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?

Sadly some women view their ex-husbands as a meal-ticket for life

But people who are determined to use any excuse? Why are they more special than all the people around them who just find a way because they have to?

Because I don't think it's that simple. You 'can't find a way' in all circumstances. When my youngest was born, I had one in preschool, one in school and then one for nursery. All three had different opening times, all three were in separate directions from our house. Without a car, I couldn't have managed it. Even with a car, it meant we were up at the crack of dawn and our mornings were shouty and stressful because I had 4 of us to get ready and out by a precise time or it would fall apart. I only held down a professional job because my mum was able to help me when the children were ill. Even then it was touch and go because one has a disability that needs careful management or he ends up in hospital and my mum didn't really understand it well enough if things went wrong. I really can't get my knickers in a twist about other single women who decide that's too much for them and their families. I was not the mother I wanted to be when my children were young and as a teacher, I can tell you that other people's children were way more important than my own. It is not a nice feeling, believe me.

Eventually, I gave in and went part-time because as an only child myself and a mother who was diagnosed with dementia, something needed to 'give'. This was a move that was very much criticised by my children's (non-working) step mother including shouts of what a lazy bitch I was.

I agree, broadly, that it's perhaps easy to be defeated rather than look for solutions but honestly, sometimes there aren't solutions no matter what you do. I also think home-working is more normal now than it has ever been and that may well help many who previously struggled as single parents but as I said, I think before judging someone's choices, you really do need to understand their bigger picture.

@Sowhatifiam you reducing your hours to something more suitable IS you taking responsibility. You have to draw a line somewhere.

So even if you are a parent that chooses not to work, for whatever reason, then take responsibility for it. Accept that you might have a slightly smaller house or cheaper car because that’s a choice that’s been made as to where to draw the line. The RP needs to get out of the idea that they can depend on their ex for eternity.

The problem here is the responsibility, not necessarily the choice of working or not.

If the ex isn’t going to work for whatever their reason, then they shouldn’t be expecting a similar lifestyle to their DH who is now part of a 2 income household.

There are plenty of stories of how the woman gave up her career for her husband so she could stay home with the children, but there is an end point to that. The children will go to school eventually but no one seems to find the need to pre plan for that even? Personally I feel everyone should have something, even an idea, to fall back on

Personally I feel everyone should have something, even an idea, to fall back on

I agree. It's hard though, I think, when your life was going in one direction and then all of a sudden it isn't. I know I held on to some kind of romantic notion of reuniting for quite some time post separation and divorce because I struggled to get my head round what I was going to need to do. The enormity of it, with a difficult ex to boot, so it would have been easier just to get back together. I remember distinctly a close friend telling me how lucky I was being able to be mortgage free post-divorce and I was utterly incredulous (in my head at least) that she could even think such a thing because my life was blown out of the water and being mortgage free just wasn't enough. Of course now, I am eternally grateful for that fact and recognise how much it is helped me manage a difficult situation. But then, at the beginning, it was impossible to see.

I suppose the rest of it is down to personality and upbringing. I got to a 'fuck you, I am going to have a good life' point pretty quickly but I come from a family where 'keep calm and carry on' is absolutely the only response in the face of adversity. I was brought up not to be afraid of change but I bet that's because I had a parent who was in a dying profession and so we went through periods of employment/unemployment and my parents had to find alternatives to keep us going. I had a family who wouldn't accept me being miserable and friends who helped me up when I was down rather than stood by me slagging off my ex. It was all 'what about you, what are you going to do?'

I feel quite sure if I had had friends willing to listen to my 'woe is me' and a family who thought getting back at my ex was an acceptable thing to do via the children, or 'taking him for every penny', I was in a place mentally when he left that I could have done that.

I can see how people end up down the path of feeling they are owed something, and I think it’s easy to get caught up in that. But I don’t believe anyone ever finds any real peace from retribution

No. You're right about that. It's the 'moving on' thing, isn't it? My ex would happily tell you I haven't 'moved on' because I don't have a new partner but it's way, way bigger than that. The inner peace is what's important. I think a lot of people never really acheive that.

Absolutely. I think it’s very rare that anyone parts ways completely amicably. It seems usually one or other of the RP/NRP end up with the short end of the stick with the other person doing all they can to ruin them in every sense.

