Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Step-parenting

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

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?
TrustTheGeneGenie · 01/05/2021 10:40

@twinkletoesfairynose

No he has a responsibility to PAY for both of his kids just like mums do.

It sounds like they are throwing the first mum/kid under a bus for their own benefit

Just like mum's do? Do sahms financially contribute? Or is their contribution the care?
TrustTheGeneGenie · 01/05/2021 10:40

[quote Maybe83]@TrustTheGeneGenie hands on parenting usually involves a financial aspect. Since children can't live on fresh air.

So he can absolutely take on more hands on parenting for both his children once the OP is happy she then becomes 100% financially responsible for him both of the children in their home.

The exact same way a SF would be if a mother had 50/50 and became a SAHP to look after subsequent children.[/quote]
Would you say that to a stay at home mum or?

Jellybabiesforbreakfast · 01/05/2021 10:53

OP, shared care may be a possible option but I'd have a think about whether you and your DH want the reality of it and whether it will work for your DSS. Will your DH want to do school drop-offs and pick-ups with a toddler in tow? Will he want to ferry your DSS about to after-school activities (which you will be 50% responsible for paying for)? How will you feel about not being able to go away doing term-time because your DH has to care for your DSS?

Maybe83 · 01/05/2021 10:53

I dont get your point?

Are you asking if I would expect a woman who wanted to become a SAHP in a second relationship to provide child care for the children of that relationship, would I expect her husband to assume 100% financial responsibility for her children from a prior relationship? If she had 50/50 so no maintenance from their father.

If so of course I would. If she has no access to any money other than her husbands wage, which then would become 100% family money.

Were do you think the money would come from to support the children she had 50% of the time if not from him? The magic money tree?

TrustTheGeneGenie · 01/05/2021 10:55

@Maybe83

I dont get your point?

Are you asking if I would expect a woman who wanted to become a SAHP in a second relationship to provide child care for the children of that relationship, would I expect her husband to assume 100% financial responsibility for her children from a prior relationship? If she had 50/50 so no maintenance from their father.

If so of course I would. If she has no access to any money other than her husbands wage, which then would become 100% family money.

Were do you think the money would come from to support the children she had 50% of the time if not from him? The magic money tree?

She's already said she's happy to have his child 50/50 so she's clearly already agreed to it and knows what it entails.

What I'm saying is you can't say only parents who earn count as supporting heir kids. it's bullshit.

worriedandannoyed · 01/05/2021 10:58

@Britsmums11

I'm not sure why lots of people are assuming my husband will leave me ? That's not the point of the post.

I can tell you we have a strong marriage and whether that lasts is not something you can predict.

I don't think anyone is assuming that. But if he can treat one mother of his child with such complete disrespect that's exactly how he will treat you IF you were to split up.

How is the mother of his child expected to make up this loss of income? Oh so you'll have his child more. So she gets less time with her child so you can manipulate the system to make her work more. Absolutely disgusting. You both sound vile

Yummymummy2020 · 01/05/2021 10:58

If he is a stay at home dad, he can take the fifty fifty split of caring for the other child and then I don’t really see any issue as he wouldn’t be due to pay cms anyway if I am correct? You have to do what’s best for you and this may also be best for the stepson too if he gets to see his dad more. I think once it’s not a case of not paying money or minding his son extra it’s totally fine! You can make up for the money in childcare of the step child!

anon12345678901 · 01/05/2021 11:00

@Mrbob

Wow everyone is being pretty shitty to OP and her DP. They are clearly not doing this to avoid payment and are saying that they want to continue paying CMS and that the change in circumstances would mean that they could have his other child more. People on here assume that all men who have a previous child are arseholes and trying to avoid paying for them and only want 50:50 so they don’t have to pay. Maybe examine your own preconceptions and bias
Hmm they said they want to go 50:50 to not pay CMS or maybe the husband can work part time to drop the payment. I mean it sounds very financially driven doesn't it 🤷🏻‍♀️
Maybe83 · 01/05/2021 11:03

No that isn't what she has said at all. There is a big difference in taking on 50% of the costs of having a child and just having a child in your home 50% of the time.

If she is in fact happy with taking on the sole financial responsibility for their family and 50/50 would be the best thing for his son it could work. Being happy with the day to day responsibility that comes with.

EarringsandLipstick · 01/05/2021 11:03

She's already said she's happy to have his child 50/50 so she's clearly already agreed to it and knows what it entails.

It doesn't sound like it.

OP's point is that they can't afford the current £250 CM that's paid. Therefore how will they afford all the shared costs - that's clothing, activities, shoes, uniform, school books, presents and so on, in addition to the extra food costs? I don't think this has been considered at all, and it's appalling behaviour by both OP & her husband.

DioneTheDiabolist · 01/05/2021 11:04

Why can't he get a part time job in the evenings/weekends that will earn him £250 per month @Britsmums11? That way he covers childcare for DC2 and the maintenance for DC1.

Jellybabiesforbreakfast · 01/05/2021 11:08

How is the mother of his child expected to make up this loss of income? Oh so you'll have his child more. So she gets less time with her child so you can manipulate the system to make her work more. Absolutely disgusting. You both sound vile

I think this is a little harsh. I don't think the OP and her DH are really prepared for the reality of 50/50 care (and sharing DSS costs 50/50) but it may not be difficult for the mother to make up £250 per month if her son is with his father for half the time rather than EOW. She can work more and (assuming the OP and DH actually pay their share) she'll be spending much less on the child. She may come out of this materially better off.

Thisnamewasnttaken123 · 01/05/2021 11:11

"How is the mother of his child expected to make up this loss of income? Oh so you'll have his child more. So she gets less time with her child so you can manipulate the system to make her work more. Absolutely disgusting. You both sound vile"

I agree.

