Child Maintenance

Man of Honour
Joined
14 Apr 2017
Posts
3,511
Location
London
A receiving parent can also tell us if they have a reason to believe the paying parent’s income is different to the amount we’ve used to work out child maintenance.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————

This won’t help the OP, but when my first wife divorced me in 1969, The Family Division of the High Court ordered me to pay £X per week per child, for our two sons.
If I described that amount as derisory, I’d be making an understatement, and knowing that she was aware of certain “other irons I had in the fire”, I was apprehensive of her blowing the whistle on me.
So I approached her in a pub in Fleet Street afterward, almost opposite the High Court, where she was with her father, and said, “You know how much I love the kids, and that I’d not lie to you about this, but if you keep shtum about certain things, I’ll set up a Direct Debit to pay you what the court has awarded you, and I’ll give you the exact amount in cash as well, every month, my hand to God.
She knew me well enough to know that I meant it, so that’s how it went for seven years, until she met and married a real nice guy, she deserved something good in her life after putting up with me for eight years.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,912
Surely the fact she's renting a cottage ought to be a red flag? I mean that requires more than £7 a week no? Unless she's getting it covered via housing benefit?
 
Associate
Joined
29 Oct 2019
Posts
1,002
It's more the principle, I have to pay for everything, we have 4 children and its just not right. I don't underhand how it's acceptable.
You can't talk to her, she's been here once in 18 months. I sent her a long carefully worded email recently to try to make her see sense.
On principle, why do you think she should pay if she doesn't see the kids and is no longer involved in their upbringing?
 
Associate
Joined
4 Jan 2004
Posts
1,328
Location
Finally, Swindon
On principle, why do you think she should pay if she doesn't see the kids and is no longer involved in their upbringing?
Really? Because she made choices to bring 4 children into the world and until they can support themselves she can’t just sack off the responsibility ‘cos she doesn’t feel like it
Access is neither here nor there
Put the boot on the other foot - do you think the State should be picking up the costs of bringing up children because their absent fathers don’t want to pay (in the vast majority of cases, it is absent fathers). Society’s answer in “no”
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
3,529
When I split from my first wife we had a long talk about how important it was to not use our kid as a weapon and to avoid bitter words- saying nothing is better than the 2 second satisfaction of saying something nasty. Ten years on and we're friends and we are both proud of ourselves for that.

I paid her more than I needed to, out of choice. Long game, and all that.

I feel for the OP here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Associate
Joined
28 May 2021
Posts
1,313
Location
St Albans
Cottage is a rental, cars are paid for because they're old now. She runs a business selling things she makes and resells on Facebook.

She doesn't contribute ANYTHING, not even school shoes etc.

I get how they work it out but I'm positive she's fudging figures

I suspect she doesnt pay tax on her sales and hence no visible income. Maybe HMRC need to know :)
 
Associate
OP
Joined
10 Nov 2012
Posts
2,284
Location
Northants
We were together for over 20 years then over the space of a year or two she changed, she met somebody who agreed with her new ideals and preferred him. She used to be the model mother, I was blind to it until it was too late.
I just want her to play her part, this £7 a week thing just irritates me because any sane person looking at that must know it's rubbish.

Thanks for the support anyway guys:p
 
Associate
Joined
29 Oct 2019
Posts
1,002
Really? Because she made choices to bring 4 children into the world and until they can support themselves she can’t just sack off the responsibility ‘cos she doesn’t feel like it
Access is neither here nor there
Put the boot on the other foot - do you think the State should be picking up the costs of bringing up children because their absent fathers don’t want to pay (in the vast majority of cases, it is absent fathers). Society’s answer in “no”
When 2 people decide they aren't fit to be parents and put their child up for adoption, nobody has a problem with it. Why should it be any different for 1 parent? People should have the right to relinquish their parental rights and responsibilities. The single parent should bear the costs of bringing up the children if they can afford to, and if they can't then yes the state should bear some of the costs, that's what we pay taxes for. They should not be looking for handouts from absent biological parents that are effectively nothing more than sperm/egg donors.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Sep 2020
Posts
3,460
Sounds like something my brother went through with his ex, he offered to give her money towards the upbrinding right from the get go, she accepted and then gradually started to ask for more and more, considering he hasn't seen his girl since she was only a few weeks old (she's approaching 2 years old) he out right refused to increase it anymore, his ex got really nasty and I mean completely lost the plot crazy, he just stopped making payments completely, went direct to child support with proof he had been paying so they couldn't try fleece him, she now gets the minimum, substantially less than she was before, my brother still hasn't been allowed to see his daughter. She even tried to leave the country and move to Spain where her family are, but my brother refused to sign the passport application.

Women wanted equality, they got way more rights than they should in my opinion.

That is brutal, Dads always get the rough end of these deals. Always. Can’t he go to the courts to see his child?
 
Associate
Joined
29 Oct 2019
Posts
1,002
It's called responsibility. If you really have no problem with someone deserting their children then there is something wrong with you.
So you believe there is something wrong with people who "desert" their children when they put them up for adoption? I've never heard such drivel before. The children will be looked after regardless since we live in a welfare state.
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Sep 2009
Posts
13,951
Location
France, Alsace
So you believe there is something wrong with people who "desert" their children when they put them up for adoption? I've never heard such drivel before. The children will be looked after regardless since we live in a welfare state.
Sort of a completely different situation there though, isn't it? Not really sure how you think they're the same. Are you 12?
 
Associate
Joined
29 Oct 2019
Posts
1,002
Sort of a completely different situation there though, isn't it? Not really sure how you think they're the same. Are you 12?
If 2 parents can relinquish their parental rights through adoption, why shouldn't 1 parent be allowed to do so? No difference from a moral point of view. Honestly I think child maintenance should be scrapped entirely, it just seems like a system for beggars to get free handouts. If you have equal joint custody then there is no reason why one side should pay another. If for some reason you want and are given full or main custody, you should bear the full costs since you get the benefits from raising the children.

Completely different scenarios, completely.
Nope, no difference. OP hasn't really gone into much detail of the circumstances, but at the end of the day there is no blanket right or wrong, only the person "deserting" them can make that judgement for their particular circumstances.
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Sep 2009
Posts
13,951
Location
France, Alsace
If 2 parents can relinquish their parental rights through adoption, why shouldn't 1 parent be allowed to do so? No difference from a moral point of view. Honestly I think child maintenance should be scrapped entirely, it just seems like a system for beggars to get free handouts. If you have equal joint custody then there is no reason why one side should pay another. If for some reason you want and are given full or main custody, you should bear the full costs since you get the benefits from raising the children.
Do you have kids out of curiosity?
 
Back
Top Bottom