@Bomblbee you know I'm on the fence on that last statement because either me and my ex are rare (doubtful because neither of us really did anything special to get to this point) or I suspect potentially it's more to do with that unless you truly fall out of love with each other (like we did in all sense of the term - so to total lack of feelings now) any feelings that do tend to remain and turn necrotic. So whenever ex's are upset by each other it's just elements of feelings that have gone "off" as it were.

Don't get me wrong I hope my ex DH is well and healthy and stays alive for DD but I really have no feelings for him past that very surface level at all anymore, and I believe he feels the same. Obviously I care about him for DD sake more than if we didn't share a joint child, as i would have happily regaled him to my past and never thought of him again. If that makes sense.

This makes me feel rather heartless typing that out but there really is a absence of strong emotions for him 😵‍💫 and it seems to have a rather lively upside.

@candlelightsatdawn that’s a really interesting point actually. I suppose if those feelings weren’t there or have gone completely then there’s nothing to turn sour I suppose

My therapist once said to me that love and hate/dislike (whatever you want to call it) are the same emotion expressed differently.
It's impossible to be indifferent to someone you 'hate' & I think this is so evident in many divorced situations.
So many former couples have the appearance of moving on (new partners, more dc etc.) but often they haven't actually moved on and are stuck in the fallout of their previous relationship(s) which then manifests itself via the dc & money, access etc.
I'm not saying all exes still love their former partners but rather when work is not done individually on the emotional impact of divorce it festers & in many ways can become bigger than what either the marriage or the divorce was, & one or both parties end up dragging that relationship around behind them for years letting it interfere with everything & everyone else they come across.

@Magda72
I think what you say makes a lot of sense. Add to that new partners who have an incessant need to insert themselves into their partner's past history or current interactions between parents and you have the makings of a perfect ongoing strorm.

As a new partner, I had no need to know or care how much money my partner/spouses gives to his ex or children as long as he is capable of meeting his obligations to our household. It matters not how often he speaks to his ex about his children because he understands that I too need to discuss my children with their father as often as is necessary. Neither of us is the arbiter of what or how much is necessary for the other. We just ensure that we are available to communicate with each other as much as is necessary. Finally, we recognize that we are together because we decided that we wanted a partner and not because our children needed another parent.

When you let go of that which is not essential to anything in your life and do not insert your self into aspects of your partners life that really do not concern you, there is infinitely less to stress about. Money that is not really yours and parenting decisions that are not really yours to make or require your approval are easy to let go off when ypu recognize and accept that not every aspect of your partners life has a niche in which you have any right or need to be involved.

@Tattler2 that’s all fine in theory but somewhat easier said than done in reality!

Actually I think @Magda72 is referring to the work a mum and dad have to do to get to a place where they can effectively co parent. Many often do not do this labour so it comes into the new relationships.

@Tattler2 is referring to the new partners solely and how they shouldn't interfere in the parameters of mum and dad. Which is perfectly reasonable if mum and dad have done that work to make a healthy co parenting arrangement . As Magda pointed out this actually rarely happens but rarely does the unreasonable side see themselves as unreasonable.

This is why it's hard I agree @Coffeepot72

I’m not convinced that atomistic theory of relationships is good in theory even. It’s all a bit flatmates with benefits (but certainly no feeling of responsibility to compromise to build a life together).

For example (and relevant to the topic of this thread), in a shared household then choices about how either of you spend your money do affect the other both directly and indirectly. If one of you is choosing to financially support another woman who won’t work (not simply the children) then they are contributing less to the household. That will often mean that the other needs to contribute more to the household than they otherwise might. In effect they end up indirectly subsidising their partner’s ex.

Same with any other resource (time, effort, care) that one partner has ring-fenced for something other than that relationship. The partner not making the choices ends up accommodating and picking up the slack.

Lots of people on this thread can give examples of that happening in their own lives.

Of course, tattler will insist that the parter who is behaving like they’re actually in a relationship - rather than some mutually convenient arrangement in the absence of emotions or any sense of responsibility to consider the other - is just stupid and ridiculous for expecting anything of their partner or for not acting like a to it programmed by a narcissist themselves.

But in the real world people are looking to build a life with their partner - to work together, pool resources of various kinds, and support each other. Compatibility is something you actively work on through patience and compromise as you adapt to changing circumstances together. Not something you pre-negotiate like some sort of international trade deal.

