Maintenance

[Bomblbee]

Am I missing the point with maintenance.

Before I get flamed I know this is DH business and should be paying what it costs to provide for his children as agreed by him and DM.

My DH shares care of my SC with their DM, not far off 50/50 and pays some maintenance (above what the calculator suggests), I realise this isn’t enough to solely pay for any child but is it meant to?

DH pays for the SC whilst they’re in our home, pays maintenance for them to DM, as far as DM is concerned this maintenance should be enough to cover the SC the entire time they’re at her home and she shouldn’t have to put anything more into the pot towards their daily living costs or unexpected costs like trips or replacement items.

Perhaps I’m being unreasonable but I was under the impression that the maintenance is to bridge the gap of extra time, not solely pay for the cost of having children incurred by the main carer?

The calculated minimum doesn’t come close to even bridging the gap never mind anything else. So if your DH is (rightly) paying more than the insulting pittance that would be enforced by cms then it’s possible that amount bridges the gap but I highly doubt it covers all costs. Without figures it’s hard to judge so no one can really help but as a step parent coming on mumsnet and questioning how much maintenance your DH pays to the mother of his kids, you may want to get your hard hat on. It is unlikely to go well for you!

Personally I couldn’t handle my husband having children of his own and everything that goes along with that, I would only be able to cope with shared kids and all our resources going towards our shared kids. So I didn’t get with anyone with kids, I know it wouldn’t go well for anyone. So I get that it must be a difficult situation to navigate. But it’s never a good look when the second wife starts kicking off about how much money her DH pays for kids he had long before she was on the scene especially when I’m reality it doesn’t come close to half the cost of raising them.

The maintenance is for your DH's part of raising the kids during the time they are with DM. Not the whole of it. That's ridiculous, why does she think she doesn't have to contribute for her own children.

@TrufflesAndToast I’m not sure what I’ve written that implies I’m kicking off? I’m not I’m just asking a question.

What I’m saying is that if the children are 50/50 then neither parent (in theory) gets anything, because the understanding is that both parents incur equal costs. I know plenty of parents would still pay even in this instance if there’s a huge disparity between income.

But what you’ve said is exactly what I’m suggesting, maintenance doesn’t come close the even half the cost, because it’s not supposed to?

No it isn't meant to cover everything. Both parents should and are expected to cover the costs of raising a child. The parent who is classed as they 'main' carer also receives child benefit to help with this (if not earning above threshold) and may be entitled to other benefits dependent on their income. They would also be entitled to a greater housing allowance, all unlike the non resident parent who still needs to provide for their child/ren nearly half of the time.

If there is a 50/50 arrangement no maintenance is payable by either parent.

@MooSakah Thank you

How are they deciding who pays for which school trip if its 50/50?

And if mum is struggling with the money could your DP offer to have the kids live with you more often? In the holidays maybe? 60/40 Then she'd only have to pay you the maintenance based on her income.

@MooSakah I don’t think DM is struggling but I can’t be certain. It doesn’t look that way but it might be a smokescreen. DSD said they’ve been away on a quite expensive sounding weekend with DM for their younger siblings birthday.

We also have almost 50/50 and they decided that my SO will pay for half of all expenses, which includes half of nursery fees, extracurriculars, etc. He then pays a certain additional maintenance fee to compensate for the 'almost' 50/50. We pay for our own clothes, nappies, toys, etc.

For clarity, BM makes more money than my SO but their household income is much lower than ours because of my salary (which obviously isn't factored in).

Everyone involved agreed this is the most fair way to do things because SO shouldn't be paying for 100% and thankfully we are all reasonable people. However when one or more parties isn't quite as reasonable I know this can be a shit situation.

I think it's always a good idea to have really high fences when it comes to blended families and finances. They don't look in your back yard and you don't look in theirs. It's really non of your business

Really hard when DSC come back bragging that they treated to xyz and that maintenance is crippling the second family and there's a disparity.

I think true division of costs is always going to be above the standards CMS spit out total.

