Father Has To Pay “Child Support” To His Kids From Two Wives, Complains That He Can’t Afford All These Expenses
Parenting has always caused and will cause a lot of controversy and discussion – from how to properly fasten a diaper, to whether adult children should even take care of their parents if they paid little attention to them in childhood.
The issue of parenthood is especially painful if the parents are divorced, and if the new family has children from the next marriage, the situation becomes even more confusing. For example, when it comes to family finances, if the spouses run a divided household.
A similar situation has developed in the family of the author of this post in the AITA Reddit community, user u/Life_Grade_4261. The post we’re talking about now got around 12.2K upvotes and nearly 5.4K different comments in just a few days. The opinions of the commenters were divided, like the finances of the spouses, but most still condemn the man. However, let’s talk about everything in detail.
More info: Reddit
The author of the post has two kids with his current wife and three children from his first marriage
Image credits: Chris Price (not the actual image)
So, the author of the post has three children from his first marriage to “Hannah” and two from his second wife, “Stacey”. By the Original Poster’s own admission, when he and Stacey tied the knot, the woman specifically stipulated that Hannah’s children were solely the responsibility of their parents. For almost five years of marriage, this did not cause any problems to the OP, but the time came, and then the problems arose…
Image credits: u/Life_Grade_4261
The man pays his ex-wife child support and has split finances with his new spouse
According to the man, he pays Hannah child support for each of their children, and when Stacy was pregnant with their first baby, she demanded that he pay her a similar amount to make it fair. The man reveals that he also pays half of his and Stacey’s joint expenses (mortgage, utilities, food, etc.) as well as for his own car, while his wife takes care of most of the expenses for their two kids.
Image credits: u/Life_Grade_4261
The OP admits that it is not a problem for Stacey to take care of his kids from his first marriage – for example, she willingly picks them up from school, takes them to various activities, and ensures they have everything they need. However, on the financial side, the woman regularly sends her husband requests to Venmo, demanding that he pay the costs of children who are “not hers”.
Image credits: u/Life_Grade_4261
The wife covers her kids’ needs and the husband usually pays for his children from the first marriage
For example, when the extended family recently went on a family vacation, Stacey demanded that her husband pay half the expenses for their children, and pay in full for Hannah’s children. The man admits that his wife earns more than him, so this alignment hit his finances hard, but Stacy once again emphasized that his children are his own responsibility.
Image credits: Blondinrikard Froberg (not the actual image)
And more recently, Stacy began to save money for a college fund for her children. Hannah, learning about this, suggested that her ex-husband start collecting money for their kids too. When the man told Stacey about this, she approved of the idea, but noted that then the OP should have contributed the same amount to the college fund of their two children.
Image credits: u/Life_Grade_4261
When the man faced the need to contribute to a college fund for his 5 children, he felt rather uncomfortable
Needless to say, when the man calculated all his upcoming expenses, he became heavily discouraged, and then suggested that Stacy pay for a “fair share” of his household expenses. The OP explained this by saying that his current wife makes more money than him, so for her it will not be a financial difficulty, while he will be almost on the verge of bankruptcy paying for literally everything that lies ahead of him.
Image credits: u/Life_Grade_4261
The man asked his current wife to share his household expenses since she earns more than him, but the woman went ballistic at him
Stacy, however, took her husband’s idea extremely negatively. She literally blew up, took the children and left with them to her parents’ house. The OP admits that his wife has been refusing to talk to him for a day and a half, and now he wondered whether he did the right thing, and was it even worth it to come up with this particular idea?
Image credits: Monichrome (not the actual image)
Most people in the comments shared the woman’s indignation at the hubby’s idea
We must say that many commenters at first were generally confused by the family and financial relations of the Original Poster, not understanding who pays for what and whose parents are whose. However, most of the people in the comments supported Stacy’s indignation at her husband’s offer.
According to commenters, the wife pays half the expenses for the house, takes care of all the needs for her two children, and also takes care of three kids who are not her own. Yes, it’s the OP who pays for their needs, but picking up the kids from school, taking them to activities, and shopping for them all takes a lot of time and energy. Therefore, as people believe, the OP is fundamentally wrong, and in any case, he is completely responsible for all the children who were born from him.