ThatIsMyPotato · 01/05/2021 11:13

@tenlittlecygnets

Even if he does suggest 50:50 care, his ex will still have all her living costs - mortgage, bills, car, food, etc etc - why should she have to pay for everything by herself? How unfair.

Your h's first child should come first.

And you should have costed everything, including childcare, before getting pg.

She should be paying her living costs herself anyway. Maintenance is for the children's living costs.

As for your Your h's first child should come first that is a disgusting thing to say implying his 2nd child isn't equal. Would you tell a "nuclear family" with 3 kids that the oldest should come first?!

ThatIsMyPotato · 01/05/2021 11:14

[quote ineedaholidaynow]@ElderMillennial the ex didn’t have a choice of whether another child was brought into the mix[/quote]
The ex should have forseen it might happen when they split up

PlanDeRaccordement · 01/05/2021 11:18

@EarringsandLipstick

She's already said she's happy to have his child 50/50 so she's clearly already agreed to it and knows what it entails.

It doesn't sound like it.

OP's point is that they can't afford the current £250 CM that's paid. Therefore how will they afford all the shared costs - that's clothing, activities, shoes, uniform, school books, presents and so on, in addition to the extra food costs? I don't think this has been considered at all, and it's appalling behaviour by both OP & her husband.

Most of the £250/mo CMS likely goes to cover wrap around child care, or after school clubs. This is assuming worst case financial situation that the ex is single and works FT and has no new partner to split household costs with.

If the father is increasing his care of the child from 1 night EOW to 50% that by itself will account for most of the £250. The ex will avoid those monthly child care costs to her.

I agree the father and OP won’t be £250 better off, they will have to provide more food, some clothes, contribute to uniform, activities etc. Probably extra petrol costs to drive child around (if have a car and live rurally). But I don’t think it will be a full £250/mo out of their pockets.

I think overall the ex’s cost avoidance plus getting 50% support on daily costs will be higher value than £250/mo and thus him being a SAHD will be of benefit to his ex, not a detriment. It is also, in best interests of the child to be raised by their father 50% instead of 1 night a week. They are bound to feel left behind and replaced by new child if the father keeps it at 1 night per week.

I agree if budget doesnt balance, it’s the fathers responsibility to make them balance and not the OP. Through part time work, using his savings...whatever. I just think that the SAHD idea could be a win win for everyone involved, especially the child who would benefit from increased contact with their father.

anon12345678901 · 01/05/2021 11:18

@Maybe83

No that isn't what she has said at all. There is a big difference in taking on 50% of the costs of having a child and just having a child in your home 50% of the time.

If she is in fact happy with taking on the sole financial responsibility for their family and 50/50 would be the best thing for his son it could work. Being happy with the day to day responsibility that comes with.

Have you read it properly?

'I agree DSS should come more often or even go 50:50 that way no CMS payment needed.'

Yeah seems really like it's not financially driven doesn't it. 🤦🏻‍♀️

Frazzled2207 · 01/05/2021 11:19

Regardless of your family situation he had a moral (if not legal) responsibility to support all his children financially. If he chooses to stay at home then the money for his older child may effectively need to come out of your wage.

PlanDeRaccordement · 01/05/2021 11:21

So she gets less time with her child so you can manipulate the system to make her work more.

If she isn’t already working FT, how do you know she doesn’t want to? Many threads on here involve mothers weeping with frustration over the low pay and insecurity of jobs that fit around the school runs. They all WANT to get a FT well paid job. They WANT an actual career. They WANT the long term financial security of being able to save a decent pension and a deposit on a home.

Maybe83 · 01/05/2021 11:23

@TrustTheGeneGenie that isn't what I said but any SAPM still has to access financial support somehow be it a working partner or benefits.

So of course you still have a responsibility to ensure your children have financial support some how. Or are SAHP some how excluded from figuring out how their children will eat? That is a financial input.

You might of missed were the OP said she can't think about what's best for everyone.
Well 50/50 means many more decisions about what's best for everyone rather than just her baby.

So it isnt as simple as him giving up work and everything is hunky dory. As I said if the OP is happy with that then it could work out for them.

OnlyInYourDreams · 01/05/2021 11:25

I'm not sure why lots of people are assuming my husband will leave me ? That's not the point of the post. Well you can be sure that if he ever does then your child will drop down the pecking order in favour of whichever new woman he ends up with.

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 and will therefore have a good idea if your relationship ever breaks down.

Added to which, if he is the stay at home parent and you split there is every chance he would gain primary residency of your child if he went for it.

ThatIsMyPotato · 01/05/2021 11:27

@PlanDeRaccordement

So she gets less time with her child so you can manipulate the system to make her work more.

If she isn’t already working FT, how do you know she doesn’t want to? Many threads on here involve mothers weeping with frustration over the low pay and insecurity of jobs that fit around the school runs. They all WANT to get a FT well paid job. They WANT an actual career. They WANT the long term financial security of being able to save a decent pension and a deposit on a home.

I agree I see lots of ex wifes complaining the child's dad won't take them more so they can work more.
SteveBuscemisRheumyEye · 01/05/2021 11:35

If he's a SAHD can he do all the childcare for his older child? So pick ups and drop offs, holiday care etc and then drop him home to his mum? It would save mum money in child care and seems like a fair exchange, plus he gets to be in his older child's life in a meaningful way

ThisIsSimplyBeyond · 01/05/2021 11:36

If he is actively choosing not to pay for his other child, and you agree with that decision, you are enabling him in the financial abuse of his ex partner. Watch out though, karma's a bitch.

SteveBuscemisRheumyEye · 01/05/2021 11:36

Him being a SAHD should benefit both his boys