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

mumps

Pollycat wrote: »

Isn't part of being a parent (even a NRP one) also contributing financially to your children, even if they are 'just' your first family and you've moved on and are enjoying life with someone else?

Let's not forget - this is not a guy who is unable to get work.
He's someone who had a well-paid job then decided it worked better financially for him to become a SAHD.
Sadly for his 'first' family, as a result of that decision it means he can no longer contribute financially to that family.

And let's not also forget that OP's friend has said that he could work a few hours a week to allow him to contribute - but he doesn't want to do that because it would impact on his family time.

I don't think anyone has said that a NRP shouldn't pay and that wasn't the question the OP asked. The thread is about what the mother should tell the child. People have said it doesn't need to effect the child's relationship with the father but lets face it most people aren't expecting that are they? The comments about what he should do and the child having a right to know make it clear that people think it serves him right if he goes down in child's mind, well that is how I read it and whilst I agree that he needs to think about his responsibilities the main consideration is to protect the child.

I think if I was in that situation I would suggest that she talk to her father about it. I would then let him know what she has asked and that I have suggested she talk to him. That gives him an opportunity to decide what to do, he might decide to give his daughter £20 a month or something he can afford with his wife's agreement or perhaps if his wife won't agree to money she has earned going to the other famly he will need to do something to generate the money. Or he might explain to his daughter what is happening at the moment and make her a promise about the future e.g. I can't do this now but when your little siblings are at school I will be able to provide money for you at college.

I think the girl is 11 or 12 and she is coming to quite a challenging age which can be difficult for her and parents. I hope her parents can make that as easy as possible for her.

silvercar

But the girl hasn't asked 'does Dad pay any maintenance'.
She has asked if she can have a clothing allowance from the money her Dad pays.

If Dad was paying maintenance, it doesn't mean that a 12 year old should assume she can have a clothes allowance. The two don't go together. So whether Dad pays any maintenance or not is not the main point from the child's POV.

Errata

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I reluctantly agree. But what a mess . Poor girl.

Unfortunately it became a mess when the parents separated. There is always collateral damage for the children as recent Mumsnet research has very clearly identified. Nobody gets away scotfree.

seven-day-weekend

I too think people are taking the attitude that it serves him right if the girl thinks less of him and blow her relationship with her father. They are not thinking of her, only the adults.

I think I will say no more in this conversation, I have said what I want to say.

But if only people thought more about the effects on their children before breaking their marriages up, maybe they would try a bit harder. And before people say 'my partner dumped me', well maybe he wouldn't have done if he'd thought about someone other than himself.

Rant over, hope it all gets sorted and that the girl does not think less of her father.

silvercar

We try to bring up our children not to be materialistic, to teach them that money isn't everything, to not make judgments on what people earn. That teaching and social work are as valued professions as solicitors and bankers and then we hint that Dad is a loser because he doesn't contribute financially to the house?

Walking on tight ropes.

Person_one

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I too think people are taking the attitude that it serves him right if the girl thinks less of him and blow her relationship with her father. They are not thinking of her, only the adults.

I don't really see how you're getting that impression.

What would you say?

Person_one

silvercar wrote: »

We try to bring up our children not to be materialistic, to teach them that money isn't everything, to not make judgments on what people earn. That teaching and social work are as valued professions as solicitors and bankers and then we hint that Dad is a loser because he doesn't contribute financially to the house?

Walking on tight ropes.

Not at all, he's contributing an awful lot to his second family despite not working. Nobody looking at that unit in isolation would say he was a loser.

All he's contributing to his first family is a few hours a week though, is that really enough? Especially considering the sacrifices and adjustments his ex and first two children are having to make to compensate?

mumps

poet123 wrote: »

Doing anything else in response to a straight and pointed question is lying by omission or otherwise.

So do you have to answer every question a child asks or you are a liar? I don't think children have an absolute right to a full answer on any question they can think of.

One of my children had a tumour, only 8 and scared about hospital, op etc. Did I need to tell her how scared I was when we went for the biopsy result? Did I cry when she was going into theatre? No I held her hand, smiled and told her it would all be ok and she could trust her doctor, he joined in and said it was all straightforward and removing the tumour was but we didn't go into what ifs about afterwards. We would deal with that if it happened.

Fortunately for us it was all OK, if it hadn't been there would have been discussions with her appropriate to her age and not all at once. I wouldn't have said on the day we found the lump, "Oh my God, we are going to have to see a doctor, I think he will need to do a biopsy, you will probably have to go into hospital and have that lump removed. Maybe there are more, maybe they are in more serious places. You might need chemo, you might need radiotherapy (obviously full description of side effects) you might die or it might be OK, you might be OK for a while but relapse. All that was true, some of it I discussed with doctor, but in no way do I think I lied to her because I didn't give her a full explanation of what could happen.

By the way I cried outside the theatre, her surgeon knew what I was going through and came out, all gowned up and unable to touch me. He reassured me that he would look after her and return her to me safely. Was he lying? I suppose he was, she could have had a bleed, her heart might not have coped with it all who knows. I was a sobbing mother in bits and I needed him to be strong for me as I was strong for her.

I sometimes think the doctrine of honesty is over rated and sometimes it is an excuse to be cruel.

DUTR

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I reluctantly agree. But what a mess . Poor girl.

Indeed poor girl, and not for the reasons waffled on about in the thread.
Many of you have grown up in a usual family of Dad/Mum siblings perhaps, somebody was probably working perhaps even both parents.
Why I find it odd is that there even needs to be any explanation to any child, clothes allowance pocket money or anything else is a privilage not a right, and sorry it is not to troll but trying to blame the other parent is just the cowards way of avoiding saying NO, you cannot have everything you want all of the time, or even some of the time is not possible.
There can be people from family units where one parent drinks or gambles the majority of the houshold income and still there is nothing left for treats.
Just like many of you here once a child and asking for something perhaps that was expensive, the answer returned was NO, there didn't need to be any explanation from any parent for them to have to justify their answer NO. Does it make you think any less of the parents? NO.
I understand some of you may wish to spoil your children and in the wrong way of spoiling them (all be it slightly spoilt) .
I wonder if the thread is really about wanting to tactfully justfy a negative answer?

Errata

Mumps, in all fairness I don't think comparing how parents behave when their child has what may be a life threatening tumour to a dad not providing for his offspring makes any kind of point.