However, there are situations in which even the Original Poster looks like a completely decent person. For example, this dad once took his new family to Paris, and not only didn’t invite his teenage daughter from the first marriage, but kept the trip a secret from her. Be that as it may, we are already looking forward to your comments on the story we have just described.
Wait why are you paying your current wife child support? Why not just pay half on your current kids expenses. Meh whole marriage sounds like a dumpster fire. ThErE Not My kids. Terrible relationship.
Yeah, all the people saying YTA – did you miss the part where his current wife demanded that he pays her the same amount of child support that he pays his ex wife??? And then people are still saying that she's paying everything for their kids? Wtf no she isn't, he is paying her chils support ffs!!!
Load More Replies...
Yeah. All i hear is "guy has five kids and now complains about needing to care for them".
Load More Replies...
I'll get down downvoted to hell for this, but anyone who has 5 kids when they can't afford them is an a*****e.
Nah. Needs up vote. Dude needs to put on a condom. FIVE kids! Dam! No wonder he has $ problems.
Load More Replies...
After reading these comments, I feel relieved; reading the initial comments, I felt like I was taking crazy pills. If you marry someone with children, you don't get to choose. I think this is something they should have spoken about in the beginning, before getting married - it sounds like they didn't. All the kids in this family are going to grow up with complexes.
Here's a tip. If you can't afford more children, DO NOT HAVE THEM.
I think we need a lot more clarity before making a decision. OP writes about how wife demands support payments, but then he says she takes care of most of the household and children's expenses. I don't think all the divisions and rules help with the marriage, but the details are confusing here.
He said they split household expenses and I think the only reason she pays the majority of expenses for the children is because he pays her "support" and the money she spends comes from that plus her contribution.
Load More Replies...
I think Stacey has a point which is why I wouldn't date anyone with kids... but you need to consider these things before you enter this kind of a relationship.
I am curious about the "Stacey pays the majority of expenses for your shared children". What expenses are we talking about here? Clothes? Extra curricular activities etc? How much 'child support' are you paying to Stacey and does it cover these expenses? I understand that if you marry someone with children you take on the responsibility which Stacey appears to do in caring for them. I also understand where Stacey is coming from in keeping all expenses separate. Money is a finite resource and she is attempting to provide the best possible childhood and future opportunities for her children, which is reasonable. Children are expensive, and if OP couldn't afford to have five of them he shouldn't have (imagine the outrage if he was the mother in this scenario). By biggest concern however is the children..... if the three parents cant compromise here the result will be children with different standards of living and opportunities which would be unfortunate.
I married a man with 2 children. I knew that going in. I never had any of my own, but I don't really see that being relevant. He always paid child support, and when we started out our married life, we had nothing. One week he brought home $3.50 for two weeks' expenses. I worked as a hotel maid at the time and didn't make much. I made sure to take some money from what my Mom gave me for Christmas presents for the kids. They were children and no child should be without a gift on Christmas. I even managed to save $200.00 to take them to an indoor carnival (we're in ND) one year. That was quite a bit of money for me at the time. I don't know or care what his Ex spent on the kids as long as they seemed happy and taken care of. I would never say within or out of earshot of the kids that they are not my responsibility. That sounds just horrible to me. I still make sure the kids get gifts and have what they need. When you marry someone with kids you are either all in or all out.
Definitely NOT THE A*****E!! Stacy is greedy to make you pay "child support" when you're IN THE HOME WITH THEM. CUT THAT PAYMENT OUT. Give Stacy money for your kids when you know she'll have them. Tell Hannah to get a job and take a portion of child support out and put into acct for them. That's something Stacy chose to do herself and if Hannah wants to do that, then she needs to take it out of child support. Wtf! This is wrong on so many levels!!
