Savings Accounts and Children (Step Family)

19lottie82

Person_one wrote: »

I'd say you need to really discuss all the finances and the children and be on the same page before you bring more children into the situation.

However, I'd also suggest starting your own thread.

Yes, you're right. Doesn't play on my mind as much to warrant a thread, just something that I have pondered and I was reminded of it while reading this thread.

But back to the topic, I'd have to agree with the OP's husband.
If her DSDs mother is on benefits then she might not be in a position to put anything away and even if she is / does, then surely the OP's DD has the benefit of 2 parents that are together. You can't put a price on that.

Wine_of_the_World

19lottie82 wrote: »

Anyway we have been together a few years now and are thinking about maybe TTC in a year or so. If I had a child I would definitely want to put their share of the CB into a savings acc for when they are older. BUT would this be fair, on the older ones, even though it’s not my fault that their father didn’t put anything away for them when they were younger.

Obviously, if I did this for my child then I would insist that we start putting something away for the other 2, BUT this contribution to their savings acc would stop when their CB did, so my child would have a lot more due to me putting it aside since their birth.

Any opinions please? Sorry to thread hijack!

Well, if you decided to save only a small amout of your child's CB so all three ended up with the same amout, I'd say that wouldn't be fair on your child - or on you - as this sounds like its important for you as a parent to save.

Or, would it fair if no children had any savings in order to 'be fair' - I'd say no.

Insead I'd say the step children would be very lucky to have a foward thinking SM who put some savings aside for them. The age differences between your child and the step children will be quite a bit anyway, your financial situation will be different, etc, etc - so I wouldnt worry about it too much.

19lottie82

Bluemeanie wrote: »

I would just need a bit more info before I expressed my opinion, (if you want it lol). Do they live with him and you? Do you have full time care? Is their Mother alive or is she just not around? Does she see them at all? Does she pay child support?

Surely, opinions wanted. Again, sorry to hijack....

Yes the girls live with us FT, hence why my OH gets the CB / for them.
They do stay with their mother a couple of nights a week but we pay for everything that they need, she makes no contribution.

clearingout

Bluemeanie wrote: »

I don't think the OP said anything of the sort about how "dreadful" the real Mother was. She simply pointed out that as she was on benefits, it was unlikely that she would save for her. That is the only bit she mentioned with regard to her. You seem to have read that into it because of your own situation?

I know your ex doesn't pay for his kids, but that isn't his new bit's fault. He should take responsibility for HIS actions. It is up to the person whether or not they let someone influence their action. Another frequent poster on the CSA pages seems to be blaming her ex's new partner all the time, when in reality it should him she is blaming.

actually, in my case it is most certainly my ex's 'new bits' fault that he pays no maintenance. He didn't run off with his secretary, he ran off with the bookkeeper/accountant! Not only does she receive over half of what he used to pay himself as salary (whilst she works full time elsewhere), she has taken great delight in turning up on my doorstep and telling me all about the 'hidden bank accounts' and how she'll make sure our children never get a penny. She's not nice.

clearingout

clearingout wrote: »

actually, in my case it is most certainly my ex's 'new bits' fault that he pays no maintenance. He didn't run off with his secretary, he ran off with the bookkeeper/accountant! Not only does she receive over half of what he used to pay himself as salary (whilst she works full time elsewhere), she has taken great delight in turning up on my doorstep and telling me all about the 'hidden bank accounts' and how she'll make sure our children never get a penny. She's not nice.

sorry, that reads wrong. It's not her fault - my ex presumably is in cahoots on this issue so it's his fault, but he has professional help in the form of his girlfriend. why on earth would you want to be with a man capable of doing that to his children?!

Bluemeanie_2

clearingout wrote: »

sorry, that reads wrong. It's not her fault - my ex presumably is in cahoots on this issue so it's his fault, but he has professional help in the form of his girlfriend. why on earth would you want to be with a man capable of doing that to his children?!

