Can you help me see how this is fair

AnxiousMum

Marisco wrote: »

Yes I agree AM, but maybe the childcare plus CSA is not affordable. We don't know the reason Kezz's oh is staying at home. Maybe all his wages would go in CSA and childcare, so it's not worth him working, and if Kezz earns more, then it seems sensible that he stay home and not her. If she stayed home, then maybe his wages are not enough to cover CSA, childcare and all the bills. And be honest, no one is going to work if all the money is going on CSA and childcare.

I understand that Marisco - however in the situation above, the NRP has another child to think about - so by working, yes, they might be losing all his wages in childcare for the new child and csa for the original child - but at least the needs of BOTH children are being catered for. I wonder, if in the situation you describe, a NRP or NRPP would see fit to use some of the money they are saving, ie, childcare for new child, to ensure that some maintenance is paid for the original child.

kezzygirl

FBaby wrote: »

So are things better now that your husband pays no maintenance at all? Does he feel happier that his ex doesn't get as much to go and get her haid done regularly now? Did the pwc suddenly woke up and decided that as a result of not getting any maintenance, she was now going to be a good mum and sort out the nit problem (not sure why this is a pwc issue alone, or what it has to do with maintenance...).
this was mentioned just to give a bit of insight as to how the pwc is with her parenting skills
What has been gained from the child's perspective now that no maintenance is paid?- Doesn't your husband feel any guilt that he is not supporting his child at all?-lol,you are joking!my husband is staying at home to look after our 5 year old and two year old-it wasnt to avoid maintenance,its because I have a degree,postgraduate qualifications and can earn more than his grand a month(which is what he was receiving after maintenance)hild, but by his actions, your husband is expecting the exact same thing. I don't know, I thought there was pride attached to knowing that you work hard to provide for your children, all of them, a way to show how important your kids are to you. How does he expect his child to grow up feeling towards his dad??

-what,because their father has paid for the last 7 years and the 'children' are now 19 and 17?i would hope they wouldnt know anything about finances etc,imo the children have no need to know.

and in reply to the rest of it,pwc and her new hubby BOTH work full time.My hisband was working fulltime plus extra hours and earning a grand a month after tax and maintenance.I was studying for a degree,and,now I have it,I can earn more than him doing less hours.simples really.

So when it comes to deprivation,tell me,who is more deprived?
2 young children with one parent working earning a measley wage working all the hours under the sun to pay maintenance and bills,trying to keep our head above water

OR
2 teenage children,with their mother and her new partner both working full time,plus receiving maintenance,plus both having their own little weekend jobs?


the answer,I think you will find,is the first one.
and not only that,you dont have a clue about how the pwc has treated those children so really,u have no right to comment

FBaby

here we go again, two more children financially supported by their step dad because their own dad prioritises his new children over his eldest. Yep, just like my ex. Had to laught at your comments about the children not needing to know about finances at 17 and 19... do you mean they are not aware that their dad doesn't contribute towards their every day living expenses? Isn't it about time they understand where money comes from and how to budget?

Totally agree with Anxiousmum, if you are saving on childcare costs because of your husband's choice not to work to look after your new children, shouldn't some of these savings go towards his first children?

