Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Step-parenting

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

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

Having to pay for everything

68 replies

PurpleHouse12 · 25/04/2022 20:04

Does anyone else find this?

My husband has older DC with his ex and we have one child together. I've found that basically I pay for everything for our child so that he can pay for everything for his older DC.

He pays half of the childcare for our child but that's literally it. Never paid anything toward clothes, groups, treats, nothing. If I ever ask he says things like 'well I have X many DC'.

Whenever DSC mum asks for anything though he pays it right away (we have 50:50 so no maintenance). She asks for half of everything (rightly so!!!) Hair cuts, clothes, school stuff, hobbies etc. and he pays it.

It's almost like I feel he'd actually contribute more toward our DC if we were separated! Like he thinks because we live in the same home that it's "our" money paying for everything to do with our child so it doesn't matter.

FWIW, I don't really pay toward anything for DSC. I pay half of all bills and food so I guess I contribute in that way but we have mainly separate finances and I don't ever send him any of "my" money for things to do with DSC.

Even at Christmas and birthdays, DCs presents will ALL be bought by me. I put some toward DSCs presents (although not a huge amount) but he'll go absolutely stupid spending money on getting them heaps of stuff and then if I ask him to contribute toward our DCs presents he says he can't because he's got no money left after buying DSCs stuff.

Our child never goes without because I make sure they don't, so they are none the wiser but it pisses me off.

It makes me resentful now whenever he buys DSC anything like a treat. He bought them quite an expensive treat the other day and it's really got under my skin. He can treat his children of course but when he won't even give me £20 toward some clothes for our son because I sort it it's a slap in the face.

I get he has more children to pay for and therefore needs to stretch more but that's not mine or my son's fault?

In his mind this is how all DC get X amount of money spent on them. In my mind, it's just a dad contributing fuck all to only one of his children.

OP posts:

GlitteryGreen · 26/04/2022 10:22

Tbh OP in this situation I'd be tempted to do the calculations on the CM website and find out how much he'd need to pay you if you were separated, and ask him for that. It's not right that he's not contributing at all towards his youngest child.

GlitteryGreen · 26/04/2022 10:23

GlitteryGreen · 26/04/2022 10:37

Sorry about multiple posting!! Don't know how that happened.

DeskInUse · 26/04/2022 12:12

Just reading your post is giving me the rage.

Sit down and spell it out to him, he decided to have x amount of kids, he needs to sort it out, otherwise he might find himself living apart from all of them and having to pay 2 sets of cm

Eggshelly · 26/04/2022 12:17

GlitteryGreen · 26/04/2022 10:23

I'd do this but if it was less than half what you're paying out then invoice him for half each time! No way should he get away with paying CMS minimum if you aren't seperated.

GlitteryGreen · 26/04/2022 12:20

@Eggshelly Totally agree with you.

Suggested CM calculator as I think it would make the point very clearly about how much he'd need to be contributing if he and OP were apart like he and his ex. He's being totally out of line.

Eggshelly · 26/04/2022 16:23

GlitteryGreen · 26/04/2022 12:20

@Eggshelly Totally agree with you.

Suggested CM calculator as I think it would make the point very clearly about how much he'd need to be contributing if he and OP were apart like he and his ex. He's being totally out of line.

Good idea. Print it off in black and white.

Hope things change for you OP x

fishingforflies · 26/04/2022 17:59

Well he's definitely landed on his feet with you!

vivainsomnia · 26/04/2022 18:00

Surely it comes down to disposable income you each get after bills are paid. If you have £1000 left and he has £500 it makes sense that you should pay towards your joint child and he pays for his eldest two.

I moved with my oh with two kids, he has none. We worked out who paid why depending on how much we both had left to make it the same. I then paid things for my kids but that meant he paid quite a lot more in bills than I. Surely that's how it works once you become a family.

What would be the point in one having much more disposable income than the other to treat themselves and one child when the other can't then buy anything for the other kids?