@BurntToastAgain Not something you pre-negotiate like some sort of international trade deal.

😂😂😂😂 (this made me giggle) has anyone told you have a way with words ? Nailed it right here !

I agree you can't simplify something that's already by nature a shitshow, no matter how many talks you broker.

I think he needs to recalculate and she needs to earn money to support her children. She's a cheeky fucker to expect him to cover all expenses.

With my DH and his ex, a lot of issues were more around ridiculous logistics. Obviously she knew what DH did for a living and she knew his working pattern. And there were elements of the visiting schedule that she deliberately made as awkward as possible, to cause DH shed loads of inconvenience. All this against a backdrop of wanting as much maintenance as possible. So I never saw her logic of trying to make DH miss work, as this impacted on his income.

So when I got together with DH, I questioned quite a bit of the visiting schedule. Not in terms of the amount of contact, just like "you're driving to WHERE(????) to collect DSS" One example was the ex collecting DSS from school, driving him to a relative's house an hour away (the ex didn't work) and then insisting DH collected DSS from that location, whereas collecting DSS from school was far easier all round.

DH had been so desperate to keep seeing this son, that I'm sure he would have travelled to Mars if necessary and it took a second set of eyes to make him realise the ex was taking the mickey. It would have been impossible for me to hold my tongue in this situation, the 'keep out of other people's arrangements' suggestion just wouldnt work for me.

Based on this thread and many others on Mumsnet, as well as other stepparent forums I frequent, I would say that a very high percentage of the low-conflict blended family setups are the ones where the dad/mum does let the stepparent have an equal say (to an extent) in parenting, finances, etc.

The ones where people complain / vent / whatever seem to be the ones where a hard line is drawn and the stepparent doesn't get any input in their own household.

This is my opinion based only on my own personal experience and observations though.

@Coffeepot72 and there lies the problem the ex partner in your case is holding on to control from some type of emotion (probably anger or entitlement over your DH) that makes the situation completely ridiculous.

You can't negotiate with terrorists.
I think tatters approach only works on a small small subdivision of people who generally do not give a fuck about what the other household is doing and that has to swing both ways (not just the second family sucking it up for the first and keeping their noses out of it). If someone gets in my business and tries to control it, I will get in theirs very simply as my household isn't held to anyone other than the people in it.

Clearly in your case there ex very much did care about running things and it meant it had to be her way or 0.

These situations you can't expect people to just bow down and be like yes sir no sir three bags full sir. Idgf how many talks you have with some people, some people will just be unreasonable because it's what works for them, and they don't want to compromise.

@BurntToastAgain I agree with you completely.

When you're in a relationship and particularly sharing a home, your choices do impact your partner. I am completely in favour of separate finances, especially where there are children from previous relationships involved, but I wouldn't extend that to mean that you never discuss anything at all. You still need to consider the impact on your partner, if you want your relationship to continue and work.

My relationship with DP would be long over if we both just lived our lives as if the other didn't exist except when we purposely decided to spend time together.

@candlelightsatdawn yes that is what I meant .
To ref your point @Tattler2 - I never had ANY problem with exdp's divorce agreement. It was HIS divorce agreement & was made well before I met him & even though I thought elements of it were ridiculous & biased it was his business & was the arrangement he & his exw came to & as such it had NOTHING to do with me.
What I DID object to is that post divorce his exw believed because she had once been married to him that she was somehow STILL entitled to him, his time, his money etc. & that it was his role to keep funding her so she didn't have to get up off her arse & earn money to pay for her own clothes/highlights etc. etc. She could not get her head around the fact that he provided more than adequately for his dc & that that provision did NOT extend to her. She had been more than compensated for being a sahp in the divorce agreement but nothing was ever enough & she spent money like it was going out of fashion. Her prerogative, but when that ran out it was not her exh's responsibility to give her more.
Her financial demands on exdp (& him stupidly giving into them because she would get the dc to ring him looking for money if he ignored her) put huge financial strain on OUR lives together & our household. It also put huge strain on Us as exdp was constantly stressed about money.
She is a prime example of someone who just would not move on & get it into her thick head that he was no longer her husband. Between her and exdp they let their years old crap permeate our relationship.
So - while what she got on divorcing never bothered me what she kept looking for absolutely did & I did not stay quiet about that. Their relationship in all ways bar coparenting was done but she would not let go & used the dc as bait to keep reeling him in.