However this is easy for me to say as I'm the high earner in my household and it's a bone of contention with DSD mum because she sees me treat her DD to things she could never afford and that makes her feel like crap (I pay for a horse for DSD and lessons ect). It's a normal feeling jealousy so I respect her feelings and try to never do anything without her permission, and she in turn (mostly) tries to avoid the fact out houses are vastly different in income and manages those feelings away from DSD as much as she can.

She still uses my DH as a ATM and says it's ok because candles can cover you, but realistically I have had to say no I won't subsides two households because I married a man with a child, I didn't sign up for that . If I chose to help it's because I want to, not because I'm going to apologise for being a high earner and her a lower one.

But with nursery fees/childcare 100% that cost needs to be covered by both parents.

@candlelightsatdawn I’m sure you do things with the best intentions but what an utterly horrible situation for the child’s mum. She sees you happily paying for the ‘Disney’ things like horse riding but when it comes to the mundane stuff that’s not your duty to pay for. No, it’s not your duty of course but can’t you see how it might come across - you’re happy to pay for stuff that grabs attention, gets the smiles from the child, but not contribute to the dull stuff. So the poor mum has to worry about the bills while the step mum buys her child a horse

I’m not sure what’s right in that situation, it’s of course lovely for the child she gets those treats and you can of course choose what you spend your own money on but I can’t help thinking how utterly horrible for her poor mum. I’m sure her daughter will grow up to fully understand what all the adults in her life did for her but right now the mum must be so sad. Good for her for managing those feelings away from her DD.

@TrufflesAndToast so? It's like if someone buys a birthday gift. It's going to be something nice usually not everyday dull stuff. It's an added extra.

She should be happy her daughter gets the opportunity and at no cost to herself. My DSC's mum is similar although she's the one demanding I pay for music lessons etc because I can afford it.

@TrufflesAndToast so what’s the answer then, should Candlelight’s DSD miss out on extra treats just because of her mum’s feelings? If Candlelight was smugly bragging to DSD saying look what I can give you, isn’t your mum a bit shit hahah” then I’d get it, but if the situation is handled sensitively then why should mum be sad rather than pleased that her daughter is getting nice things she’d never have a chance of benefiting from otherwise?

SPs can’t bloody win, treat the DSCs and we’re trying to get one up on the RP, don’t treat them and we're accused of being cold and not treating them as our own (talking generally, not saying you personally Truffles). So much shit in families were there are step parents in the mix is caused by adults’ feelings and insecurities in the guise of “won’t somebody think of the chiiiildren.”

I get that it’s nice on the face of it but I do also think it’s inappropriate and overstepping for a step parent to act ‘Disney’ and pay for expensive treats that the child’s parent can’t afford….because they’re busy paying the boring bills. I think you either keep yourself separate financially (totally understandable) or pitch in with the basic expenses. It smacks of Disney step parenting to me and isn’t going to help with balanced family dynamics. I know it may be done with good intentions but I personally believe it’s really inappropriate. It kind of comes across as something that a quite immature step mother with no kids of their own would do because they enjoy the fun attention and praise it gets them and don’t have the emotional maturity to see the impact it can have on the child’s mum. The PP previously admitted it makes the child’s mum feel like crap so if she was actually a nice person she either wouldn’t do it or would pay for smaller less attention seeking treats and use the rest of the money she wanted to spend on her step daughter for day to day expenses which helps her mum in turn to afford some small treats. Just my opinion though, I accept others may not agree!

SPs can’t bloody win, treat the DSCs and we’re trying to get one up on the RP, don’t treat them and we're accused of being cold and not treating them as our own (talking generally, not saying you personally Truffles

I agree, and to top it all off there's a feeling of "well why does mum get a say in how I spend my money anyway" I hate that she feels she has ANY say in how I spend my money when I spend it on her kids. She doesn't.

Again, to stress, not at all aimed at you Truffles

So if I pay for music lessons for my DC and then wanted to pay for them for DSC that wouldn't be ok with you? Because I have the opposite in that mum is demanding I pay. This is a genuine question and I'm interested in the different opinions.

If my child had a horse would I not be allowed to let them share it with DSC in case mum got upset?