MeridianB · 26/04/2022 18:28

NarcissasMumintheDoghouse · 25/04/2022 22:55

So, basically, you are subsidising the children of his first marriage through the 50/50 split of housing costs. But then more so, by covering all the costs (beyong child care) of your child together. Clothing, toys, birthdays and Christmas stuff, treat day outs? So that he can save his disposable for the older kids. No, in my world he doesn't get to do that. He is financially misusing you and slighting your child together.

This. 🔼

it’s unclear From your Op whether he doesn’t have the money or has it and just fails to contribute.

Assuming he’s in work and you have similar incomes, I would absolutely stop paying for everything and make it clear that he pays half of everything. If his income is less then he needs to pay what he can towards both children.

Riverlee · 26/04/2022 18:39

I get that he wants to be a Disney dad and wants to appear the good guy in the dc’s eyes. However, he shouldn’t do this at the detriment of his/yours child, and it shouldn’t be so uneven.

However, I don’t know how you are going to resolve this, except by causing a fuss. Maybe every time he spends £50 (oR whatever) on his first kids, ask for the same amount for your kid. If he says you don’t need it (as he’s young), you can always say you’ll put it in a saving account, buy him toys, clothes etc. if he says he hasn’t got enough, then say he shouldn’t have spent so much money in the first place.

I can easily see how you are beginning to resent his favouritism. In financial terms, as it’s if your dc doesn’t exist,

Eggshelly · 26/04/2022 21:09

What would be the point in one having much more disposable income than the other to treat themselves and one child when the other can't then buy anything for the other kids? because one parent has decided to have 3 kids and the other just 1 so they should have more disposable income. Which doesn't have to be disposed of it can be saved for that 1 child's future.

Eggshelly · 26/04/2022 21:11

I already pay a higher mortgage because of DH's kids needing a bedroom, and bills are probably higher too. There's no way I am subsidising anything else of theirs and the expense of my own child, and if my DH was refusing to pay for our shared child then I would be furious.

SpaceshiptoMars · 26/04/2022 21:14

What would be the point in one having much more disposable income than the other to treat themselves and one child when the other can't then buy anything for the other kids?

Things don't always work out. Sometimes men with kids get through a long line of women they rope in to share bills and do the care work. Financially that can be pretty rough on those women. Effectively they are paying to audition as his future wife.

vivainsomnia · 27/04/2022 09:12

because one parent has decided to have 3 kids and the other just 1 so they should have more disposable income. Which doesn't have to be disposed of it can be saved for that 1 child's future
Really? Does this apply to single parents who move with their new partner who doesn't have children themselves too? Would it be right for them to say that bills are paid 50/50 and he gets to go on nice holidays with his bodies whilst she can't afford to take her kids away because he has a right to more disposable income since he chose not to have children?

He would be called an a**hole but the other way around, that's ok of course!

aSofaNearYou · 27/04/2022 09:15

*Really? Does this apply to single parents who move with their new partner who doesn't have children themselves too? Would it be right for them to say that bills are paid 50/50 and he gets to go on nice holidays with his bodies whilst she can't afford to take her kids away because he has a right to more disposable income since he chose not to have children?

He would be called an a*hole but the other way around, that's ok of course!

He would be called an arsehole by the same people that would call a woman doing the same an arsehole. Personally yes I would think that was acceptable.

SpaceshiptoMars · 27/04/2022 09:18

Really? Does this apply to single parents who move with their new partner who doesn't have children themselves too? Would it be right for them to say that bills are paid 50/50 and he gets to go on nice holidays with his bodies whilst she can't afford to take her kids away because he has a right to more disposable income since he chose not to have children?

Not sure I've got your meaning quite clear - is this it? A single man moves in with a woman who has several children? He has none? It is her house and she pays all the costs of maintaining that house except the utilities? And the food for everyone except him?

Eggshelly · 27/04/2022 09:36

vivainsomnia · 27/04/2022 09:12

He would be called an a**hole but the other way around, that's ok of course!

Does this apply to single parents who move with their new partner who doesn't have children themselves too? Would it be right for them to say that bills are paid 50/50 and he gets to go on nice holidays with his bodies whilst she can't afford to take her kids away because he has a right to more disposable income since he chose not to have children? yes it would be ok. If both parties are earning the same amount then 50/50 means the partner would be helping cover the kids costs so the partner with the kid would be benefitting there. And their "disposable" income can be spent however they want. The parent would have less as they chose to have a child.

