Active discussions

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Step-parenting

Connect with other Mumsnetters here for step-parenting advice and support.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

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

999 replies

Britsmums11 · 30/04/2021 20:04

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 ?

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
CandyLeBonBon · 02/05/2021 12:04

@Dugee

At that age, his opinion would be very much taken into account if it went to court.

If it went to court then the ex wouldn't get any CMS if the father has no income. I'm not aware of any situations where the OP's income would be taken into account, are you?

The threat of court doesn't work in this situation.

You misunderstood. I was saying that if op's dh went to court to force 50/50 care, then dss's wants, feelings and opinions would be taken into consideration. It's a shitty way to handle the whole situation and the one person whose needs are most important are at the bottom of the list in this whole sorry mess.
Dugee · 02/05/2021 12:34

@CandyLeBonBon @ALevelhelp

So it's two separate issues (I'm late to the party and don't want to derail).

The first being that the OP has no legal liability for paying CMS to her DP's ex - everyone agrees this is the case. Whether the OP has a moral responsibility to pay something (even if it's not the full amount) to the DP's ex is up for debate. The OP doesn't want to pay anything to DPs ex, so has proposed increasing childcare of DSS to 50/50 and the OP is happy to fund the extra costs of having DSS with the OP and her DP 50% of the time.

The second issue is whether or not the increase to 50/50 childcare (to make up for the fact that OP's DP is no longer paying CMS, due to having no income) is acceptable to the ex and DSS?

GreyhoundG1rl · 02/05/2021 13:00

I would certainly hope the 11 year old's wishes would be taken into account in this game of pass the parcel, poor little devil.

CandyLeBonBon · 02/05/2021 13:13

Yes I realise @Dugee - my point was that if the dh gives up work and applies for 50/50 through the court and is refused, because dss doesn't want it, then as you say, his lack of income will mean that no maintenance will be payable. If dss doesn't want 50/50 but feels forced into it, then he'll be miserable. The loser here is dss. It's a shitty situation all round.

vivainsomnia · 02/05/2021 13:18

Any parent who shares their adult disagreement with the other parent directly with their child, like you describe is harming their child's self-worth. Regardless of whether one parent is being a dick with money or not, these are not appropriate to then share with the child. There is absolutely nothing good to come out of it
I agree 100% but at 11 yo it won’t take long at all to work it all out by himself.

Dugee · 02/05/2021 13:21

From what I can see the discussion over whether the offer of 50/50 childcare to the ex is plausible is kind of a red herring. Hear me out.

The OP's DP has no income, therefore no CMS to his ex is due. The OP is not obliged to pay CMS to DPs ex from her income. To soften the blow to the DP's ex, the OP is proposing offering an increase in care of DSS to 50/50.

The conversation with the ex will be along the lines of DP has quit work so he will no longer be paying you £250 month CMS - and there isn't anything, you (DPs ex can do about this). What we can do though is have DSS 50% of the time - but only if you and DSS want us to have DSS 50% of the time, we aren't going to force DSS to stay with us more often than he wants to.

It doesn't sound like the OP and her DP are going to push to have DSS 50% of the time and go to court over it, it's just something they are proposing, if it will help DPs ex and DSS out and ex and DSS want to do it. The £250 monthly CMS isn't going to be paid and that's that.

CandyLeBonBon · 02/05/2021 13:24

@Dugee

From what I can see the discussion over whether the offer of 50/50 childcare to the ex is plausible is kind of a red herring. Hear me out.

The OP's DP has no income, therefore no CMS to his ex is due. The OP is not obliged to pay CMS to DPs ex from her income. To soften the blow to the DP's ex, the OP is proposing offering an increase in care of DSS to 50/50.

The conversation with the ex will be along the lines of DP has quit work so he will no longer be paying you £250 month CMS - and there isn't anything, you (DPs ex can do about this). What we can do though is have DSS 50% of the time - but only if you and DSS want us to have DSS 50% of the time, we aren't going to force DSS to stay with us more often than he wants to.

It doesn't sound like the OP and her DP are going to push to have DSS 50% of the time and go to court over it, it's just something they are proposing, if it will help DPs ex and DSS out and ex and DSS want to do it. The £250 monthly CMS isn't going to be paid and that's that.

Yes. That's the point I was trying to make. It's shady as fuck.
Iyland · 02/05/2021 13:35

Agreed. And if the ex does agree I wouldn't be at all surprised if a new thread appeared in time about them dropping their 50/50 agreement or tried to insist on changing the days to accommodate a holiday they want to go on without SC, or a family gathering with her family or a house move because it's more affordable to them/better location for schools for the youngest etc etc.

I'm basing this off nothing other than the already apparent attitude that OP's SS just has to fit in to the desired mould of their new family unit. In my experience moving the goal posts to this degree when a new child enters the equation rarely is an isolated move.

Tiredoftattler · 02/05/2021 13:51

OP,
It is regrettable that your husband lost out on a significant part of his son's childhood. Alas, that can often be the results of random sexual encounters.

However, none of that excuses his financial obligation to his son ,nor does it justify his choosing to not work. Working fathers, as is the case of most nuclear families - and many if these nuclear families include working mothers and fathers, do not lose out on their children's childhood because they work.

His unfortunate earlier experiences just provides a handy excuse for not doing the hard work of finding a way to provide adequately for both of his obligations. What if rather than the 250 to the mom that you were having trouble paying it was 250 towards your mortgage, would he call the mortgage company and offer to provide childcare services in lieu of payment ?

The ex and the son are simply viewed as the most readily disposable of his financial obligations and that is unfortunate.

Again, like many working dad's with multiple children, he could join the ranks of those who leave their day job and go directly to their evening job. These men love their families enough to actually want to provide them.

