We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

csa help please!!!

124»

Comments

  • RedSky
    RedSky Posts: 234 Forumite
    LizzieS wrote: »
    10 years may give hope all historical encounters have not resulted in a child, but unless you stuck something on the end of it and kept distant tabs on your previous encounters for 9 months after, there is always a risk factor to put into financial plans.

    No contraception is 100% and not all liaisons last 9 months afterwards (and that is not necessarily any one individual's fault or choice)
  • Blonde_Bint
    Blonde_Bint Posts: 1,262 Forumite
    AnxiousMum wrote: »
    I know my ex is upset as he now has a step son, and has in the last year had a daughter with his current partner. Unfortunately, the laws governing our child support order in Canada don't take that into account. They really do consider the fact that existing children are entitled to live in the lifestyle provided by the two parents. They don't consider new children in a family, and consider the fact that the parents already have so many to support, and if they cannot afford more, then don't have them. Maybe it's harsh......but when you think about it - as a couple if you have three children and decide you can't afford more, then you don't have them. But, if you have three children, split, you then can afford more? I guess there's two ways to look at it.


    Thats the way I see it. I used to get a lot of 'oh when you and dh going to have another baby' from his side of the family one of his sisters even said that it wasnt the same for dd as having a brother who lived with her 24/7. Maybe its not. But the fact is the way I saw it was our money was split between the 2 of them if I have another i'm going to have to take that pile of money and divide it 3 ways. babies cost then theres the cost of 3 children in school 3 sets of well everything school trips sponsor ship money etc etc you get the picture. It really used to pee me off big time:mad: the way they looked at me as having only one child, thats not the way I saw it:mad::mad:.

    Not PC but I agree with the Canadian system but for people to see that this is going to be implemented the powers that be have to have the balls to do it. Sadly we in britain handed over our balls to was it brussels or belgium I forget.:p as soon as someone is told your extra child is going to be paid for by you but your first child isnt going to be paying for it it may take some years before people see this is happening but eventually people who already have children wont be so keen to spit out 6 kids with 2 or 3 other women. Good for you Canada. :)
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 353.6K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 246.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 603K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.1K Life & Family
  • 260.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.