Savings Accounts and Children (Step Family)

Peanuckle

I really don't understand the logic of treating kids differently, when my DH adopted my 3 children then we started a savings account for each of them and one for his son from his previous marriage. When we married my parents opened a savings account for their new stepson and he will get the same amount on his 18th birthday as all of his (now) half siblings and cousins.

What his mother and her family choose to save for him isn't any of our business but we treat them all the same. The older 3 have since received their accounts when they passed 18 and know there is one waiting for their little brother but not one of them is concerned by this, in their opinion it's only right that they should all get it.
How does the OP feel her daughter will feel when she finds out one day that her half sister was treated so differently?

Bluemeanie_2

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'. That may be true but that is none of your business who she chooses to go out with. 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, again true, but it is up to her who she goes out with and who she chooses as a partner, that's nothing to do with you.

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.

She isn't asking the Father to support his children on different levels though. She is asking him to support his children the same. By him paying the same amounts to both his children and the OP matching this for her child.

How they divide their money up is largley by the by, either way, technically the OP subsidies his contribution one way or another as it his money he not spending on their child together or them as a couple.

Bluemeanie_2

19lottie82 wrote: »

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.

Really? That's very interesting, if a female PWC had stated that about a male NRP they would have been ripped to shreds by now!

Why does she not pay 20% of her net income for support as per the CSA guidelines?

jungle_jane

It's a toughie OP and something that you and OH will need to resolve not just with savings but with your stance in future with just about everything 'additional' that you provide for the children in future, especially when they get a bit older and start asking you guys for more stuff because you are in a better financial position.

It's even harder as you say because your SD doesn't live with you and I agree with Bluemeanie inasmuch as you can't run out and buy and equivalent for the non resident child each time you get your own child something. It's one of the down sides of divorce.

On the flip side it would be hard on the non resident child when they visit and there is a vastly different standard of living in each house - I am not sure how other blended famililes deal with this scenario. It might be worth having a browse at a few forums aimed at stepfamilies to see how others overcome it?

Some of your frustrations are also felt because you contribute financially to SD but are not able to discipline / set boundaries / parent. Is this because your OH has specifically asked you not to?

pinkclouds

tanith wrote: »

It might be fair for you to give your step-daughter less but how is it fair to your husband? He has two children and wants to provide for them equally, is there anything stopping you from saving separately for your own daughter? Its not something I'd recommend as I think your husband is right but it might make your feel better..

^I think this is the best compromise. Each child has 2 parents, so each parent can choose to save money for their child. Your husband can save money for each of his two children and you can save money for your child. Your step-daughter's mother can exercise her prerogative to save money for her child and if she doesn't then that's her choice. It's not the most ideal solution but I guess something has got to give in a modern "blended" family.

Is there any chance that your reluctance to save the same amount for each child is due to... some sort of fear or suspicion that the money will go astray? It would be a little more complicated to set the savings up as trust funds but it would ensure the money only goes to the child, not the child's mother. I am aware that most bank savings accounts for kids require a named adult to "administer" the account and that the adult can withdraw the whole lot at any time.

FBaby

If this is likely to become an issue of contention why not agree to rearrange your budget so you are both left with a similar disposable budget to do what you want with and the bills divided accordingly. A certain equal amount for kids savings can be agreed but you could then top your daughters with whatever amount you Waugh out of you personal account. Similarly of he wants to take his daughter somewhere as a special treat it can come out of his. My partner doesn't have children but many interests I don't share. it works for us to do it this way. I spend on my kids he spends on his bike and we are free to do so as we wish.

Bluemeanie_2

I don't think there is going to be any easy solution, because what about any more kids in the Mother's family?

Take my situation, my Husband has done ok for himself, and earn a decent wage. His ex made different life choices that I wouldn't have made, but are nothing to do with me. However this means even though us and her and her new partner (who she has two more children with) have the same income (them maybe more I think but then they have 4 kids in their household) they choose to spend their money on very different things.

My stepchildren have 4 double wardrobes full of next clothes, the latest gadgets and trainers etc. But they never get taken out for the day, swimming, activities or have ever been on holiday with her and their stepdad.

When they are with us we only buy minimal clothes and concentrate on spending qulaity time together. I am also taking them to Florida in 2014 to do Disney.

How is her other two kids going to feel when they come off holiday glowing about how wonderful Disneyland is?

Even though that is nothing to do with me and it is her choice how she spends her income I can't help but feel a bit sorry for them.

So if their Mum took those two kids to the Disney shop to buy a toy to have some small compensation, I doubt my two stepkids would hold this against their Mum.

That's how I feel about this, the SD, when she is old enough will hopefully be able to recognise it her Mum and Dad's responsibility to make decsions and save or what have you. Not her Stepmothers and she shouldn't be bought into it.

19lottie82

Bluemeanie wrote: »

Really? That's very interesting, if a female PWC had stated that about a male NRP they would have been ripped to shreds by now!

Why does she not pay 20% of her net income for support as per the CSA guidelines?

She's unemployed. He could get the CSA on her for £5 per week, but what good would that do, apart from cause resentment? Even if she did get a job (which I doubt), I don't think he would ask her for anything in case she flipped her lid. He's trying to keep waters as still as possible for the sake of the kids.

Bluemeanie_2

jungle_jane wrote: »

It's a toughie OP and something that you and OH will need to resolve not just with savings but with your stance in future with just about everything 'additional' that you provide for the children in future, especially when they get a bit older and start asking you guys for more stuff because you are in a better financial position.

It's even harder as you say because your SD doesn't live with you and I agree with Bluemeanie inasmuch as you can't run out and buy and equivalent for the non resident child each time you get your own child something. It's one of the down sides of divorce.

On the flip side it would be hard on the non resident child when they visit and there is a vastly different standard of living in each house - We really struggle with this one. Even though my Hubby's ex has a similar if not higher income plus CSA off my Hubby (rightly so BTW) they have completely different priorities as to what they spend money on. I am not sure how other blended famililes deal with this scenario. It might be worth having a browse at a few forums aimed at stepfamilies to see how others overcome it?

Some of your frustrations are also felt because you contribute financially to SD but are not able to discipline / set boundaries / parent. Is this because your OH has specifically asked you not to?

We struggle with the above. I just don't know what the solution is!

clearingout

yes, of course it's up to her who she chooses as a partner. But by saying that, aren't we basically turning a blind eye? isn't that the same as saying it's OK to create children and to then choose to move on and not support them? Surely as a society we shouldn't be shrugging our shoulders and saying 'her choice' but should be screaming at the tops of our voices that people who refuse to face their responsibilities (whatever they may be) shouldn't have a place in a civilised society? By choosing to turn our backs we are saying it's OK and we are standing by the side of people like my ex who refuse to face their responsibilities. That's not the kind of world I want to live in.

The OP has chosen to share her income 100% with her partner. You can't get away from that. Now she wants to gloss over that and save more for her child with the expectation that her step child receives less whilst still saying 'what's yours is mine' to her husband.... I have every empathy with why she might feel that way - but I don't accept it as right.