Honestly if the child’s mum demanded I paid for anything then I wouldn’t even consider it on principle! If you have a horse in your household then of course that’s different to going out and paying specifically for lessons as it’s just part of the child visiting.

I absolutely get that this is hard stuff to navigate and I personally believe step families are by and large a nightmare for all involved. It just made me feel so sad for the poor mum talked about above, where her child’s step mum is lavishing her with expensive treats that she can’t afford. I don’t know what the answer is but I think it’s awful for her

While I completely understand why a birth parent's feelings may be hurt or made to feel inadequate because they can't afford things a stepparent can, the fact is that it's not about the parent, it's about the child.

Stepparents get shat on all the time for not contributing enough, or treating their own children differently. The amount of moaning on this forum about 'it's not about you, it's about the kids' should apply to birth parents as well, this is a two way street.

Mum is free to also date someone with a high income if they want to. And the idea that stepparents don't contribute financially to the 'boring' things is ludicrous. I don't pay money into my stepson's mum's bank account directly, but you can bet your ass I contribute financially. I bought a three bedroom house even though I'm childless. I'm paying mortgage on a ridiculously expensive house (I'm in the South East), even though I most certainly would not need a house this big if I didn't have a stepson.

But stepparents can never win.

I don’t know what the answer is but I think it’s awful for her it's just life though. Some people earn more. It's a bit off to say someone in the child's family can't buy them gifts imo. If it were a grandparent it wouldn't be an issue.

@TrufflesAndToast I actually don't know what to say. I'm actually really floored.

I'm not sure why I'm having to justify this but here I go because that's ticked me off.

For years DSD didn't even know who paid for the horse she assumed her parents (both mum and dad) and the horse therapy that went with it - my DSD is non Nero typical and it's helped her dramatically as she was struggling and both mum and dad didn't want to heavily medicate her.

I was quite happy for it to be kept that way but her DM told DSD fight that if she didn't "start acting normal" she would tell me to stop paying for it and she would get her put in a mental hospital and she wouldn't ever be let out. I can't tell you what this did to my DSD. I have feelings on it but I haven't ever said one word to anyone about the above.

I have respected DM at every step of the way, and I offered to pay because DM was getting to the edge with DSD and was genuinely considering some drastic options.

She grabbed the help with both hands and I have never ever once wanted any recognition, I was happy quite happy to stay stum on the whole thing. Literally would have preferred it actually. This wasn't about Disney step parenting, this was about helping a non nerotypical child in a way she wouldn't have been helped if I hadn't been there.

And only on MN could I still be considered evil for it.

Oh and yes I do feel sorry for poor mum, I do, but you know when I picked up my DSD off the floor sobbing asking if she would be sent away I know who I feel more sorry for out of the two.

Maintenance should cover 50%of the costs for the "extra" days that the RP has them. So if Mum has the DC 70% of the time and Dad 30% (so Mum has 40% more) then maintenance should cover half of that extra 40%
That's how I understand it anyway.

Oh also just because I also paid for their electric bill last month because DMs parter drank all the bills money and the electric was going to be disconnected but clearly my focus is fun step parenting.

The default thought is that just because I pay for a horse I don't contribute to anything else is absolute bent logic.

I don't have to dammed do one thing financially but I'm not going to let my DSD suffer. I grew up poor and I know what that feels like.

It's peoples comments like that, that really make me question. Will just because I'm a SM, my actions will always be interpreted as evil.

I think the DM should thank her lucky stars that maintenance is being paid considering that contact is 50:50.

It does drive me a little bit nuts in this day and age that the gender divide only seems to be there when it suits Exes. It's not 1947 anymore and women can work their way up the ladder if they choose to. Especially if they're not in sole charge of childcare with EOW at dads.

Maintenance ultimately is a ticking clock and I'm surprised by how many women I know that don't have a plan b once their kids have flown the nest. But both parents should be contributing equally to their children, either in time or money

The only thing with 50/50 I struggle to work out what is fair is who pays for school trips? It shouldn't just be whichever person's time it is on imo.