Do you have to be a child's biological parent to be forced to pay child support?

HoneyNutLoop

Batman_100 wrote: »

And she's got this idea that she can get the courts on her side if I don't meet her demands. But I know now that that's just a figment of her imagination.

No, it's not. As stated in that article, she can apply to the courts under Schedule 1 of the Children's Act 1989, specifically paragraph

Marisco

HoneyNutLoop wrote: »

No, it's not. As stated in that article, she can apply to the courts under Schedule 1 of the Children's Act 1989, specifically paragraph

But your link applied to step parents, this couple weren't married and only lived together for 18 months! Surely he can't be made to pay in this case? If so then that is disgraceful.

HoneyNutLoop

Sorry, got really bad internet connection. Will try to quote the text. Back soon.

EDIT: "The provisions of Schedule 1 of the Children's Act 1989 can also apply to step-parents where the child has been treated as a child of the family. Schedule 1 is usually invoked where the couple are not married or in a civil partnership. Under this provision, claims can be made for the benefit of the child for: periodical payments, school fees, lump sum(s), settlement of property and/or transfer of property."

And it goes on. This section is near the end of the article. If I were the op, I would be spending 5 mins talking to a solicitor before directing anyone else to do so. It could be she wouldn't stand a chance, given the timescales involved. But an experienced legal professional is the best placed to answer that.

Just-asking_4

You sound like a really nice guy, keeping contact and offering to contribute to the daughters upbringing proves this. But remember, she could stop this at any time in the future, especially when a new partner is concerned and we all know what new partners *can* be like.

Just stay strong, realise there is no real legal obligation for you to do anything, and do not let her push you around. If she can afford to carry out her legal threats then let her do it, it will get her nowhere.

Also, you are saying its amicable which is great, but how amicable is threatening to take you to court and telling you that you have to pay more, that is just greed and pretty disgusting. Also the fact that she wants it paid to her indicates its her that will spend it.

Just be careful and keep your wits about you. Its about the daughter, not the ex girlfriend, she can demand all she likes, doesn't mean she will get what she wants, and do not let her use the child as a weapon, also do not let her use you.

Good luck buddy :beer:

FBaby

From a legal perspective, she is totally off the mark, but i am wondering whether her threats came out of frustration to your proposal. This little girl thinks you are her father, that's a huge responsibility. Now you say that you want contact and that you won't tell her the truth until later...but your proposal financially is to give £20 and that is to go in a Trust fund?

That's massively insulting to the role you want or think you should still have in her life and if I was the mum, I would have felt it was an insult to my child and would probably have reacted with anger (although not by saying nonsense!).

You indicated that you don't want to give it to her mum because she would spend it on things you don't agree. Well that's the dilemma that many nrps face and they don't have a choice. In the vast majority of cases, money is spent on the child because let's face, they cost a lot, so it is difficult not to spend anything on them.

I regarded the little girl in question as my daughter for a while and I'm the only father figure she's ever known. We're planning on eventually telling her that I'm not her biological father at some point, but she's only just started primary school so we don't think she's old enough to understand that yet.

I find it a bit confusing as to why you are using the past tense? Are you saying that you considered her your daugher, but now you are separating from her, you don't any longer, and after you tell her the truth, you won't want contact any longer? If that is the case, then I do see why you wouldn't want an arrangement to pay as an nrp would, but well, poor child, talk about dealing with total rejection from the man she only know as dad.

seven-day-weekend

He is not the child's father, nor her stepfather (as he and her mother were not married) and has no obligation to pay anything at all. The quoted legislation seems to apply to stepfamilies.

I think what he has offered is more than generous under the circumstances. Lucky girl, having money in a trust fund!

But let's hope that she manages to get a stable family at some point. Poor little girl.

sulkisu

I don't agree with her position either (and hopefully she is wrong about the legal position), but in the mothers shoes I would probably be a bit ticked off by the suggestion (or implication) that if you gave me £20 a week, I would probably spend it on nights out and fags, instead of my child. I think it's safe to say that the child will cost more than £20 a week to feed, clothe etc, so although she might not take the actual £20 note that you give to her and use it to buy items for her daughter - she will be spending more than that amount on her. You do see that, don't you?

Having said that, no reason why you should give anything so I guess you just let her do her worst.

ETA - I have just realised that the child does not know that you are not her father. If you no longer regard her as your child, then the sooner she knows the truth the better. She really should have known at the outset, but putting it off - will there ever be a good time to tell her?

HoneyNutLoop

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

He is not the child's father, nor her stepfather (as he and her mother were not married) and has no obligation to pay anything at all. The quoted legislation seems to apply to stepfamilies.

I would be 100% happy to find out I have misunderstood and have got the wrong end of the stick, as it does seem harsh. But, the Legislation.co.uk website states the version of the Act as quoted on the site still has a substantial amount of updates to be impacted against it, the article is all about step-parents and makes specific reference to unmarried couples as well as married ones, and apparently the ops ex is aware of a recent change to the law that she claims impacts on unmarried couples.

Added together, it would be enough for me to want to check the facts with a legally qualified professional, not just hope the advice from a forum was accurate and up to date. I would not like to be 100% sure I was immune to a court claim, to come home to find notice of an application on my doorstep and then have to scrabble to get advice. And I would kick myself if I had been the one to say "well knock yourself out and apply to the courts then" which then led to that predicament. But that's just me. Clearly from the majority of posts, I am alone in my thinking on this one.

Just-asking_4

What would concern me is this... What if her real dad does eventually get in contact and the mother allows him to have a relationship with the daughter (which is right and would be great).

In this case, the daughter will have her real dad. A 'stepdad' (whoever the lady is now with) and you as another 'stepdad' even though you are no longer a real part of her life since you are no longer with her mum.

Will this lady then have 3 separate men supporting the child in a parental role, and also a financial role?

Another thing to consider is the fact that you want to, but more importantly, the mother is expecting you, to pay a decent amount of maintenance for the child. You will in the future no doubt meet someone else and the likelihood is you will have children. How is that going to work out when you have your own partner/children to support, plus you are financially supporting another mans child via your ex partner? Good luck explaining that one to a new girlfriend/wife.

I think its great that you offered to help financially with the little girl, but it is so messy. You have no rights, and to be quite honest, this lady should not be expecting you to pay for another mans child when she is in fact in an entirely new relationship with someone else.

I know its about the stability of the child, but maybe her mother should be the one considering that a bit more, and not the ex partner who is now an ex step dad to another mans child.

In short, I think she has a cheek and you really need to think about this, and the future, for your sake as much as the child, because at the end of the day, its the mother that should be taking care of the childs interests and future security, not the ex stepdad.

seven-day-weekend

He is not the 'ex stepdad'! He is the mother's ex-boyfriend.

But I do agree with you, the mother should think very carefully before bringing yet another male role model into her household.