Your husband's son represents a life created out of randomness and providing for his future seems no more important and significant than was his conception. It is all about what is most convenient for the adults involved.

OP, I am not criticizing you for wanting to make your life easier. Your husband's son existence and financial security is a cautionary tale filled with examples of adults doing what is most convenient fulfilling their needs and preferences.

Dugee · 02/05/2021 14:06

I am feeling sorry for the DSS. It doesn't sound like he has any of the adults, who should be supporting him (ie his mum and dad), doing what's best for him. However this isn't OP's responsibility.

twinkletoesfairynose · 02/05/2021 14:09

@Tiredoftattler

OP, It is regrettable that your husband lost out on a significant part of his son's childhood. Alas, that can often be the results of random sexual encounters.

However, none of that excuses his financial obligation to his son ,nor does it justify his choosing to not work. Working fathers, as is the case of most nuclear families - and many if these nuclear families include working mothers and fathers, do not lose out on their children's childhood because they work.

His unfortunate earlier experiences just provides a handy excuse for not doing the hard work of finding a way to provide adequately for both of his obligations. What if rather than the 250 to the mom that you were having trouble paying it was 250 towards your mortgage, would he call the mortgage company and offer to provide childcare services in lieu of payment ?

The ex and the son are simply viewed as the most readily disposable of his financial obligations and that is unfortunate.

Again, like many working dad's with multiple children, he could join the ranks of those who leave their day job and go directly to their evening job. These men love their families enough to actually want to provide them.

Your husband's son represents a life created out of randomness and providing for his future seems no more important and significant than was his conception. It is all about what is most convenient for the adults involved.

OP, I am not criticizing you for wanting to make your life easier. Your husband's son existence and financial security is a cautionary tale filled with examples of adults doing what is most convenient fulfilling their needs and preferences.

Wow, such a lovely way to put it :)
TheSilence · 02/05/2021 14:27

@Dugee

I am feeling sorry for the DSS. It doesn't sound like he has any of the adults, who should be supporting him (ie his mum and dad), doing what's best for him. However this isn't OP's responsibility.
From what info we’ve got on here, what do you think his mum is going wrong, or could be doing better?
FrankieFox · 02/05/2021 17:46

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

OverTheRubicon · 02/05/2021 18:23

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

AlexaRain · 02/05/2021 18:27

@FrankieFox

Everyone keeps asking why the OP married a man with so little integrity. Is it not obvious that she has to take what she could get? With a personality like that I can’t imagine she was beating good men off with a stick.
That's a bit harsh.

These threads are full of women complaining about deadbeat exes. Did they all have to take what they could get too?

Pinkpaisley · 02/05/2021 18:36

Expecting 50:50 in that scenario is insane.

It’s completely understandable he wants a close bond with his next child, but he still needs to meet his financial responsibility to his first. His son will know that his dad couldn’t be bothered to pay child support because he got a new baby. Even if the mother is a saint and tries to hide it, the facts will come out eventually. Your DH has to make a decision about the kind of relationship he wants with his first child.

kandikandi · 02/05/2021 18:45

@Pinkpaisley

Expecting 50:50 in that scenario is insane.

It’s completely understandable he wants a close bond with his next child, but he still needs to meet his financial responsibility to his first. His son will know that his dad couldn’t be bothered to pay child support because he got a new baby. Even if the mother is a saint and tries to hide it, the facts will come out eventually. Your DH has to make a decision about the kind of relationship he wants with his first child.

Parents who protect their children from their adult conflict with the other parent are not saints. They are decent.
TrustTheGeneGenie · 02/05/2021 19:08

I can't believe a woman keeping her child from its dad for four years is seen as completely okay tbh. Bizarre. Seems if you have a vagina you can do as you please and it's fine.

FrankieFox · 02/05/2021 19:32

@TrustTheGeneGenie

I can't believe a woman keeping her child from its dad for four years is seen as completely okay tbh. Bizarre. Seems if you have a vagina you can do as you please and it's fine.
I didn’t see where anyone said that, which post are you talking about? Whatever the mum did seven years doesn’t has no relevance here anyway. It’s about the child’s best interests.
Tiredoftattler · 02/05/2021 19:33

@kandikandi

Effective parents teach their children how to effectively handle conflict; that does always entail protecting them from conflict.

What children need or should know should be determined by the situation and the facts and circumstances surrounding that situation. Children are not always best served by trying to shield them from reality.

Sometimes, they are best served by being taught to face and effectively navigate the situations that are a part of their reality.

In these situations , there is no one size fits all solutions. Decent parents are those who best equip their children with the skills that permit them to be successfully functioning adults.

TrustTheGeneGenie · 02/05/2021 19:35

She wasn't acting in the child's best interests then. I haven't suggested it makes a difference to this situation but posters saying "oh you're just painting her in a bad light" rather than judging her as harshly as they are the dad.

ineedaholidaynow · 02/05/2021 19:36

Maybe it took her some time to track him down if he was a ONS

TrustTheGeneGenie · 02/05/2021 19:37

@ineedaholidaynow

Maybe it took her some time to track him down if he was a ONS
She said she texted him which suggests they were in contact.
FrankieFox · 02/05/2021 19:43

@TrustTheGeneGenie

She wasn't acting in the child's best interests then. I haven't suggested it makes a difference to this situation but posters saying "oh you're just painting her in a bad light" rather than judging her as harshly as they are the dad.
Arguing over how adults behaved many years ago is not in the child’s best interests. The kid didn’t do anything wrong!
Thisnamewasnttaken123 · 02/05/2021 19:43

And he didn't respond or at least SAID he didn't get the message.
Let's not put all the blame on the mum here having unprotected sex on a one night stand was a stupid idea for the BOTH of them.

Bares no relevance anyway to what is currently happening now...