Cant balance my ideas of "whats fair" with my finances - help!

[terrier141]

I have 2 dc's and 2dsc's aged between 7-11. Have been SM for almost 2 years and have always believed in treating all the kids the same, including financially. Spend the same for xmas and birthdays, pay for everyones swimming lessons, take them all on holidays, and never buy treats for 1 without the others etc.etc. My dsc's have a full wardrobe of clothes at our house and we pay maintainence for them. This has always been my idea of what is fair.
Unfortunately we have never received a penny in maintainence from my ex for my dc's and he doesnt provide in any other way either.
However, we are really struggling financially and I wondered how other step families do things.
I have had it pointed out to me that actually my dsc's are getting double of everything (pocket money etc), as they get everything off us and off their BM. Due to the financial struggle I have had to stop everyones swimming lessons because I cant afford to pay for 4 lots, and pocket money has been halved since dsc's came. Birthdays and xmas have also been halved. It seems I cant afford to do the things I used to with my dc's anymore but my dsc's continue to do these things with their BM.
Am I selfish for thinking my dc's are missing out?
I know that if they were all our biological kids then that we would have to split things 4 ways, but cant help feeling that my kids are having less while dsc's are having more. Apologies if that sounds resentful, as I do love my dsc's and want the best for all of them.
I would like to start a monthly savings bond, but cant afford to do it for 4, so feel unable to do it for any.
Its really keeping me awake at night.
Any advice gratefully received. Thanks

Terrier, you do sound like a very caring mother and step mother, which is a very difficult role

I really don't know what to suggest, as it does seem impossible for you.

I have 2 sc, thoiugh they are quite a bit older than our dc, and it is obviooulsy a different situation.
We have never encountered sc being jealous or demanding of what dds have and vice versa.

I think you are right that if your ex contributed it would make everything easier ti sort out.

I hope you get some more advice here.

But having said that, are you sure if you went through the CSA, and just paid his ex maintenance and that's it, would you be worse off than now, paying maintenance, looking after them all day for many weeks of the year etc.

If she took you the CSA you could say, right that's it. We're paying you what we should. YOU provide them their pocket money out of what we give you, YOU pay for their groups/activities, YOU provide them with spending money and we will care for them when they are here. Would it take some of the guilt out of it?

Have you checked on the CSA website, on their calculator to see how much they would ask for. Remember to include your child tax credits in the income as they take it into account ( )

bonsoiranna - I am not "resentful" that we do not have enough money for everyone - whether I look after ky step-kids or not does not make a bit of difference.

Thanks choc - I will have a look at the CSA website

And thanks littlerach for your kind words

and for what its worth (although its totally irrelevant - it was mentioned!) - my dhs exP does NOT work full time - like me she works part time 10-2 daily and is a single mum (way before I came along and through her leaving during an affair), I work evenings and weekends and thats how we manage the childcare for the 4 kids

thanks jammi - was hoping you would respond - cos read your posts regularly and you have a lot of experience on these issues. How do I CAT? Im a bit pc illiterate! lol!

Sorry jammi - have just read then page on how to cat - but have to pay £5 which i no is not a lot but will av to wait til tomorrow. Thanks though. Dont think you live far from me either?

terrier - I think you are trying to do the right thing. I would say though that you are very defensive about how you currently manage things, whereas the fact that you posted means that there is indeed a problem which needs to be sorted. I think you need to try to take some of these comments on board (and not just those of people agreeing with you!)

As a BM (with a spookily similar thread going on at the moment) my view is as follows:

DSCs don't need a full wardrobe when at your house, depending on how often you have them. If it the 'standard' EOW weekend contact, then it is nothing but a waste of money. If it is more than that, than DH should look at the maintenance he pays, as more frequent overnights would decrease his maintenance payments, allowing him to cover items like clothing etc.

As for fairness towards all children ... it really depends on the circumstances. Assume you were a full-time employee and made good money ... you would very much resent BM getting a share of your income, wouldn't you?

You say BM has lots of money for her kids ... is her income made up purely of your DH's maintenance and benefits, or does she go to work as well and maybe have family who help her out? If the latter is the case, then think how you would feel if your hard-earned money was going to another woman and her children.

Ultimately, as harsh as it sounds, your DH's first responsibility are his bio kids. But if there is enough money also for your kids, and provided his bio kids' lifestyle doesn't suffer unreasonably (and a new tooth brush or swimming lesson here or there for your kids isn't going to ruin his DCs' lives), then I wouldn't feel bad if I was you.

But you certainly cannot take BM's income into account when it comes to fair treatment for all the kids (provided that it isn't purely made up of your DH's contributions).

Thank you for all your advice - I will certainly take it all on board (yes - even those of you who have not agreed with my lifestyle as you have made some good points).

What I do find hard to hear is that if we were just all a bio family then I wouldnt have to feel guilty for earning less than dh, but because by kids are not his bio kids then I shouldnt expect my kids to have the lifestyle I provided for them before we married.
As I have said before - it was a choice that we BOTH made to get married and live this way - and whilst I do earn less - I do contribute in lots and lots of other ways.
Yes I agree he has a commitment firstly to his bio kids - which he provides in the way of maintainence.

