Would you tell a child that NRP does not pay for them?

poet123

I think the explanation from the OP's friend shows exactly how selfish this man is. Everything seems to be on his terms and to the benefit of his new family. He has moved on, and simply pays lip service to his older children.

He probably comes up to see his own family or friends on the Wednesday and then takes the older two to the Cinema or for a pub meal. Job done, conscience, such as it is satisfied. Selfish in the extreme.

clearingout

silvercar wrote: »

Plenty thick but rich kids. And poor kids who have made it "in spite" of their lack of money. Academic achievement may depend on whether you have inherited an academic ability, so lower qualified and therefore lower paid parents produce lower achieving children.

There is plenty of research out there that clearly demonstrates household income is the main factor in determining your outcomes at 16.

lostinrates

itsanne wrote: »

There's quite a lot of self-justification going on in this thread!

There certainly is. Some of it from mothers. Its rare there is one 'goody' and one (or two) baddies, people, even parents, even mothers, are imperfect sometimes.

I really feel for OP's friend. She is between a rock and a hard place.

Fwiw I think a possible outcome is that Op's daughter might talk to her father who might give her (and her sister) pocket money directly on Wednesdays, thus being 'the hero'.

In some family dynamics this sort of situation even gets used as a point of manipulation.

silvercar

clearingout wrote: »

There is plenty of research out there that clearly demonstrates household income is the main factor in determining your outcomes at 16.

The two indicators are linked, plenty of research shows that better qualifications lead to better jobs, so the better educated tend to earn more. So the children are getting better qualifications themselves because they come form households who earn more because they are better qualified.

silvercar

poet123 wrote: »

I think the explanation from the OP's friend shows exactly how selfish this man is. Everything seems to be on his terms and to the benefit of his new family. He has moved on, and simply pays lip service to his older children.

He probably comes up to see his own family or friends on the Wednesday and then takes the older two to the Cinema or for a pub meal. Job done, conscience, such as it is satisfied. Selfish in the extreme.

If he is not earning, all he has got is his time. Would you rather he didn't visit his children mid week?

clearingout

silvercar wrote: »

The two indicators are linked, plenty of research shows that better qualifications lead to better jobs, so the better educated tend to earn more. So the children are getting better qualifications themselves because they come form households who earn more because they are better qualified.

I think we will need to disagree. Do you work with young people? Have you seen the impact of the single parent household in an educational setting in 'real life'?

silvercar

clearingout wrote: »

I think we will need to disagree. Do you work with young people? Have you seen the impact of the single parent household in an educational setting in 'real life'?

Anecdote: I was a class rep in my son's year 7 class (1st year of secondary school). This was a grammar school whose intake is based solely on performance in the entrance exams and the exams were designed so that you couldn't be coached for them ( verbal/ non-verbal reasoning etc). I commented to the head that all the address lists were Mr & Mrs and kids all had same names as children, so the impression was that there were few if any children of single parents or divorced parents. He said that, however well intentioned the parents, a split at even a young age, has an effect on a childs' learning. He also said that about 20% of the children didn't speak english as a first language at home, it really was the trauma of a break up that impacted on education. In terms of finance, there really were families from all incomes and some children who travelled quite a way to get to school.

paulineb_2

silvercar wrote: »

The two indicators are linked, plenty of research shows that better qualifications lead to better jobs, so the better educated tend to earn more. So the children are getting better qualifications themselves because they come form households who earn more because they are better qualified.

This debate hasnt much to do with the original posting

Id just like to say from a personal point of view, I grew up in a single parent household. My mum has a degree and two post grads and so do I but both of us worked in professions that werent well paid.

I went to a very ordinary state school. What got me my degree was support and encouragement. My brother has a degree, we also both have other qualifications apart from our degree. Money wasnt plentiful when we were growing up but I had a much better life growing up with my mum than I would have had had my parent stayed together.

There will always be studies and stats that say that people who live in a single parent household will be disadvantaged to some degree but thats not how it was for me, quite the opposite. And as I said in earlier posts, my dad had no interest in me and continues to do so.

Im also a qualified youth worker and worked with young people for almost 20 years, theres not much I havent seen to be honest, but Ive worked with many teens who grew up with both parents and who had more than enough money to go round and things still went wrong in their lives.

I had ability and I was encouraged, in the same way that my mum was encouraged by her parents before her, lack of money didnt stop me from getting a degree, neither did it stop my brother.

I also know people with few qualifications who work in certain trades who earn a packet. Not always the case that higher qualifications earn more money.

fabforty

silvercar wrote: »

Bottom line is you have one household with 4 people living in it and 6 at some times and another with 3 people in it and only 1 at some times. Not equal and the finances will never be equal.

This is incorrect. You have two households, each with three people in. One household will soon have four, but the older girls do not live with their father, except for staying over sometimes during the summer holidays.

itsanne

silvercar wrote: »

You say that without knowing people's backgrounds, unless they have posted that information.

I have an admiration for anyone that starts a relationship with someone who already has children. Luckily I have never been in that situation.

If you have 2 mums with 2 kids each and a dad who is father to all 4, there is always going to be some conflict. Bottom line is you have one household with 4 people living in it and 6 at some times and another with 3 people in it and only 1 at some times. Not equal and the finances will never be equal.

At least one has given the information.

The overall finances are never going to be equal, but that doesn't mean there should not be a real effort to treat the children fairly. In the families involved in this thread that was patently obviously not the case.

Numerous threads throughout MSE show that there are a large number of NRP parents who do not treat their original children in the same fashion as their later ones. They "move on" with their lives, leaving their children decidedly worse off, not only in the financial sense. Children have the right to be supported and treated fairly by their parents regardless of the changes in the parents relationships. They are not commodities to be discarded as convenient.