If new wife can set up funds for her kids, but husband can only either fund old kids or new kids, I can see the dilemma. And yes, whilst it isn't fair if he can't pay for new kids funds as for old kids, in case of old kids, they just won't have a fund at all if he doesn't do it. The mom of new kids can (I am not including old mom, I don't know why she can't pay too). It's a dilemma, but I don't see a real villain here. ESH
ESH. Stacey (slightly) for not including her partner's kids in the family, but OP said she make it very clear that these kids are not her responsibility. I am not saying that it's right, but it seems that kids live with his exwife and Stacey is at least willing to help him care for them. OP knew what he was getting into. Now he has more kids than he can support. Kinda irresponsible. Anyway, it seems like this whole relationship is one big mess.
Wow, I have had a stepmom for most my life and thank god she's not a Stacey.
Is OP's child support paid per mother or per child? Is OP's college fund contribution paid per mother or per child? Is OP's child support payments to Stacey on top of half the household's expenses? Why is OP paying Hannah child support when it seems that he and Stacey are their primary caregivers? Why did OP marry a person who doesn't fully care for his kids? Is Stacey caring for the kids in every way other than financially, or is she prioritising her bio kids? While it sounds like he shouldn't have had 5 kids in the first place, I think there are enough things missing here that might swing it either way.
I don't think OP is being an a*****e at all. When you get to know someone, you find out they have kids, and you still marry them - that means you're aware of the kids and should be willing to view them as part of your family. It's part of the damn package, if Wife #2 is being this ridiculous, maybe, just maybe, she shouldn't have married someone who had previous children.
Exactly! Like, I don’t see the problem with what OP is saying and wife #2 seems really unreasonable tbh
Load More Replies...
yeah, she is a POS I guess she doesn't believe in being a stepmom then, everyone that is supporting her are just as stupid as she is. I provide for my step kids because I accept them as part of my family so what if they were from my wife's pervious relationship, I guess everyone is as selfish as she is
Things/responsibilities are pretty convoluted here so pardon me if I inject another element - LOVE. When my niece/daughter asked my opinion of her taking in and caring for the daughter from her husbands 1st marriage - I immediately suggest the think about it. If she did bring the girl into the family then it was incumbent upon her to love and care for that girl as if she were her. Making money an issue every time a penny is spent of step-kids send such a terrible message. Children need to feel they are loved and cared for without exception. I say this as a step kid whose stepfather looked at me as my mother was ready to take me to the hospital after an accident - and said, "another damn doctor bill. I hope you die!" I will never forget that. He loved my mother and he always claimed to love me but --- I'm 7o years old and I still don't believe it.
Wait why are they all saying he ihe ah, no one pays child support to a wife they are actively living with...no one. And the whole my kids your kids c**p is garbage, they are a family they are together. He didn't know up a bunch of women and take off, he had one family, it didn't work and he found another. Bother women seem to have found a carpet to walk on and take advantage of. His current wife should not be getting child support, that is silly and greedy, he is nta.
YTA. Too many kids? Should have pulled out then. Shut up and pay up.
Hard NTA bc the op pays his current wife and ex wife child support. No she shouldn't contribute to the college fund but I didn't read it as that was the request. If he's paying child support the current wife should be paying the household bills exclusively and all her children's expenses except for normal divorced parent expenses that are shared. That's what the child support is supposed to do. She seems to be wanting to live as you're divorced but still married sharing your income as well. Can't have it both ways.
In the UK a spouse/ live in partner, etc is responsible for paying towards the upkeep of the partners children if they live outside the home. I understand to some point the wife not being happy paying towards her 'non kids' but making her husband pay child support for his own children whilst he's living there and contributing to the normal household bills etc is a bit crazy and weird. Surely they pool their money in the household?
Child support is meant to take care of the child, not the parent (though this is, at times, misused). Hannah needs to increase her income to pay Stacy for gas and expenses. It seems like OP is paying for majority 3 kid’s expenses or at least half. Stacy, while the breadwinner, is not to be expected to do everything for OP’s children. He is not doing anything other than paying for them, and honestly, that’s bull. Also, if OP is paying exact amount of child support to Stacy as he is Hannah per child, then he is mostly likely paying the majority of their expenses, if not all. Yes, these are his kids, and his responsibility, however, everyone involved needs to sit down and talk versus OP being the middleman. A financial analyst would do well for them to figure out where the extra money is. OP is to take care of his own car payments, and any debt on his behalf, same for the other two involved. Maybe Stacy is paying off debt with her payment, we don’t know. There’s not enough context.