That's what I'm getting at. Ultimately it is not her "fault" he doesn't support his kids. The responsibility lies with him to support his children and facilitate this. Her helping him disguise his income etc obviously isn't a nice thing to do and would make me question her morals, and turning up on your doorstep etc is disgusting, don't get me wrong, but she wouldn't be able to it etc unless he let her/facilitated this.

clearingout

Bluemeanie wrote: »

That's what I'm getting at. Ultimately it is not her "fault" he doesn't support his kids. The responsibility lies with him to support his children and facilitate this. Her helping him disguise his income etc obviously isn't a nice thing to do and would make me question her morals, and turning up on your doorstep etc is disgusting, don't get me wrong, but she wouldn't be able to it etc unless he let her/facilitated this.

it's a two way thing...I wouldn't stand by a man who didn't support his children with my knowledge (I accept it could happen without my knowledge), and I wouldn't sit back and say 'oh well, his children, his problem'. Fundamentally it says something particularly horrible about a person's character - complete lack of responsibility and commitment - and I don't want to be around that kind of person. But maybe that's just me.

If we go back to the OP's situation - she is basically saying she's willing to support her step-child (great) but not to the same degree she would her own child (OK). That's not unreasonable on those terms. But what she is asking is that the child's father support his children at different levels. And that's what we're discussing...for me, it's the expectation that a child should accept less from a parent as a result of having separated parents. It's life, I guess, that it sometimes works out that way. But I'm not sure it's OK to plan it that way.... if the OP had maintained her financial independence I could go with it, if they were putting a prorportion of what they were earning into the joint pot and saving the rest themselves but that's not the case...she is basically saying she's happy to share but only on her terms. I'm not OK with that.

moneybags13

clearingout wrote: »

it's a two way thing...I wouldn't stand by a man who didn't support his children with my knowledge (I accept it could happen without my knowledge), and I wouldn't sit back and say 'oh well, his children, his problem'. Fundamentally it says something particularly horrible about a person's character - complete lack of responsibility and commitment - and I don't want to be around that kind of person. But maybe that's just me.

If we go back to the OP's situation - she is basically saying she's willing to support her step-child (great) but not to the same degree she would her own child (OK). That's not unreasonable on those terms. But what she is asking is that the child's father support his children at different levels. And that's what we're discussing...for me, it's the expectation that a child should accept less from a parent as a result of having separated parents. It's life, I guess, that it sometimes works out that way. But I'm not sure it's OK to plan it that way.... if the OP had maintained her financial independence I could go with it, if they were putting a prorportion of what they were earning into the joint pot and saving the rest themselves but that's not the case...she is basically saying she's happy to share but only on her terms. I'm not OK with that.

Sorry for your situation, that is horrible and I think both ur ex and the new woman are awful for what they are doing.

My husband supports his child and I would not want to be with him if he didnt. I think that children are the joint responsibility of their respective parents.

That said, I am not asking my husband to pay more to my child than to my SD, that is why I suggested she gets 50% of what our child gets....if me and my husband seperated I wouldn't be able to make the same contribution to my daughters savings.

huskypup

Person_one wrote: »

Maybe theit should be something added in to the wedding ceremony when either already has children:

"I hereby swear that I accept your children as an equal part of our loving family."


This is exactly what I did, when I married my HB, as part of my vows, I said I would treat my Stepchildren as I would my own and do my best for them, love them and be honest with them.

They also made vows to me and there dad. We saw our wedding as the coming together of a new family unit.


Yes they do receive things from their mum and stepdad - but like the OP our money is joint - so what ever they need including savings comes from the one account.

FatVonD

I still think your best solution is to save the child benefit you receive for her. Your stepdaughter's mother will be in receipt of child benefit for her but because of lifestyle choices made by her and your husband she is not in a position to save the money and needs to spend it on living costs. You have made different life choices and have sacrificed time with your child to enable you to become more financially stable and are therefore able to save her child benefit for her. Sorted.