! It's up to the parents to sort out the arrangements for their children.

PlanDeRaccordement · 01/05/2021 14:48

@LaceyBetty
You don’t know that he can’t afford to be a SAHD. And support comes in many forms, it isn’t just £££££.

LaceyBetty · 01/05/2021 14:50

[quote PlanDeRaccordement]@LaceyBetty
You don’t know that he can’t afford to be a SAHD. And support comes in many forms, it isn’t just £££££.[/quote]
The kind of support you are talking about doesn't put food on the table of clothes on backs. Is he going to pay 50/50 for everything now? Bet that comes to a lot more than £250.

ThatIsMyPotato · 01/05/2021 14:50

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.

It makes sense if she bought the house and investments that the income is in her name. Why would she work to give him an income that some of would go to you?

LaceyBetty · 01/05/2021 14:51

[quote PlanDeRaccordement]@LaceyBetty
You don’t know that he can’t afford to be a SAHD. And support comes in many forms, it isn’t just £££££.[/quote]
And he can't afford it if he's not going to pay at least CMS minimum.

Mummyoflittledragon · 01/05/2021 14:52

@ThatIsMyPotato

What happened to sisterhood?!

Why should OP not go out and earn a wage for herself?! It's up to the parents to sort out the arrangements for their children.

I never said op shouldn’t earn a wage to pay for her child. But she sure as hell shouldn’t enabling her husband to financially abuse the mother of his other child.

TrustTheGeneGenie · 01/05/2021 14:55

Financially abuse?
You're joking right?

ThisIsSimplyBeyond · 01/05/2021 14:57

If the mother of his first child decided she didn't want to buy any food or clothing for them, it would be neglect. So financial abuse is putting it lightly IMO.

Thisnamewasnttaken123 · 01/05/2021 14:58

"Why should OP not go out and earn a wage for herself?! It's up to the parents to sort out the arrangements for their children."

Op would be the reason he is still living a decent life whilst his previous child goes without, she would be complicent in him avoided his previous responsibility as a parent.
It's views like yours which is the reason this country has a problem with feckless father's, turning a blind eye to being part of the problem is not ok.

ThatIsMyPotato · 01/05/2021 15:00

It's views like yours which is the reason this country has a problem with feckless father's, turning a blind eye to being part of the problem is not ok.

I disagree, I would say it is the fault of the feckless fathers.

Viviennemary · 01/05/2021 15:02

Technically no. But morally speaking then yes he should support his son financially.,

PlanDeRaccordement · 01/05/2021 15:02

Financial abuse? That’s ridiculous.
50/50 support of a child is the starting point. It’s why at 50/50 no one owes CMS to anyone. When the support is not 50/50, the nrp parent doing less support owes the other parent a CMS payment which is in lieu of support and commonly known to not be enough, as in less than a true representation of the costs of the support it is replacing.

So the nrp increasing support to 50/50, that’s a good thing. That’s not “financial abuse”.

TrustTheGeneGenie · 01/05/2021 15:04

@ThisIsSimplyBeyond

If the mother of his first child decided she didn't want to buy any food or clothing for them, it would be neglect. So financial abuse is putting it lightly IMO.

What a lot of old shit. Presumably sahms aren't abusers

ThatIsMyPotato · 01/05/2021 15:05

PlanDeRaccordement you would think a father wanting more time with his own children would be seen as a good thing. But aparantly it isn't!

Thisnamewasnttaken123 · 01/05/2021 15:05

"I disagree, I would say it is the fault of the feckless fathers."

You thinking it's ok for someone to play a role in helping their partner in avoiding child maintenance, making it socially acceptable, yep definitely part of the problem!
If it wasnt socially acceptable less people would do it.
Don't know how you can't understand that but nevermind..

ThisIsSimplyBeyond · 01/05/2021 15:06

A sahm is contributing in care. If he is a sahd he would be contributing in care for DC2, but (as there is no guarantee the child could even do 50:50 living) he would not be contributing to DC1. He would be intentionally depriving his first child.

TrustTheGeneGenie · 01/05/2021 15:06

@ThisIsSimplyBeyond

A sahm is contributing in care. If he is a sahd he would be contributing in care for DC2, but (as there is no guarantee the child could even do 50:50 living) he would not be contributing to DC1. He would be intentionally depriving his first child.

He'd be contributing his half of the care....

If his ex says no that's on her surely?

She'd be intentionally depriving her child too if you want to go down that road.

ThatIsMyPotato · 01/05/2021 15:09

@Thisnamewasnttaken123

"I disagree, I would say it is the fault of the feckless fathers."

You thinking it's ok for someone to play a role in helping their partner in avoiding child maintenance, making it socially acceptable, yep definitely part of the problem!
If it wasnt socially acceptable less people would do it.
Don't know how you can't understand that but nevermind..

If someone thinks oh I'll not support my own children then that's on them not me.