Is OP's child support paid per mother or per child? Is OP's college fund contribution paid per mother or per child? Is OP's child support payments to Stacey on top of half the household's expenses? Why is OP paying Hannah child support when it seems that he and Stacey are their primary caregivers? Is Stacey caring for the kids in every way other than financially, or is she prioritising her bio kids? While it sounds like he shouldn't have had 5 kids in the first place, I think there are enough things missing here that might swing it either way.
If the genders were reversed the answers would be NtA but in general it's ETA , you got married they are your kids too even if it's step.
regardless of who the A*hole is, i think it may be both of them, this is a F*cked marriage. My suggestion is do not have any more kids with wife no 3.
I wonder how lightheartedly everyone seems to agree on YTA. I don't, at least not to the full extent. While, as always with these, we can expect that we don't know anything close to the full picture, we do know a handful of things, and, tbh - you marry a man having 3 kids already, you cannot expect that every penny is justified, even counted, in group activities. One time you get to pay lunch for whoever is with you at that time, and similar stuff ... unless you're really struggling, I'd demand that minor expenses need to go unnoticed, not to rip off anyone, but to not have my life revolve around pennies. Oh, one of the kids you had lunch with today wasn't yours, the other two were? So then I need to pay 1 full meal, two half ones? And ... that is what really is important? As with college funds ... whatever you can afford. If the Kids of current marriage already have nothing to fear, set up funds for the other two. As these are none of you wifes business, I don't think she needs to know. After all, the kids' education is far more important than petty behaviour on highschool level, and compromising any of your childrens' chances because you can't pay half of what the already covered ones cost in that regard AND the full amount of what the currently uncovered, who also likely have less time left till college, cost, is just insane. Demanding so is demanding insanity. Also, the entire thing seems moneycentered to me, and that's something you happen to have to do a lot of times already. By choice, one shouldn't do that.
Wait why are you paying your current wife child support? Why not just pay half on your current kids expenses. Meh whole marriage sounds like a dumpster fire. ThErE Not My kids. Terrible relationship.
Yeah, all the people saying YTA – did you miss the part where his current wife demanded that he pays her the same amount of child support that he pays his ex wife??? And then people are still saying that she's paying everything for their kids? Wtf no she isn't, he is paying her chils support ffs!!!
Load More Replies... Yeah. All i hear is "guy has five kids and now complains about needing to care for them".
Load More Replies... I'll get down downvoted to hell for this, but anyone who has 5 kids when they can't afford them is an a*****e.
Nah. Needs up vote. Dude needs to put on a condom. FIVE kids! Dam! No wonder he has $ problems.
Load More Replies... After reading these comments, I feel relieved; reading the initial comments, I felt like I was taking crazy pills. If you marry someone with children, you don't get to choose. I think this is something they should have spoken about in the beginning, before getting married - it sounds like they didn't. All the kids in this family are going to grow up with complexes.
Here's a tip. If you can't afford more children, DO NOT HAVE THEM.
I think we need a lot more clarity before making a decision. OP writes about how wife demands support payments, but then he says she takes care of most of the household and children's expenses. I don't think all the divisions and rules help with the marriage, but the details are confusing here.
He said they split household expenses and I think the only reason she pays the majority of expenses for the children is because he pays her "support" and the money she spends comes from that plus her contribution.
Load More Replies... I think Stacey has a point which is why I wouldn't date anyone with kids... but you need to consider these things before you enter this kind of a relationship.