@QuirkyTurtle

Based on this thread and many others on Mumsnet, as well as other stepparent forums I frequent, I would say that a very high percentage of the low-conflict blended family setups are the ones where the dad/mum does let the stepparent have an equal say (to an extent) in parenting, finances, etc.

The ones where people complain / vent / whatever seem to be the ones where a hard line is drawn and the stepparent doesn't get any input in their own household.

This is my opinion based only on my own personal experience and observations though.

I think you are right there.

It is likely to be intolerable for an adult to live in a situation in which they have no control over key aspects of their home life. It’s awful to not be able to do anything about things that affect them (and often their children) negatively.

In tattler’s emotion free works of entirely transactional relationships, the answer to a partner who chooses to parent in the way he likes (the interpretation of letting his children behave in ways that upset you and make you miserable) or who chooses to co-parent the way that works for him with his children’s mother (tattler euphemism for allowing her to dictate what goes on in his home or doing everything he can to placate unreasonable demands or many other things that any normal person would find intolerable in a partner) is to say ‘oh we’re not compatible’ and go your separate ways. There’s no need for anyone to consider their partner or compromise or work together. There’s only keeping quiet, putting up with things and, if you have a problem, deciding that it’s your own fault for having the unreasonable expectation that your husband might care enough to think about his anything affects you.

In the real world, the problem is that the actions and choices of one person within the household (and particularly the marriage) will inevitably affect the other. You can separate finances, but if one of you is choosing to divert considerable amounts of their income towards something outside the household (whether that’s contributing more than required to enable an ex wife to avoid taking financial responsibility for themselves or having a ridiculously expensive cycling hobby) it will have an impact on the household finances. Similarly, you can have different ideas about parenting but allowing your children to be rude to your partner or deciding that there are no bedtimes for your children does impact on everyone else in the household.

It cannot work if there’s no discussion and compromise as you figure things out together. Especially not where there’s an ex determined to have things her way everywhere. No amount of pre-marriage talks can preempt the fact that things change over time, often in unpredictable ways.

It has to operate as a household in which both partners listen to and consider each other. The alternative is the intolerable situations we see in here all the time.

This is also why I don’t think the nacho approach works. If it was something you could just ignore or that your partner was handling in a way that was considerate of you and your needs, you wouldn’t be looking for ways to live with the intolerable.

I'm not sure I 100% agree with this. I think for some people that kind of setup CAN work, as long as all parties are on the same page. If you want to live with your partner but still live different lives in terms of kids, parenting, finances, etc and you're not a very emotional person, I don't see why it wouldn't work.

It wouldn't work for me, because I am very family oriented so I can't disengage, and it's important to me that I have equal say in my household because I didn't have that growing up. And I'll admit I can be an emotional person. But it works for us because my SO and I are on the same page about it.

Does that make sense? Kind of comparable to having different sex drives in a relationship. There's nothing wrong with having a low sex drive, just like there's nothing wrong with having a very high sex drive. Both kind of relationships can be equally fulfilling. It's only when there is a mismatch between partners that issues come up.

I think ultimately most humans are emotional beings, and a lot of things that are easily said in theory are very hard, or impossible, to execute in practice. And I detest the MN attitude of "I certainly wouldn't do x" or "in that situation I would behave in x way" because it's so easy to judge people, but in my opinion near impossible to accurately predict your own actions or feelings/emotions until you are in that exact situation. Ultimately I think everyone should just try to be a little bit kinder to each other, both on here and in real life.

Sorry I went completely off track there.

Well it works for tattler. 🤷🏻‍♀️

But I think in most cases, humans don’t do well in situations where they have no control - especially over the elements of their lives that are important to them or where the actions and choices of those around them have a substantial negative impact upon them.

Frankly anyone who isn’t willing to in any way compromise on anything wrt their ex or their kids should just stay single. Because that means they aren’t willing to consider a partner and adapt so that everyone can thrive.

Clearly! Although based on Tattler's posts in recent history I am going to make an assumption that perhaps they paint their family life slightly more rosy than it is in real life. Or perhaps it's just hard to see from the very high horse.