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

mountainofdebt

Errata wrote: »

I think that if the older child is starting to resent the limited time they have with their mum, and all the activities mum has to miss, and is unhappy about it then the child is old enough to understand a very clear explanation of why mum has to spend so many hours working.

totally agree with this.

The other thing to bear in mind is how the issue of non-maintenance affects the relationship between the children.

mountainofdebt

Imp wrote: »

Couldn't the father become the resident parent?

How would that work?

hngrymummy

Brighton_belle wrote: »

I'm another one for who it is inconceivable that he can be considered a 'great dad' for deliberately choosing a lifestyle which means he does not contribute his children's welfare financially and for valuing his 2nd lot of children over his first.
It's not an accident he does not earn any money - it is a choice.

I guess I'm a bad mother then I do not contribute to my children financially. I chose not to go back to work, it's not an accident that I don't earn anything or pay for my children.

bewilderedhelpneeded

Perhaps the 12 year old meant child benefit? I know quite a few parents who pay an allowance to their children out of the child benefit with the understanding this is used for clothes etc. Helps children to manage their own money which is good for the future.

perhaps the child was talking to her school friends who have this arrangement with their parents? 12 years old is a ab out the right age to implement this and makes the child feel grown up being able to manage their own money

onlyroz

What's wrong with a simple "daddy doesn't work so he doesn't pay maintenance"? Then any further questions can be directed at daddy.

sulkisu

supersaver2 wrote: »

It is, plenty of parents don't pay anything financially towards their own children.

True. But as nobody in the thread is claiming benefits, perhaps just for once, benefit claimants and what they may or may not do, can be kept out of the thread.

cef66

I'm not in this situation but if I was the mum, when the child had asked about maintenance, I would have said in a matter of fact way that the dad doesn't give any as he is a SAHD which is why I have to work longer, unsociable hours to pay for everything. I'd also tell the dad that the daughter had asked about a clothing allowance from the maintenance and this is what I've said.

I don't think he's a good dad at all. He has chosen not to contribute towards his first children and he must know that this impacts negatively on his ex in terms of the amount of work she has to do and therefore his kids.

If he was a decent parent when he and his new partner sorted out their joint income and child care arrangements the maintenance should have been a bill they had to pay, not one they could morally drop even if legally they can do so.

I wonder if he has implied to the kids that he does pay maintenance. He should know that the daughter has asked and been told the truth about the situation. Perhaps then he would, at least, give the children an allowance of some sort (which wouldn't be difficult if he is living in a high income household.)

sulkisu

onlyroz wrote: »

What's wrong with a simple "daddy doesn't work so he doesn't pay maintenance"?

Nothing wrong with it, that is the whole point of the thread - OP's friend is asking if she should tell them that he doesn't pay maintenance.

Pollycat

onlyroz wrote: »

What's wrong with a simple "daddy doesn't work so he doesn't pay maintenance"? Then any further questions can be directed at daddy.

I agree with this - and said pretty much the same thing a few posts ago.

I don't see why the Mum should be dodging this issue - now that it has been brought up in conversion - and she should certainly not feel she should make excuses for the fact that her ex doesn't pay child maintenance.
It should be down to the Dad to explain to his daughter why he's not paying.

FatVonD

Re those thinking the ex's new partner should be paying maintenance on his behalf, perhaps the ex's new partner doesn't receive any maintenance from her ex for her existing children and sees that she's doing enough by supporting her/their own family single handedly without also supporting her new partner's existing children too. (She is, as described by the OP only the 'higher' earner which isn't necessarily the same as a 'high' earner.)

Regarding the OP's friends dilemma, I think the daughter probably has a friend who is given a clothing allowance from maintenance paid by her father and the daughter has just assumed maintenance is being paid for her.

I wouldn't have volunteered the information had she not asked but since she did then I think it's fair for her mother to say, in the nicest way possible, that no maintenance is forthcoming but she's approaching the age where she will be able to work it out for herself (unless she's under the misapprehension that it is paid via bank transfer.) On the few occasions that my ex has contributed anything to our son he's made such a song and dance about it (insisting on giving it to DS as 'pocket money') that it's plainly obvious to DS it doesn't happen most of the time.