I am curious about the "Stacey pays the majority of expenses for your shared children". What expenses are we talking about here? Clothes? Extra curricular activities etc? How much 'child support' are you paying to Stacey and does it cover these expenses? I understand that if you marry someone with children you take on the responsibility which Stacey appears to do in caring for them. I also understand where Stacey is coming from in keeping all expenses separate. Money is a finite resource and she is attempting to provide the best possible childhood and future opportunities for her children, which is reasonable. Children are expensive, and if OP couldn't afford to have five of them he shouldn't have (imagine the outrage if he was the mother in this scenario). By biggest concern however is the children..... if the three parents cant compromise here the result will be children with different standards of living and opportunities which would be unfortunate.
I married a man with 2 children. I knew that going in. I never had any of my own, but I don't really see that being relevant. He always paid child support, and when we started out our married life, we had nothing. One week he brought home $3.50 for two weeks' expenses. I worked as a hotel maid at the time and didn't make much. I made sure to take some money from what my Mom gave me for Christmas presents for the kids. They were children and no child should be without a gift on Christmas. I even managed to save $200.00 to take them to an indoor carnival (we're in ND) one year. That was quite a bit of money for me at the time. I don't know or care what his Ex spent on the kids as long as they seemed happy and taken care of. I would never say within or out of earshot of the kids that they are not my responsibility. That sounds just horrible to me. I still make sure the kids get gifts and have what they need. When you marry someone with kids you are either all in or all out.
Definitely NOT THE A*****E!! Stacy is greedy to make you pay "child support" when you're IN THE HOME WITH THEM. CUT THAT PAYMENT OUT. Give Stacy money for your kids when you know she'll have them. Tell Hannah to get a job and take a portion of child support out and put into acct for them. That's something Stacy chose to do herself and if Hannah wants to do that, then she needs to take it out of child support. Wtf! This is wrong on so many levels!!
If new wife can set up funds for her kids, but husband can only either fund old kids or new kids, I can see the dilemma. And yes, whilst it isn't fair if he can't pay for new kids funds as for old kids, in case of old kids, they just won't have a fund at all if he doesn't do it. The mom of new kids can (I am not including old mom, I don't know why she can't pay too). It's a dilemma, but I don't see a real villain here. ESH
ESH. Stacey (slightly) for not including her partner's kids in the family, but OP said she make it very clear that these kids are not her responsibility. I am not saying that it's right, but it seems that kids live with his exwife and Stacey is at least willing to help him care for them. OP knew what he was getting into. Now he has more kids than he can support. Kinda irresponsible. Anyway, it seems like this whole relationship is one big mess.
Wow, I have had a stepmom for most my life and thank god she's not a Stacey.
Is OP's child support paid per mother or per child? Is OP's college fund contribution paid per mother or per child? Is OP's child support payments to Stacey on top of half the household's expenses? Why is OP paying Hannah child support when it seems that he and Stacey are their primary caregivers? Why did OP marry a person who doesn't fully care for his kids? Is Stacey caring for the kids in every way other than financially, or is she prioritising her bio kids? While it sounds like he shouldn't have had 5 kids in the first place, I think there are enough things missing here that might swing it either way.
I don't think OP is being an a*****e at all. When you get to know someone, you find out they have kids, and you still marry them - that means you're aware of the kids and should be willing to view them as part of your family. It's part of the damn package, if Wife #2 is being this ridiculous, maybe, just maybe, she shouldn't have married someone who had previous children.
Exactly! Like, I don’t see the problem with what OP is saying and wife #2 seems really unreasonable tbh
Load More Replies... yeah, she is a POS I guess she doesn't believe in being a stepmom then, everyone that is supporting her are just as stupid as she is. I provide for my step kids because I accept them as part of my family so what if they were from my wife's pervious relationship, I guess everyone is as selfish as she is
Things/responsibilities are pretty convoluted here so pardon me if I inject another element - LOVE. When my niece/daughter asked my opinion of her taking in and caring for the daughter from her husbands 1st marriage - I immediately suggest the think about it. If she did bring the girl into the family then it was incumbent upon her to love and care for that girl as if she were her. Making money an issue every time a penny is spent of step-kids send such a terrible message. Children need to feel they are loved and cared for without exception. I say this as a step kid whose stepfather looked at me as my mother was ready to take me to the hospital after an accident - and said, "another damn doctor bill. I hope you die!" I will never forget that. He loved my mother and he always claimed to love me but --- I'm 7o years old and I still don't believe it.
