How do you split the costs?

[Woodstocks]

Hello all,

My partner has two sons from a previous marriage, they are primary school aged. We moved in together and bought a house and now split the mortgage, bills and food costs 50:50. The kids are here every other weekend and half the holidays.

I am getting to the point where I feel it isn’t fair to split everything down the middle - the mortgage (even though the extra room is needed for HIS kids) would at least build equity for me overtime but the food money is just gone and with them growing and the horror stories of “teen boys eating” and being here for a whole week during holidays, plus the other weekends etc I feel like I would be significantly out of pocket over the years to come.

I keep thinking “ah it’s only a bit of extra this and extra that” in terms of hygiene items, toothpaste, shower gel, shampoo, extra washing tablets, extra dishwasher runs etc. but then again- these things aren’t free and that’s what their mum gets maintenance for- to cover the extra living costs that are clearly involved.

What would be a fair reflection of the extra cost of them
being here?

And in this case there no ‘going without’ for the kids.

It just means their father has less disposable income. Because being a parent does that.

Yes you are expressing it better than I could. By earning more I was actually the one who enabled us to get the house in the first place- on my partners salary and with his commitment for maintenance taken off the affordability his possible mortgage would have bought him a tiny flat in a small town and not a house in a desirable urban city. So the kids are already better off and benefiting from garden, playing outside, being able to have bbqs etc and not sharing a box room.

i obviously also benefit as I wouldn’t have bought a house by myself. That is I guess the crux of families splitting up- suddenly two households to pay for, plus duplicating a lot of costs (ie he pays maintenance for clothes and shoes but still has to buy the same for his house, car seats and furniture and everything else always needed twice) but still the same amount of money to go round. Of course that is hard to manage. Especially when the expectation is that spending money and treat money should remain the same.

It's not cheeky to ask dad for money for aquapark. Correct me if I'm wrong but did you say the maintenance doesn't cover much ? They prob can't afford to go. How is it cheeky to ask a parent for money for an activity. You sound very naive and immature 😶

I'd pay 50/50 on mortgage, and household utilities and whatever you pay on food for a week when they are not there you just pay that amount every week if you don't want to contribute towards his DC. He can pay the additional costs. My DH has always insisted on paying 50/50 on everything and we earn about the same money each month. At one point I had 2 teenage sons living with us all the time. I did offer to pay more towards food but DH told me not to be silly. He was happy to pay half. He also drove them around, helped with hard Maths and Physics homework I couldn't help with and now my son's are adults DH helps them with DIY on their homes and has shown them how to service their cars. He often goes to the cinema or for a curry with the one that lives close to us and is this weekend cat sitting for adults DS who lives 200 miles away as he is away with his gf this weekend. If you want a good relationship with DC going forward think about it before asking your DH to pay more. They are his family and he might love them more than he loves you.

'I myself don’t have kids and dont have a real grasp on the cost of things in many cases. Sometimes there is a difference between “spending on essentials” and “spending for fun because you want to treat your kid” which is obviously not a cost that the ex partner needs to subsidise.'

Is it 'obviously not a cost their father needs to subsidise?' Why wouldn't their father want his children to do fun things? They are with their mother the vast majority of time, so I would have thought he'd want them to live a live which goes beyond simply spending on essentials.

It might shock you op to learn that all the dc I know have thousands upon thousands spent on them over the years for football practice, dance practise, tennis lessons, birthday presents for parties they're invited to, swimming lessons...etc etc

If the kids’ father wants to subsidise his ex to do fun stuff with the kids (beyond maintenance) - fine. No problem.

Surely it just means he has less spending money for himself. Thats his choice to make.

The issue is in expecting a new partner to contribute to this.

He's there Dad why wouldn't he want his DC to go to an aqua park or pay towards hobbies and holiday activities. My DH used to insist on going 50/50 on Xmas gifts, birthday gifts, and all hobbies and activities for my DC. In return they love him. They have a much better relationship with him than they do with their biological Dad. I know if I were to die tomorrow my DH would carry on looking out for my DC even though they are adults now. He helped me bring my youngest DS up from 8 years old and elder DS from 16. DH doesn't have any DC of his own and they are his family too.

Let's take the kids out of it. When you decide to live with someone else as a romantic partnership, if one person has significantly less money than the other, for whatever reason (low paid job, illness, whatever), then if each person is "paying for themself/their responsibilities", it's likely there's going to be friction.

Regardless of kids, if I loved someone enough to share a home with them, I would not want them to feel like they were scraping around for pennies while I had plenty. If you share a life you share a life.

