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?

If children were just “little costs” there wouldn’t be posts littered about Mumsnet re a lack of CMS and the “CMS is a MINIMUM” line trotted out.

I don't see anywhere where OP says she plans to have children?

Me neither.

Even if that were the case OP is still not benefiting proportionately from the uplift in equity, if she is only getting half of that but contributing over half. She would still benefit more from just having her own home, no kids and getting 100%. So you can’t argue that providing living space for the children isn’t an expense. Basic economics provides it is.

Yes I do agree with this. The children definitely have an impact on cost in both houses, although obviously there is a difference between having them around12 days vs 2 in every 14. They do not live on fresh air at the NRP's house and often need different bits bought in for them.

I think attempts to transfer nuclear family dynamics onto non-nuclear situations are unhelpful. The whole family money, contributing to the pool in different ways thing doesn’t translate outside of a situation where you both share responsibility for the kids. Denying the woman who contributes the lion’s share practically access to the money earned by the other is pretty terrible.

I also 100% agree with this, and one of the reasons I am reluctant to pool money myself is that I have no say over what does/doesn't get spent on his two older children. For our joint child, we can discuss and agree things, or reject things without any feelings of defensiveness over said child, but for his older 2 it's not that simple. It's very different when you're one nuclear family with only shared children.

Yet it’s not her burden to bear at all. She is indeed subsiding him in regards the housing:

”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.”

and by paying 50% of the costs.

Thanks everyone for your varied input. As mentioned before - I don’t mind paying 50:50 for the house as a) I will get the equity back and my initial deposit is ring fenced and b) we would have wanted to live in a house anyway with garden and flats normally don’t offer this.

But I disagree with a previous poster saying that this isn’t subsidising the kids who are “currently utilising this space” assuming that we would expand into this space ourselves with our own children. What does “currently utilise” mean in this context? They are children and unlikely to not utilise the space anymore once own children come along! We would then need an even bigger house to accommodate everyone. So they definitely do incur costs by being here.

Plus imagine posting saying you were booting SDC out their rooms to accommodate the baby 😂

Exactly. People always like to think that CMS is the only money the dad spends on the kids.

In fact he also has to house them, buy the big ticket items such as beds and furniture and car seats and bikes (if he wants to be able to take them for bike tours etc) and all the toys and bedding and clothes and shoes they need etc without regular cash injections.

He doesn’t get child benefit and also all the claims you can make that this triggers. Left with the travelling costs as well. So I don’t think it’s unreasonable for the mother’s side to bear some of the costs as well.

But that isn’t the topic of the thread- it was simply to ask how other people deal with this situation. As an early post said - if he had his mates round every weekend I wouldn’t pay for that either.

It comes down to do you share finance completely in a second marriage or do you ring fence.

I don't think you are being unreasonable, but you have to think carefully about how to manage it and how much of an issue it is.

YABU. Surely they can’t be using that much toothpaste/eating that much food in the 52 weekend days they’re with you and 6.5 weeks holidays 🤷‍♀️

BINGO!

I see a lot of toxic mums have jumped on. Do you have direct experience of paying for someone else’s kids? I do and its not necessarily the cost but the principle and all the other crap that comes with being a step parent. I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy.

That’s 13 weeks a year. Would most people support another person for 13 weeks a year? That is not insignificant.

Then. Don't. Do. It.

If you don't want to be a step mum, which is fine and your choice, then don't date a man with kids. It isn't rocket science.

This feels really nitpicky. As long as he isn’t expecting you to pay for clothes/gifts etc, I don’t really view it as you subsidising him, just that you have chosen to become live together and become a family and that comes with shared bills.

Oh if only we all KNEW how shit it was going to be. Of course we wouldn't do it. Honestly, this bullshit narrative that if you marry a man with kids you just have to put up with aaaaaall of the shit really PISSES ME OFF!

Genuine question - how do you not know if you do or don't want to be a step parent to someone else's kids? Isn't it an absolute basic thought process when you first meet a man?

@arethereanyleftatall I honestly never wanted to be a step parent. We were living happily apart. After 5 years he proposed. The kids were older and it made sense financially. I made it clear that I didn't want to be a 3rd parent and he accepted that. I thought it would be ok. But no one can ever know how difficult it is to live with someone else's kids until they're actually in that situation.

Thank you for the considered response.
For me, I know, I know categorically that I would hate it, and so I wouldn't live with anyone who has kids.
Do you have your own dc?

@arethereanyleftatall yes, I have one but she's left home now.

Whay I would find as reasonable would be that your DH pays fopr his kids activities while with him and also puts in a trip to the supermarket to top up on extra food before they come - with consultation with you as to what would be handy and useful to stretch the pantry.

What really annoys me about this statement is the total hypocrisy. It is not directed at the parents who had kids, realised they weren’t compatible and spilt. Arguably THEIR decision making was the most flawed and has the greatest consequence!

Yet the step parent should know better.

Nah. As I say to my husband, you had a child with a knobhead. I could have had a child with a knobhead but I had the foresight not
to. So don’t moan at me.

It’s not as clear cut though. Nobody slates parents for saying they are struggling with their kids and says “well tough shit didn’t you know it was hard”. Then it’s all “aw you deserve a break” and “you’re doing great”.

It is no different being a step parent apart from that you are at the mercy of a stranger to a large extent. Will the ex be high conflict and will there be a lot of court costs? Will she wind the kids up and turn them against their dad so that what should be a nice weekend having the kids around turns in to a cry-fest Because they are just upset the whole time. Will you have to hide your life from the kids as they are instructed to spy on you on their mums instructions and start walking around video chatting with her showing her round your house.

And while you are putting yourself through all of this, you think that in approx 5 years time they won’t want to come anymore anyway as they will either be completely alienated or if ex isn’t high conflict then they will just grow up and develop their own lives and then you have approx 40 years left with the man you love so its
not all that clear cut.

This. I think you need to live separately for this relationship to continue, with separate finances.

Step parenting is much harder than parenting. As a parent I exercise a degree of control and competence.

My DH and his ex are totally ineffective, incompetent parents and that’s made step parenting even harder.