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 ?

Why does the NRPs home costs not seem valid by some posters, I can't speak for all but my DH and I could of had a small 2/3bed house for ourselves but we chose a much older spacious house with 2 reception rooms and space to possibly extend purely because he has other children who we factored in and giving them space when here.. we also pay a ridiculous amount for the top internet so that gaming / streaming isn't a problem. Food shops are very different when they stay also. It's not only mums rent/ bills that shouldn't be taken into account really

"Why does the NRPs home costs not seem valid by some posters,"

You are coming onto a thread where a NRP can legally duck out of his responsibilities paying absolutely nothing in maintenance and asking that...

And for your information your DHs costs are counted, for every night the child is with the NRP you get a reduction in maintenance.
You can even get further money off if you decide to have more children or if you had children already living with you that aren't even his...

Or you can choose some other available loop holes to pay a minimal amount if you are self employed..

Do you have your step children 50% of the time @ihavenowords30 ?

ihavenowords30 it's your choice to have fancy Internet.

Another one of those threads were I don’t see the need to share private stuff like this. It’s almost like canvassing abuse. Bizarre !.

As PP have said you do receive a reduction based on how many overnights you have them and even based on number of children in your household.

A NRP's contribution goes down the more children they have. Could you imagine the outrage if their contribution went up based on each additional child the RP had.

Not even the more children they themselves have actually, based on the children in their household.

And before that gets twisted, I absolutely don't think a NRP maintenance should go up to help support a child in another household that has absolutely nothing to do with them. Neither do I think NRPs payments should go down based on their choices but alas we don't get that choice.

The last post on this went very much the same way. I think if you are able to offer 50/50 and that’s feasible with school etc, that is a perfectly good offer and then no maintanence is due anyway. That way 50% of DSS costs will be covered by you which is fair enough.

People rely too much on maintainence I feel. But every child should ideally have 50/50 as long as the parenting is good with both parents and then each parent should pay 50% of everything.

It seems many think the default is EOW and mum is priority and can do as she pleases to accommodate her DC including any new DC but dad does not have the same privilege.

I think if you can offer 50/50 that is exes choice to either take it and benefit that way, or lose the costs and get neither. Exes shouldn’t be able to dictate what you can and can’t do with your life to always accommodate what they need for the DC. Peoples lives can and will change and everyone just has to do what they need to do; change it and make it work. I imagine if ex was having another child and decided to give up work to do this, therefore lowering their income, no one would question that, they’d probably say NRP should up their maintanence to help!

blendiful it's been asked several times but not really been answered. Do you think it's OK if 50/50 doesn't happen because the child doesn't want to go for the NRP to continue with this plan? I'm not asking legally but morally? It keeps being termed as the RPs choice to accept 50/50 or to not. This child is 11, his feelings on this should be taken into consideration.

The difference for me is that if my income lowers it does not impact any other household than my own. I would have loved another child but to do so would have meant upheaval and massive change to my ability to allow my current DCs to continue activities and suchlike so I chose to not have any more. I certainly wouldn't expect an increased maintenance payment to cover those costs, what a bizarre suggestion. Why would I expect my ex to increase maintenance to allow me to work less or have more children? I also don't know any of my LP friends who would expect this either.

@Blendiful It seems many think the default is EOW and mum is priority and can do as she pleases to accommodate her DC including any new DC but dad does not have the same privilege.

While I would always prefer to have my DCs more than EOW, an ex hardly gets to do "as she pleases" if they have sole residency for the vast bulk of the time (including school pickups, sickness and all the other things that come with it), and £250 to put together all the costs of raising a child outside every second weekend.

50/50 can be great if both parents are engaged and involved but not if one of them, either father or mother, is only committed to it to minimise maintenance.

@Blendiful

The last post on this went very much the same way. I think if you are able to offer 50/50 and that’s feasible with school etc, that is a perfectly good offer and then no maintanence is due anyway. That way 50% of DSS costs will be covered by you which is fair enough.

People rely too much on maintainence I feel. But every child should ideally have 50/50 as long as the parenting is good with both parents and then each parent should pay 50% of everything.

It seems many think the default is EOW and mum is priority and can do as she pleases to accommodate her DC including any new DC but dad does not have the same privilege.