Just the other day I read a thread of a woman who lived with her kids, her partner and his kids and he'd taken his kids on a lovely holiday and left her and her kids at home. This is an awful situation for children to grow up in. Step up, or ship out.

Dad should be doing the travel for contact. It's his time with his children, so up to him to arrange. Mum just has to ensure the children are available - that's what I was always advised. Personally we helped with travel as it meant we got DS home at a reasonable time, but we weren't obliged to do it

Amen to this.

but AS EVER the step mum is in the wrong. When will the bullshit stop ?

As someone who was a stepchild as a child, this makes me a little upset.
You surely knew what you’d be getting into when you got with a man that already had children from another marriage?
but then again I don’t know your financial situation etc

Who initiates the break up between your partner and his ex wife? If it is him I can perfectly understand that his ex wife don't do any drop off or collection from your place. Why doesn't he have the kids 50/50?

Every other weekend - I wouldn't worry about it especially if I earned more. Are you really going to ask him for a free quid for the 4 days a month they spend in the house when you earn more and are letting him pay 50:50?

Half the summer holidays you could always ask him to buy the food during their stay.

All seems a little ungenerous to me.

@Elektra1 the reasons someone has significantly less disposable income vary and matter.

If someone is disabled and can only work PT, that’s a totally different situation to that person just having massive debt to pay off. Why should a partner have to pay off debt accrued before they knew you?

Being a parent does not mean you are entitled to have a non-parent cover your parenting costs. You may need to just accept that you have less disposable income than them because you are a parent and they are not. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Similarly the PP who basically says a SP needs to pay so the SC will love them… it’s pretty indicative of their weird way everything is framed for SC as being about what they ‘get’ more generally. We see this time and time and again on MN. If it’s about SC, everything is measured in how much they get - money, time, effort. From everyone.

i earn more than my partner. He is already paying significantly less than the open market to live with me. We used to split 50/50 but I was spending £500 - £750 a year on his kids and family whereas his 50% of mine was £100 too whack for 6 adults. The £500 - £750 was for 2 kids and his elderly mum. I was happy to do so until he made a comment about not paying for the house insurance as he didn’t choose to own a home. My response was I didn’t choose to have your kids. I no longer pay a single penny towards his children or family and he doesn’t contribute to mine. He isn’t thrilled by this as when he suggests dinner or an activity I remind him I’m only paying for me. Usually it then doesn’t happen. Do not be made to feel guilty for saying I don’t want to pay for responsibilities that aren’t mine! They are not your children and your money is not something they have entitlement to.

id speak to your husband and say as the boys are growing the food shop is getting dearer and as you do not eat as much it would be fairer if he absorbed the food shop costs for his children.

This sums up exactly what I've been trying to say.

Dropping off this thread now as the views expressed by those who think that "children should appreciate that their parents should pay for them" are just too depressing for words. Children are children. I pity those who have step parents with those views.

I pity the partners of all the parents who view them (and encourage their children to view them) as a cash cow.

Sadly it seems that so many people
on MN think this way. And also think this is how it should be.

I didn’t say maintenance doesn’t cover much- it is just a thing that always gets pedalled on here. Why should he pay for his ex to take them and not take them himself? If the ex wants money for fun and activities then she can earn it herself!

Because op, in an ordinary school month, their father only has them 1 day in 14; so if they could only afford to do fun things with their father, that would be 13 days of doing nothing.

You’ve totally missed the point. OP is saying the maintenance is an acknowledgment there are extra costs associated with having children in the house. She is not saying she resents the ex receiving maintenance.

Sadly, the audience on MN is such that you will just be told that it’s his job to pay for his ex.

But… equally, I think my opinion is that he’s welcome to pay for his ex’s days out if he likes. He can spend his money on whatever he likes. He just doesn’t get to ask me to contribute more to make up for that choice.

Why is that the OP’s problem though?

To Answer a few questions: it was her who broke up the family. Initially said he would never see the kids again. He then went to court to gain access. They granted every other weekend and half holidays. She then moved away so it’s not possible to do more.

She may have them more but the expensive time at weekends when you have to entertain kids and they aren’t tired from
school is shared 50:50 so why should he not be the one to take them to the aqua park? Why should he pay for her to take them and not do it himself? It seems like the kids only benefit from something if it’s the mum going too.

Personally I pity the step parents who are financially supporting other people’s children, whose conception they had nothing to do with because people pedal this absolute drivel.

Financial support doesn’t equal love or affection. It’s quite concerning that people think it does.

Back to the OP - I think on the weeks the children are there your OH should be making a concerted effort to pay for those shops, the hygiene products etc. I wouldn’t go down to the penny aslong as he is taking the bulk of these expenses.

This seems sensible. A way to split things without being penny pinching