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 ?

@CandyLeBonBon

Agreed *@ALevelhelp*

No idea why my previous message was deleted either!

I just think this thread is utterly shameful. How anyone can think it's acceptable for OP's husband to make a lifestyle choice that means he no longer supports his other child is beyond me. I'd be more understanding if he'd lost his job and was struggling to find another, or for whatever reason was unable to work, but no - he just fancies being at home with his little one. Lucky him. Oh, and if the young lad wants to, he can come and join them? But if not, well....

@ALevelhelp

Whether you agree with it or not, legally the OP's DP and the OP, don't have an obligation to pay CMS if the DP gives up work and has no income. That is fact.

Do you think the comments and remarks aimed at the OP on this thread, have encouraged her to voluntarily pay the CMS on her DP's behalf? Or do you think these comments have discouraged her from paying it?

I think you all have shot both yourselves (as anyone can read this thread, registered mumsnet user or not) and the DP's ex massively in the foot by reinforcing opinions of self entitled ex wives / partners.

[quote AlexaRain]@ALevelhelp

Whether you agree with it or not, legally the OP's DP and the OP, don't have an obligation to pay CMS if the DP gives up work and has no income. That is fact.

Do you think the comments and remarks aimed at the OP on this thread, have encouraged her to voluntarily pay the CMS on her DP's behalf? Or do you think these comments have discouraged her from paying it?

I think you all have shot both yourselves (as anyone can read this thread, registered mumsnet user or not) and the DP's ex massively in the foot by reinforcing opinions of self entitled ex wives / partners.[/quote]
Self entitled ex wives. Yep can see where your are in this debate,

Do you mean mothers of children which men have fathered and chose to walk away from?

Legally they do t have to pay, morally they should.

Still I guess the resident parent could go on to benefits ...but I' guess that would be wrong too.

It may well be a case of this parent not paying and the tax payer picking up the tab.

@AlexaRain

Well aren't you a delight. I'll hold my head up high thanks as the person who didn't walk away from their child

You and your H deserve to be together. I hope his ex who he at some stage loved and had sex enough times to make a child with has a wonderful life without her ex in it. Thanks from a tax payer and not an ex wife.

Think the only people who have shown their true colours are the OP and her little (and I do.mean little because it is the minority of posters) band of followers who can't see beyond their dislike of woman who had children with their OHs before them.

Also nobody is talking about the legality of what they are planning to do. It's the lack of morals behind it.

I'll just add, as a 'bitter ex wife' that I facilitated my now ex's maintenance payments when he couldn't afford them. Turns out he was cheating on me and embezzling money from my business so was a REAL prince amongst men, but at the time, I didn't know that. So I chose to adjust our finances so that his children received the financial support they deserved. It would've felt wrong to do otherwise.

I probably shot myself in the foot there but I'd do the same again if a similar situation arose.

@Feelinghothothottoday

You and your H deserve to be together. I hope his ex who he at some stage loved and had sex enough times to make a child with has a wonderful life without her ex in it. Thanks from a tax payer and not an ex wife.

It was a one night stand. He didn't even find out he had a child until the child was 4.

Reason being that the child's mother had formed a new relationship for 4 years but when that broke down, the man wasn't liable for CMS as he wasn't the child's father. So she tracked OP's DP down (after hiding his child from him for 4 years) to claim CMS. The OP's DP paid CMS and built a relationship with his son.

@PottyTrainingissues

Surely this is easy to sort out. 1). Your Dh being a sahd is better for you all so do that it sounds ideal 2). Don’t stress cms payment isn’t worked out on your wages 3). You said you can afford the £250 a month still so pay that ! Your wages / dh wages/ child benefit etc etc it’s all ‘household income’ and that’s a priority bill. View it as no different to rent council tax or utilities ! You wouldn’t start wondering do you still need to pay those

RE your third point, the OP doesn’t want to. She’s admitted she can easily afford to, but doesn’t want to hand money over to the ex.

Actually Alexa, I think the OP said it was a fling? Which could mean anything from one night to 6 months or so!

@CandyLeBonBon

Actually Alexa, I think the OP said it was a fling? Which could mean anything from one night to 6 months or so!

Doesn't change the fact that she didn't bother telling OP's DP that he had a child because she was being financially supported by another man. Then that relationship broke down and at that point she told the OP's DP that he had a child and asked for CMS.

Also doesn't change the fact that if the dh gives up his job knowing that 50/50 care is not what dss wants, then he will be deliberately depriving his child of financial support.

I'm just doing what's best for baby.

As anyone would expect.

Do you ever allow yourself to think about why he isn't doing the same for his children?

Ah well. Op will continue to have tunnel vision, dh will be a sahp and everyone will all live happily ever after. The end! 😂

@Whiskyinajar. It's amazing how many NRPs (mostly fathers) are happy for the taxpayer to pick up the tab for their children, isn't it?

Personally I think there should be a minimum child maintenance payment that all children are entitled to. If the NRP can't afford it, the state pays it for them and takes it off their future state pension entitlement so they have to wait longer to claim.

[quote Jellybabiesforbreakfast]@Whiskyinajar. It's amazing how many NRPs (mostly fathers) are happy for the taxpayer to pick up the tab for their children, isn't it?

Personally I think there should be a minimum child maintenance payment that all children are entitled to. If the NRP can't afford it, the state pays it for them and takes it off their future state pension entitlement so they have to wait longer to claim.[/quote]
Maintenance doesn't affect benefit entitlement.

@AlexaRain. I know that. But one of the reasons many RPs need benefits is because NRPs don't do or pay their share. The benefits system used to take maintenance into account but that was changed because it was so unpredictable and the amounts so small.

Hence the RP and the state fund the children, while the NRP's contribution is an often optional extra.

Parents should pay for their kids. End of.

And that's relevant how?

Maintenance doesn't affect benefit entitlement.

I don't think @Jellybabiesforbreakfast mentioned or was referring to maintenance in relation to benefits, unless I misread their post?

Nope. What I'm saying is that lack of financial support by absent fathers is a big driver of poverty for children of single parents.

Child benefit should be treated as an absolute commitment. A minimum amount should be payable and if NRPs chose not to work or become unemployed, they can take a "payment holiday" and the government pays for them. They can then repay the government either by continuing to pay after payments to the child cease or by deferring taking their state pension.

So in the OP's case, her partner can choose to be a SAHP but he'll have to repay the missed payments somewhere down the v line. Everybody happy.

That's what I thought you meant Jelly. Interesting concept

Well, a lot of people take mortgage holidays when they're financially stretched. They extend the term of their mortgage or overpay later. I've often wondered why maintenence is treated differently. Is paying for your child less important than paying for your house?

The relationship between the child's parents at conception shouldn't come into it IMO.