Is it worth going down the CSA route?

gratefulforhelp_2

kinksfan wrote: »

that is so spooky as when I was earning and she moved into new husband's house prior to marrying him I suggested we assessed roughly how much of the 400 per month was necessary for "day to day" living expenses given that her overheads had reduced considerably and her new husband is a 40% taxpayer, and then put the rest into a dedicated bank account for university or house purchases for the kids or whatever, when they were older but I got a very curt rejection of this idea, but I like the way your natural justice mind thinks. I wish the law was like that. I have always paid, now I can't and there is simple no recognition of the fact that thanks in a significant way to me (not entirely but significantly) there has been no reduction in her standard of living since the split. She accuses me of being irresponsible and it is very annoying that as soon as I am earning again I will have to give all of the contribution direct to her again instead of channelling some of it to a ringfenced pot for the kids. It almost drives me down the route of exploiting my self employed position to minimise any hit once I secure work again. I just wonder how PWCs would feel if they had to provide money direct to someone who does not need it and makes no secret of the fact that she resents me.

clearingout nails this, I think. And kellogs also has an important point that it would be pretty mean for a new husband to refuse to provide stuff for stepchildren. My new husband certainly treats DD1 as his own, and its a good thing as my XH doesn't, even though she is!

It is a reasonable expectation that when you have a child, you continue to provide for that child throughout your life and while you have the means to do so. Whether that is by providing a home and all the things that go with it, or by providing maintenance because a relationship has broken down, is largely down to fate for some people.

It is ridiculous to suggest that the pwc should have to account for child support money, or that is should somehow be diverted to a savings account for the child if the pwc income goes above a certain point. This money is for the upbringing of the child now, not for them to spend on a car/whatever later on. Unless the NRP earns mega bucks the combined costs of extra mortgage/rent/heating/elec/'phone/clothing/food/transport/school trips/uniform/equipment/hobbies et.c. et.c. easily account for the CS money.

I do think, though, that as clearingout suggests, better to put the money into a savings account for the child than for the NRP to blow it.