Originally - before you all realised that i only worked part-time - there was a definate vview that the maintainence he pays should adequatley cover all his bio kids needs and that we needed feel we have to give equal pocket money, activities etc.
So why the huge shift when you find out I only work part time??

This is the way we BOTH CHOSE to live and is the way many bio families have to live to (one partner worknig part-time because the cost of childminder outweighs income).

We are a FAMILY - we do what works for us.

Thanks again for all your advice - and yes clearly there are issues which I need to address - but this will not include working more hours (because of reason previously explained), nor will it involve not voluntarily looking after my husbands kids if I can.

I do not see why my children should expect less than before I married when I feel that sc are adqeuately provided for.

Regardless of who puts most money in the pot it is a family pot (just like it would be in a bio family for instance), the maintainence is paid - so wheres the problem?

Thats it for me thanks

'Regardless of who puts most money in the pot it is a family pot (just like it would be in a bio family for instance), the maintainence is paid - so wheres the problem?'

The problem is that you are now short of money, which is why you originally posted

I think you are quite wrong to insist that your family is "like a bio family" and this is part of your problem. Just because you married a man doesn't make your children his children and does not make all your and all your DH's responsibilities shared as they would be in a bio family.

I can quite understand your wishful thinking on this issue, but it is just that!

You wrote: I do not see why my children should expect less than before I married when I feel that sc are adequately provided for.

And then transfer this on to BM: Why should HER children expect less than before you married?

Imagine the BF of your children suddenly decided to pay up? Would you add this to your household income and advise DH to contact the CSA and let them know your household income has increased and therefore his maintenance payments will increase as well? You would be mad to do that!

From what I've read from terrier, if her xh started to cough up then I think she'd be pleased to have the extra money and would be able to give all the children more than she can afford now.

And I agree with everything you say about being like a "bio" family and not viewing having your dsc's with you as "childcare". Dsd is part of this family and she's either with us or with her mum. Who cares whether her being here is "free" childcare for her mum, or doing her mum a favour. What matters to us is that we have a much loved and much missed member of the family here.

I do think the balance is a bit skewed in your family terrier. I think it's fine to buy your dd a toothbrush and not her step-sister. It's fine for your children to have things that their step siblings don't. What they get at their mums end will balance it out. We spend the same on Christmas and Birthdays, we all go on holiday together but there a lot of things that have to be split now we can't afford to pay for everything - school trips, school uniform, birthday parties.

I think there are may be areas where you can cut back on your spending on your dsc's, but what about not looking at it from purely a financial point of view? I suppose if I look at it that way dd gets less than she would if we didn't have dsd. And definitely gets less than she did before I had dd. DD and dsd adore each other and I'm quite sure given the option of having "more" or having a sister they'd go for the latter every time. It's not always about the money.

Oh and I completely disagree with Anna's last point - I do consider us like a "bio" family and I do consider that I have an equal responsibility, albeit a slightly different one to her parents. And I don't think you're "wrong" to consider it like that terrier. I would really struggle to view dsd in any other way, that would just feel wrong to me.

We always disagree on this point surfermum .

But you contradict yourself, because you acknowledge that a stepparent's responsibilities are different to a bio parent's responsibilities. The law is very, very clear about this

We do don't we? It just shows that there's no right or wrong ways of thinking about things, just different ones . We all do what works for us.

I think that getting to a concept of "fair and equal treatment" (which I believe in very strongly) of all children in a family is very, very hard indeed. This is why there is so much discussion about it. It is so much harder than eg buying swimming lessons for all the children when they are all at the same house.

Anna, sorry to be nosey, going back to your comments about the account which your partner and his ex have, is this an extra amount he pays into the account every month as well as paying his ex maintenance or is it the maintenance paid into the account? I hope that makes sense.

It's not "extra", the maintenance was renegotiated and part of it was allocated "directly" to the boys as opposed to their mother. It's a way of earmarking the maintenance so that it gets spent as intended (on the boys).

FWIW, DP paid for the boys' nanny at their mother's house until last July. He used to pay her wages directly, as well as the costs of her accommodation. Maintenance doesn't just have to be paid in a lump sum directly to the exspouse. For example, in England maintenance can include school fees paid directly to the school.

Oh no, I understand that. I wasn't being accusational at all. I was genuinely wondering how it worked because I think it's a good system.

When using the CSA, the money does have to go directly to the parent with care. Only in Scotland can it sometimes go directly to the child.

Giving money directly to the child, putting in an account specifically for the child etc is not classed as maintenance in the eyes of the CSA. It is a gift. Ridiculous, I know.

Unfortunately some parents with care are not happy for them to be dictated where and when the money should be spent on their children. It's one of the reasons the CSA are brought into the equation as the parent with care knows they get the money to do with as they please.

My H has a amicable relationship with his daughter's mother and it's something I would like to bear in mind in the future. Thank you.

DP and exW have never been to court over money - they have a private arrangement and DP does a lot of "bargaining in the shadow of the law". But in any case, DSS1 will be 15 next year, and once children are 15 in France they basically get to decide which parent they live with when. So exW doesn't have a lot of say anymore!

DP and exW have shared residency btw - there is no "parent with care" in our case.