Wait why are they all saying he ihe ah, no one pays child support to a wife they are actively living with...no one. And the whole my kids your kids c**p is garbage, they are a family they are together. He didn't know up a bunch of women and take off, he had one family, it didn't work and he found another. Bother women seem to have found a carpet to walk on and take advantage of. His current wife should not be getting child support, that is silly and greedy, he is nta.
YTA. Too many kids? Should have pulled out then. Shut up and pay up.
Hard NTA bc the op pays his current wife and ex wife child support. No she shouldn't contribute to the college fund but I didn't read it as that was the request. If he's paying child support the current wife should be paying the household bills exclusively and all her children's expenses except for normal divorced parent expenses that are shared. That's what the child support is supposed to do. She seems to be wanting to live as you're divorced but still married sharing your income as well. Can't have it both ways.
In the UK a spouse/ live in partner, etc is responsible for paying towards the upkeep of the partners children if they live outside the home. I understand to some point the wife not being happy paying towards her 'non kids' but making her husband pay child support for his own children whilst he's living there and contributing to the normal household bills etc is a bit crazy and weird. Surely they pool their money in the household?
Child support is meant to take care of the child, not the parent (though this is, at times, misused). Hannah needs to increase her income to pay Stacy for gas and expenses. It seems like OP is paying for majority 3 kid’s expenses or at least half. Stacy, while the breadwinner, is not to be expected to do everything for OP’s children. He is not doing anything other than paying for them, and honestly, that’s bull. Also, if OP is paying exact amount of child support to Stacy as he is Hannah per child, then he is mostly likely paying the majority of their expenses, if not all. Yes, these are his kids, and his responsibility, however, everyone involved needs to sit down and talk versus OP being the middleman. A financial analyst would do well for them to figure out where the extra money is. OP is to take care of his own car payments, and any debt on his behalf, same for the other two involved. Maybe Stacy is paying off debt with her payment, we don’t know. There’s not enough context.
Is OP's child support paid per mother or per child? Is OP's college fund contribution paid per mother or per child? Is OP's child support payments to Stacey on top of half the household's expenses? Why is OP paying Hannah child support when it seems that he and Stacey are their primary caregivers? Is Stacey caring for the kids in every way other than financially, or is she prioritising her bio kids? While it sounds like he shouldn't have had 5 kids in the first place, I think there are enough things missing here that might swing it either way.
If the genders were reversed the answers would be NtA but in general it's ETA , you got married they are your kids too even if it's step.
regardless of who the A*hole is, i think it may be both of them, this is a F*cked marriage. My suggestion is do not have any more kids with wife no 3.
I wonder how lightheartedly everyone seems to agree on YTA. I don't, at least not to the full extent. While, as always with these, we can expect that we don't know anything close to the full picture, we do know a handful of things, and, tbh - you marry a man having 3 kids already, you cannot expect that every penny is justified, even counted, in group activities. One time you get to pay lunch for whoever is with you at that time, and similar stuff ... unless you're really struggling, I'd demand that minor expenses need to go unnoticed, not to rip off anyone, but to not have my life revolve around pennies. Oh, one of the kids you had lunch with today wasn't yours, the other two were? So then I need to pay 1 full meal, two half ones? And ... that is what really is important? As with college funds ... whatever you can afford. If the Kids of current marriage already have nothing to fear, set up funds for the other two. As these are none of you wifes business, I don't think she needs to know. After all, the kids' education is far more important than petty behaviour on highschool level, and compromising any of your childrens' chances because you can't pay half of what the already covered ones cost in that regard AND the full amount of what the currently uncovered, who also likely have less time left till college, cost, is just insane. Demanding so is demanding insanity. Also, the entire thing seems moneycentered to me, and that's something you happen to have to do a lot of times already. By choice, one shouldn't do that.
54
57