Eggshelly · 27/04/2022 09:37

It wouldn't be right for my DH to expect me to give up my "disposable" income, which I have earned, it's not a handout from him, for his kids to go on a holiday. He and their mum earn money for them. I subsidise already as we don't split bills by person here.

candlesandpitchforks · 27/04/2022 10:28

Really? Does this apply to single parents who move with their new partner who doesn't have Really? Does this apply to single parents who move with their new partner who doesn't have children themselves too? Would it be right for them to say that bills are paid 50/50 and he gets to go on nice holidays with his bodies whilst she can't afford to take her kids away because he has a right to more disposable income since he chose not to have children?

He would be called an a**hole but the other way around, that's ok of course! themselves too? Would it be right for them to say that bills are paid 50/50 and he gets to go on nice holidays with his bodies whilst she can't afford to take her kids away because he has a right to more disposable income since he chose not to have children?

He would be called an a**hole but the other way around, that's ok of course!

Tbh if I chose to have 10 kids I don't expect that anyone including the government has to subside that choice. I'm a female and don't expect my partner to pay for my DD.

The thing is second marriages mean the first family are often made up of older kids with more expensive needs.

He's got 3 kids he needs to pay for them equally. I would say this to a women too. Gender doesn't come into it tbh unless you hold fairly outdated views on partnerships imo.

Now if he offered fine but I would feel uncomfortable taking money from anyone for something I made a active choice in creating aka my kids.

SpaceshiptoMars · 27/04/2022 10:34

Look at it the other way around. If a man moves in with you and your kids, and immediately pays for everything - how would you feel? Ecstatic or uncomfortable? What is he paying for, exactly?

candlesandpitchforks · 27/04/2022 11:24

SpaceshiptoMars · 27/04/2022 10:34

Look at it the other way around. If a man moves in with you and your kids, and immediately pays for everything - how would you feel? Ecstatic or uncomfortable? What is he paying for, exactly?

Tbh the thought makes my skin crawl tbh but I have idea why. Would feel like I'm being bought or a suggestion that I couldn't provide for my family. One offs would bother me less but still wouldn't be comfortable

Eggshelly · 27/04/2022 11:26

SpaceshiptoMars · 27/04/2022 10:34

Look at it the other way around. If a man moves in with you and your kids, and immediately pays for everything - how would you feel? Ecstatic or uncomfortable? What is he paying for, exactly?

Very Uncomfortable.

vivainsomnia · 27/04/2022 13:33

So much hypocrisy here. Many move in with single mums (or more likely them moving with him) and have no choice but to support her and her children if they were on benefits, or working very PT.

The majority of mums earn less than their partner, but according to this thread, it would be ok if he earns £100k to expect his new wife earning £20k to pay half, and for him to treat his kids to luxury holidays, expensive gadgets etc...even to the children they might have in common whilst her kids get nothing because she has nothing left after she's paid her half of all the bills?

There've been a few such posts on aibu, and everyone has considered this unfair. Same during divorce, why expecting half or more of the man's wealth if indeed, it is fair they should have different levels of money and no expectation to support each other?

Blendiful · 27/04/2022 13:44

The point in this situation is that he has 3 children. OP has one.

She contributes towards his other 2 DC by going halves on everything in the house they live in which is 50% their home as they spend the other 50% with their mum.

Their mum is requesting half of all costs for them (rightly so in a 50:50 set up) and he pays it no issues.

But their joint DC is getting everything bar half the house and childcare paid for by OP. So OP is significantly worse off by paying half the house for all of them then 100% of costs for their DC (bar childcare).

It sounds as though he is paying half of other DC costs no matter what, no questions asked so those DC doing 50/50 are getting much more treats and luxuries (unless OP chooses to pay for these thing for their DC)

He is taking advantage of that fact they live together and he knows OP won't let DC go without . But it is not right. He should be contributing towards all these things for his joint DC same as he does with his others.

Flip

1 2 3