End of maintenance - what to do?

[Donewithitt]

DSS will be 18 this year, so his maintenance payments will stop. Which are around 1.5k per month (not including school fees)
We are pretty sure DSS's mum will KO about it, is there anyway to mitigate this?
DH is planning to write to her at the end of this month to let her know it's stopping, so it doesn't come as a shock and she has 10 months to prepare.
Currently we can afford to continue the payments and plan on diverting the money, minus the school fees into savings for DSS so he'll leave uni with a lump of 50k - which he can access for a house deposit.
Has anyone done anything similar?

Not arguing.

Just you said that you don't agree with the majority on this thread. I was wondering what you think " the majority think" .

Well I’ve never heard of you, but I’m sure your valuable contribution to Mumsnet is appreciated by someone.

Cool, I’ll bear that in mind next time I’m giving advice on infertility and DV which is on a regular basis.

DSS mum needs to get a job

How do you know she hasn't got a job?

Did you not read OP's posts?

Allowance 500 per month
Uni fees paid in full
Car + fuel card 50 per month + insurance
1 overseas holiday per year paid for by his dad

And he will have a 50/50 home between his mum and his dad in holidays.

She's been very clear.

Do you really think this seems like a situation where all of the financial burden has fallen on the mum?

And yet you've dedicated two entire paragraphs pf a thread to the issue when you don't even know either of the parents let alone love one of them, presumably. How ironic.

I agree with you though that the majority of blended families and step parent setups usually somewhere between unpleasant and traumatising for the children subjected to them, largely because the unrelated adults marrying into the family have attitudes like yours to the existing children, yet impose themselves on the family anyway. It's good that you have the self-reflection to know this would be a terrible idea in your own case.

I thought the plan was Dad would pay uni fees - but, especially if DS will be living away from home like he wants to, there will be many other university expenses? Accommodation to start with…

OP said they are paying his fees, bought him a car and pay some of the running costs and provide him with an allowance (which will help with living expenses). He also works. Presumably his mother should also contribute towards his university costs so perhaps she can fund the accommodation given it appears the rest is already covered by the DSS himself/ his father and step mother? And they are apparently simultaneously going to save £50k for a house deposit for him.

Surely it should be a balance between the two parents? Why is their contribution insufficient? The mother should be supporting him as much as she can herself and will have no expenses any longer in relation to him except visits in holidays.

Apparently he splits his time equally between his parents' homes so presumably he'll continue to do that during university holidays, so it's hard to see a case for the father to continue to pay money to the mother's to fund the DSS's living expenses in this situation as she's no longer housing him/ paying for anything to support him that the father and step mother need to contribute towards.

I am disappointed to see some of the attitudes on this thread. I think the amount of CMS required by law is an insulting pittance and not enforced properly but from OP's posts she and her husband have gone far above this and intend to continue to do so, helping her DSS very generously. Why the mother feels entitled to continue to receive money from them in the above circumstances is a mystery to me so please can somebody arguing for this explain the reasoning?

As a lone parent raising my children with no involvement from the other parent I think this type of attitude - that somehow this mother should continue to receive money when she has no additional expenses to fund for DSS - quite shocking and it undermines all of the totally valid arguments about deadbeat fathers who do not pay anywhere near what they should, or nothing.

Maintenance is to fund the expenses of raising the child, not to fund the other parent. It should be much higher than the CMS amounts, and equate to 50% of the cost of raising and housing a child. But this child has been raised (with very reasonable contributions to the expenses involved, it seems) and is now an adult so there's no further case for maintenance, surely?

oh i have no problem with talking about how unappealing i find the idea of step parenting! 😆

I'd never inflict that on my children, either. My point was that those who do so should only do so if they have entirely the opposite approach to yours and will prioritise the children's needs over their own. Most do not.

But in this particular case the OP and her husband's financial support seems very reasonable and generous and I don't understand the clamour from some posters that they're being really unfair to the mother. I hope someone can explain why they think this is the case.

i suppose because scant detail about the ex has been provided

What detail about her would make any difference to the situation?

She has no further expenses relating to DSS once he goes to university beyond him stay with her for 50% of the holidays, and the other half with his father. So no case for one parent to fund the other as one isn't incurring costs for their child that the other is not and therefore needs to contribute towards.

The ex-wife's life post-divorce is not the OP and her husband's problem. Their job was to ensure they supported the costs of raising the child, not to help the ex-wife with her own circumstances. If she would struggle financially once maintenance for DSS is no longer payable because she has no further expenses in relation to raising him then this would indicate she was misspending the maintenance when she did receive it and using it for purposes other than raising him.

If the maintenance was used for its intended purpose then it stopping when the related expenses that it contributes towards also stop being incurred this should have no impact on her whatsoever. In fact, she should be better off because giving her som a small contribution towards living expenses at university (his own work and his father having covered most of it already, it seems) should be much cheaper for her than her 50% of the cost of housing and raising him when he was a dependent child.

(Lose the quote. Was in reply to our pal @ttcat37, a proud outlier)

I guess. It just doesn’t make….sense?

Are you a stepchild? Mother to a child who has a stepmother? Just trying to understand the logic.

“It is better to stay silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”

Hahahaaaa

Yeah, reading a few paragraphs is really hard. If reading is such a huge effort perhaps online discussion forums in written form aren't for you. The existence of things called "books" (significantly longer than the short posts on Mumsnet) evidences the fact that not everything worth communicating (and in fact, nothing useful at all) can be expressed in a three word slogan.

Who is this aimed at? The OP, or me?

Why would somebody's personal situation be relevant at all to the objective merits of the case?

No, my children don't have any step parents and never will. 🤣 Some people can consider things objectively rather than respond based on personal vested interests, you know.

Trying to turn it into a personal issue is a sad response. I was asking for an actual logical and reasonable justification why child maintenance should be paid to someone who no longer has any expenses related to their (now adult) child, except them visiting for half of their university holidays (so cost neutral between the parents as the other parent also has them stay for 50%)? Especially when it sounds like they are also paying far more than 50% of his costs for university, as well. It makes no sense.

I’m not sure who you are, or your stance. I edited my post. It was in reply to another poster’s reply to me. Can’t quite fathom why some people are working quite so hard to demonise the father and the OP. They pay a huge amount, are continuing to support the son generously in multiple ways, and share the residential side of parenting 50:50, so arguably maintenance not required. At all.

Oh dear GOD, please do 🙈

Don’t disagree with them @ThisPageIsBlank, unless you want a pile on. Have you watched Mean Girls? It’s a bit like that.

I’m not sure who you are, or your stance. I edited my post. It was in reply to another poster’s reply to me. Can’t quite fathom why some people are working quite so hard to demonise the father and the OP. They pay a huge amount, are continuing to support the son generously in multiple ways, and share the residential side of parenting 50:50, so arguably maintenance not required. At all.

Ah, ok. Your post appeared in the middle of an exchange so I was confused who you were talking to, that's all.

As for the rest of what you've said above, I agree.

Seems like it. Good advice. Not worth it.

I just wish people could look at a situation objectively without bringing personal baggage to it and assess it fairly. OP has been unfairly attacked her IMO and I'm certainly not generally someone on the defence for absent fathers!

What, with £50k? 😂

To normal people, it is pretty obvious that the mother is the deadbeat here.