AnxiousMum

Kezz......is the 17 yr old still in education, and so child support would normally still be payable - or, is the 17 and the 19 yr old both considered out of education now and therefore not having child benefit payable to the mum - and so CSA payments would be stopped? If that is the case - then there is no need to be providing child support for them anymore. If though, (as you haven't made it clear in your posts, and the impression I got from your post was this) he has made the decision, jointly with you, to be a househusband and therefore unable to help provide by way of child support that would normally still be payable - just be careful My ex paid his child support no problem for years, moved in with a new partner and her son, and child support payments became late and somewhat sporadic, but always made up to amount owed. They then had a child together, and child support stopped altogether. Unfortunately for my two eldest children, this came at a time when they were in need of this additional money (money being put aside for uni etc.) and totally spoiled my eldest son's first year at university. Who does he blame - dad and his partner - I helped him all I could, two universities and two colleges in his uni town - no work available - not that he didnt' try. He no longer actually speaks with his dad's partner, and is very reserved with his dad due to him 'allowing' her to control his responsibilities to his first two children. Meanwhile, her son was posting on facebook about their holiday to the Phillipines, thanking his step dad for enabling him to go to California on a school trip etc, and then in the next post, saying what an a$$ he was and hoped he would die! So - my ex got his priorities misplaced - his first responsibility should have been to his children - his first two and his new daughter - ALL of them. His step child's responsibiities should've been met by his mother and father - not by my ex at the expense of his own two boys. That's the type of thing that breeds resentment, and my son has now not seen his dad for three years. He was 19 when this all occurred (our agreement, and law in Canada with our court order) was that children would be supported (by him and me) through university.
Unfortunately for them.......enforcement stepped in and the enforcement is so good that he actually pays them about five days before the payment is due - unfortunately, BOTH of my kids see it as he's only doing it because he's forced to, but he's shown in the past that he would not do it if he could get away with it. ?What a horrid feeling for a kid to have with regards to their father?

FBaby

I do wonder what my kids would make up of it too when they are older. My ex also supports his partner two children from a previous relationship as well as his new baby (which is right), yet provides nothing to our children. My children know that he doesn't contribute anything (I think!) but at the moment, believe his sopping excuses, that is poor whist I'm sooo rich... they buy it and in a way, I am pleased that my children are showing compassion. However, I can only imagine they will one day - without my help- start to understand that if their dad showed them plenty of affection, he wasn't prepared to be there for them from a financial position. It's the money per se that makes the children resent the parent who doesn't pay, it's the evidence of favouritism which would hurt any child, rightly so. My parents separated when I was very little, my dad remarried to a woman who already had a child. My dad always made a point to be fair to both of us. I never got along brilliantly with my step-sister, but grew no resentment towards her and i adore my dad. I know for a fact I would have felt very differently if my dad had supported her generously yet not provided anything for me. I'm so glad this never came to my dad's mind.

kezzygirl

here we go again, two more children financially supported by their step dad because their own dad prioritises his new children over his eldest. Yep, just like my ex. Had to laught at your comments about the children not needing to know about finances at 17 and 19... do you mean they are not aware that their dad doesn't contribute towards their every day living expenses? Isn't it about time they understand where money comes from and how to budget? -errr, I think you will findthe mother kicked stepson out at 16 and he came to live with us.we supported him financially and bougth him a motorbike etc so why we are 'prioritising' our children over the other two i cant understand,but then like i say you do not have a clue about our situation.His son left school at 16(and like i said,lived with us thanks to his mother throwing him out)and his daughter also lived with us for 6mths,she left school last year and is currently doing an entry into employment thing.

FBaby

kezzygirl wrote: »

So when it comes to deprivation,tell me,who is more deprived?
2 young children with one parent working earning a measley wage working all the hours under the sun to pay maintenance and bills,trying to keep our head above water

OR
2 teenage children,with their mother and her new partner both working full time,plus receiving maintenance,plus both having their own little weekend jobs?


the answer,I think you will find,is the first one.
and not only that,you dont have a clue about how the pwc has treated those children so really,u have no right to comment

I'm confused, were you referring to your situation there? because you mention the nrp working to pay maintenance and the pwc and pwcp receiving it, but your last post you say that your step-children are not elligible for maintenance any longer.

kezzygirl

FBaby wrote: »

I'm confused, were you referring to your situation there? because you mention the nrp working to pay maintenance and the pwc and pwcp receiving it, but your last post you say that your step-children are not elligible for maintenance any longer.

I was referring to our situation for the past 7years until hubby stopped working last april.
Anyway,we shall agree to disagree because i dont think there will be resolution to this matter.