I think if you can offer 50/50 that is exes choice to either take it and benefit that way, or lose the costs and get neither. Exes shouldn’t be able to dictate what you can and can’t do with your life to always accommodate what they need for the DC. Peoples lives can and will change and everyone just has to do what they need to do; change it and make it work. I imagine if ex was having another child and decided to give up work to do this, therefore lowering their income, no one would question that, they’d probably say NRP should up their maintanence to help!

I begged my exH for shared care. I would have loved to avoid my career going south. I'd be on £50-60k by now. As it is I'm scraped a living and yes, I've relied on maintenance because I've had no choice. Eldest is autistic so there's extra work, appointments, meltdowns, mental health issues that have ALL been dealt with by me. Single handedly.

He refused to even ask his firm about flexible working because he didn't want people to consider him as expendable by going part time.

He has never taken a day off when they are sick, does nothing in relation to any of their care and is quite happy having them stay over for one night a fortnight.

I have now put myself through uni and got a better paying job now they're a bit older but I still rely on that maintenance because it's a tough tough slog working AND being the sole adult in their lives that these young people can rely on. The pressure is enormous.

I still can't work full time just yet but I'm getting there. My son's mental health means that I still need to be around more and 40 hours a week is too much for me right now to be able to balance all their needs as well.

I get sick of hearing how 'we only want money over time' I'd love exH to be more involved. He just won't.

And then to be told we 'shouldn't rely on maintenance'?

It's a joke.

Exes shouldn’t be able to dictate what you can and can’t do with your life to always accommodate what they need for the DC
How ironic that is exactly what this man plans are.

Anyone who suddenly expects 50/50 because it suits them financially is expecting not only the ex but the child to accommodate his needs.

It is so insulting and hurtful to the child to be informed that a parent wants more time with them because they resent to pay maintenance.

My ex moved out into a one bed flat with his GF 25 miles away. He had no intention of doing 50:50 care.

Coming in to this right at the end, but I can’t say I like the 50/50 solution as a quick easy fix in these situations.

50:50 isn’t the great solution always. I have a friend whose son is 19 and has done 50:50 for ever. He wants to stop - has done for years. Wants one home, one bedroom. However he doesn’t want to “upset” either parent. And neither parent will help him make a decision. 50:50 isn’t about the child but the parents.

I'd love to know what mortgage we can get that would allow us to only pay for DSDs bedroom on the nights she sleeps in it if anyone could advise?

It's a special type of mortgage on available to RPs

You do realise we have those same costs as well as, in most circumstances, the majority if not all regular activities, clothes, food, childcare etc etc?

And in case my point is lost on you, the reduction isn't for the room 😳

You know that though. It's hyperbole to perpetuate a poor NRP attitude. I rarely hear a RP complaining about paying for their children, I do hear them, and rightfully so, complaining about the thousands of NRPs who don't, won't and dodge. HTH.

"You know that though. It's hyperbole to perpetuate a poor NRP attitude. I rarely hear a RP complaining about paying for their children, I do hear them, and rightfully so, complaining about the thousands of NRPs who don't, won't and dodge. HTH."

Absolutely!

I do realise that, I just find it puzzling when people talk as if maintenance is the only money an NRP will spend on their child, and the RP is the only one paying bigger bills to accomodate the children. There's always a lack of nuance.*

*The case of these worthless sacks of shit who don't see or pay for their children excepted.

Exes shouldn’t be able to dictate what you can and can’t do with your life to always accommodate what they need for the DC.

Heaven forbid they expect a father to pay for his children. The children should just suck it up and learn to survive on oxygen alone or they're being "entitled".

@Jellybabiesforbreakfast

Exes shouldn’t be able to dictate what you can and can’t do with your life to always accommodate what they need for the DC.

Heaven forbid they expect a father to pay for his children. The children should just suck it up and learn to survive on oxygen alone or they're being "entitled".

Just a joke isn't it

Well my ex made it very clear, when we were separating, that as I wanted the children, it was only fair that I had the lions share of their care.

I'm afraid I'll save my concern for the thousands of women out there, like me, who constantly put their kids front and central, in spite of the difficulties that causes. Because that's what good parenting means.

I'll be interested to see if the op comes back here in a few months or years with an entirely different viewpoint, once she's actually done some parenting of her own child.