What happens re maintenance in this situation ?

[Chenillerug]

If a father is paying maintenance as has a good income so was paying enough to allow ex to just work part time but now he has given up work to be a carer so I assume it will go through the csa not a private arrangement and how is it worked out?

Ex is very unhappy but we have said although maintenance will drop we could actually have sd more so that ex can work full time which is reasonable but apparently not ?

No their answer is "oh yes it's shit isn't it can we help by taking the kids more so you can work more would that help?" Which is fair enough. And one of them does not NEED to have a job. They are clearly going through some shit right now and no one would take on caring responsibilities for a laugh.

It's not babysitting. Just because he's a man doesn't mean he's not parenting.

You would hope a man capable of paying £600 a month in maintenance had made provision for his child in his will eg, a life insurance policy that paid out to the ex to cover maintenance lost. And in the case of illness or redundancy, some kind of income protection insurance. Whilst that wouldn’t last forever, it would give some short term protection whilst looking at longer term options. It is disingenuous to suggest that the ex would just have to cope. A decent parent would look to make sure that wasn’t automatically the case, although I appreciate what might be achieved in these circumstances is income dependent.

I feel for you, OP. The ableism of MN is generally dreadful but sadly seems a reflection of the society we live in. I hope you are able to work something out that benefits both families and everyone is able to cope as best as possible for the sake of the children involved.

That's the reality many families face though. Many people are parents and claim carers allowance. Are you trying to say all these parents aren't good parents?

But what is the offer is what I'm asking... because I just can't imagine he can pick up kids from different locations at the same time whilst caring for his wife. So when is the extra childcare being offered going to be given? Or is it an offer that in reality does nothing to support the ex in working more hours.

He wouldn't need to be warning that. Maybe about 60k minus the 7% and divided by 12% (I'm assuming he pays full 12% with no discounts for overnights)

Could say the same the other way "spot the exes who think they're more important than the new family and the dad should pay x amounts of child maintenance whether it's affordable or not"

@brighterthanthemoon honestly! Did I say anywhere that disabled people or carers aren't good parents? Please enlighten me as to where I did so. You can't, because I didn't, but carry on inventing things to suit your own agenda. You know nothing about me or my own disabilities either so give it a rest. The reality is though children often do get neglected by their parents, it doesn't mean it's done on purpose, it doesn't mean it's done maliciously, it doesn't mean they are always bad parents. Disabled people aren't exempt from that. All parents can struggle to cope and the children's needs are often not met, to pretend otherwise is ignorance and you should be glad you've never had to experience this first hand. The father of the child in this fictitious situation isn't coming across as a good parent though. Giving up a presumably secure, well paid job, that will provide a nice lifestyle for all 3 of his children and is able to afford some care or help for his disabled wife. Plus his first daughter has a mother who's been looking after her (apart from at the weekends when Daddy gets to play Disney Dad for 2 days) for 6 years, so no need for the father to think he's some kind of superhero for offering to 'look after' her a bit more. He wants to add another child into the mix of his wife, who needs care ad hoc, and his child who needs 1-1 care, plus the other child they also have. Is it a safe environment for a disabled 3 year old, another young child AND the 6 year old to be thrust into? When there are other options? Safeguarding would have a lot to say about it. The children are the ones going to suffer most in this situation. ALL 3 of them.

I agree that giving up a high earning job is very shortsighted, regardless of family circumstances. He will regret it.

It isn only no longer affordable because he has chosen to give up work.

@ConnieTucker yes but it's because he needs to care for his wife. He hasn't just decided not to work anymore

To become a CARER.

Is that such a shameful thing to look after your disabled partner nowadays?
What do you expect the OP or her DP to do instead?
For him to work and put the OP at risk?
For the OP to magically get better?
Oh, maybe pay a carer to be with her all day long instead? For the government to provide such carer?

Shit happens in life. You just have to do with that.

Why can't he work from home? In another job role its very drastic. OP stated she is unwell some days.

Even if he worked part time you can work along side PIP and it is not means tested.

@Endofmyteatherr but it's maybe not as easy as him wfh. Just like it was said it's maybe not easy for the ex partner to change her contract. His field maybe isn't a role he could do at home and if he isn't skilled in areas he could wfh he'd prob be worse off to take such a cut and not be able to claim benefits/carers whilst supporting three kids and disabled wife

he had a choice. She is also a career herself and clearly said repeatedly this isnt constant. There are wfh options available, especially for some who was a high earner.

this is a poorly thought out plan that disadvantages his 6 year old child at the start of a crisis. Some choices are just wrong.

It isn only no longer affordable because he has chosen to give up work.

Which is he fully entitled to do for whatever reason he chooses @ConnieTucker

I think no one on this thread knows how much support the OP needs and if this is compatible with her carer working from home.

I also think you have no idea how much work is involved with caring fir someone full time.

eg: I often say that DH is my cater because he is the one to cook, clean the house etc…, I’d struggle Wo him. But I don’t need him around all day long. I can take myself to medical appointments etc..
Thats not what the OP is describing. She is clear that she needs someone with her for safety reasons. Could be many things incl having regular seizures. That means she might not be safe to be making a cup of tea, having a shower in her own, let alone go to appointments. How can you work around that? Her needs to have someone with her at all time would not disappear at night or weekends either.
Wfh would NOT solve any of those issues, nor having flexible work etc….

Seriously, who would chose to live in poverty for THEMSELVES if they dint have to?

@WakingUpDistress exactly! These women think because they were the first wife that they should control finances forever. They cannot afford to subsidise the ex like they have been. It is what it is.
She's already got a home from the ex in laws - which of course will impact his inheritance. She's not destitute

Your opinions are very biased here. The situation is very bleak. I never said it was easy however anything I seem to ask you in this debate you seem to ONLY want to look from YOUR OWN view point.

I admitt as the thread has gone on it seems complex however as others as said the child is only 6 and there's 3 kids future to think about. I am suggesting here trying think of the kids. People work even 1 day a week I never said it was easy. But there's the children's future, 3 of them to consider.

Again why are you and OP trying to get the ex into fulltime work? Because lots of mums with a 6 year old work part time and get topped up with UC the ex will be fine!
I think poster were aghast from the shock point of view of the money drop but we gather the ex will not be living on the poverty line. I asked you prior. WOULD YOU be happy to have your child left at OP house because it's not suitable for OP to be taking on more responsibilities plus its not for OP to decide she is not the mother and MAYBE the small child will want his poor mum!! (Righy so).

@Endofmyteatherr well your point of view is that the ex shouldn't have to have her money reduced. Why will you not budge on that?

Child will still have his mum - they're in school 30 hours. She could do another 7 hours during wraparound and child will barely notice.

It is not for the ex and op to support her not to work. He should still pay maintenance. Unfortunately they can't give her £600. Would you like to give your ex £600 and believe that the child costs £1200 a month plus child benefit and any universal credit she can claim (nb no mortgage)

@amiold I am not the one stuck on the money factor. I have already asked you why you are the one making this solely about money. I agreed with you that it's not just about the money and the ex will be fine did I not?

It's all about money. This thread is about child maintenance like I've said. What do you believe the OP is asking about?

@amiold we have already established that OP cannot just magic money. In adult life people would suggest alternatives and yours is bizarre that in one breath you have no thought for OP 6 year old small child, you wouldn't have your own kid moved round from house to house despite being asked you have deliberately bypassed that point.

Because you know its wrong.

She's moved from house to house anyways. She stays there three nights a week?