Ex Wife Wants Too Much Money For Kids

[inthepink]

I would say that the average middle class salary in Thailand is definitely more than 10k a month. Considering that a 7/11 shop worker can earn 6k or so a month, it would be silly to believe otherwise

And to work in a 7/11 you need to have finished high school, which few Thais do.

I believe 7/11 workers get a nation wage of 7,500bht a month.

Yes, I know the educational requirements to work for 7/11 and I think they are ridiculous. I wouldn't consider shop workers to be middle class though - not that I dwell on the subject very often. I think we have come too far from the initial point. There is a sizeable minority in Thailand that earn an average salary of far in excess of 10k baht a month but as you pointed out yourself, Thailand is a developing country and many people earn a lot less than this.

However, if I split with my partner I would want to ensure that my children had a much better standard of living than that of children living in Thai villages and I would consider myself a bit of an arse if I didn't make sure that was the case. Other people may feel differently of course but considering I earn multiples of the average Thai income across the country as a whole (as do most Westerners I would imagine), I would be a bit selfish to leave them struggling to make ends meet.

[sarahsbloke]

I don''t believe in giving money away.

I support those living in my household, if I keep the children, I pay for everything, if she keeps the children, I pay nothing, find a new partner and start again.

Never saw the point in paying for kids that end up calling someone else 'daddy', and that seems to be what happens when you pay for your children to live with someone else.

Just my opinion.

[inthepink]

I don''t believe in giving money away.

I support those living in my household, if I keep the children, I pay for everything, if she keeps the children, I pay nothing, find a new partner and start again.

Never saw the point in paying for kids that end up calling someone else 'daddy', and that seems to be what happens when you pay for your children to live with someone else.

Just my opinion.

I wouldn't consider taking financial responsibility for my own children as giving money away. I'd consider it the only honourable course of action to take. To run away from the responsibility because my relationship with my partner broke down would be cowardly, and cruel to my children.

[WyattEarp]

Thailand Average Salaries 2005 available here. They've probably gone up a good bit since then.

[lannarebirth]

600K GBP for 4 kids over 15 years. yes you did get a good deal, a bargain.

I'll not vouch for his figures Boo, but c'mon, if true, that's a bloody raping!

[sbk]

600K GBP for 4 kids over 15 years. yes you did get a good deal, a bargain.

I'll not vouch for his figures Boo, but c'mon, if true, that's a bloody raping!

10k per child per year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/8359516/Parenting-pressures-cost-of-raising-a-child-now-210848.html

The total £210,848 cost of raising a child until their 21st birthday equates to £10,040 a year, £836 a month or £27.50 a day.

Today's cost of raising a child is up 50 per cent from LV='s first report in 2003.

Childcare and education remain the biggest expenditure, costing parents £67,430 and £55,660 respectively over a childhood.

[Boo]

Full time care & responsibility of 4 kids with zero assistance from the other parent. I'd say she didn't get that much of a great deal.

But I suppose it depends on whether or not you think money is all it takes to raise a child.

[billd766]

I don''t believe in giving money away.

I support those living in my household, if I keep the children, I pay for everything, if she keeps the children, I pay nothing, find a new partner and start again.

Never saw the point in paying for kids that end up calling someone else 'daddy', and that seems to be what happens when you pay for your children to live with someone else.

Just my opinion.

I wouldn't consider taking financial responsibility for my own children as giving money away. I'd consider it the only honourable course of action to take. To run away from the responsibility because my relationship with my partner broke down would be cowardly, and cruel to my children.

I am with you 100% inthepink.

The fact that my relationship with my child's mother broke down is certainly not the fault of any child and I feel that it is my responsibility to support my child even if I am in another relationship or not.

If my new partner felt that I shouldn't support the child then that partner would go out of my life.

Edited May 12, 2011 by billd766

[sarahsbloke]

I wouldn't consider taking financial responsibility for my own children as giving money away.

If they live with someone else, call someone else daddy, and you are not allowed access to them, in what way are they your children?

Are you entirely certain you were even there at the conception? (my former wife claimed I wasn't, so I see no reason at all to have contact with what I previously considered my children)

In the UK alone, it is considered 1 child in 8 has no biological connection to the man that thinks he is the father. (more likely to be yours for 1st child, getting less likely as you have more, apparently some women get tired of having sex with their husbands after a while)

Edited May 12, 2011 by sarahsbloke

[billd766]

I wouldn't consider taking financial responsibility for my own children as giving money away.

If they live with someone else, call someone else daddy, and you are not allowed access to them, in what way are they your children?

Are you entirely certain you were even there at the conception? (my former wife claimed I wasn't, so I see no reason at all to have contact with what I previously considered my children)

In the UK alone, it is considered 1 child in 8 has no biological connection to the man that thinks he is the father. (more likely to be yours for 1st child, getting less likely as you have more, apparently some women get tired of having sex with their husbands after a while)

Personally speaking the child is still mine or at least 50%.

From what you are describing you seem to have had a not so good former relationship and then assume that everybody else shares this.

You say that in the UK (and I will take your word for it) 1 child in 8 or 12 1/2% has no biological connection with the man who thinks he is the father.

On the other and more positive note 7 in 8 children or 87 1/2% must therefore be the natural child of that father which is the same statement but read from the other direction.

No child has ever asked to be born but all should be loved and cared for and in the case of my two, one in the UK and one here I love them both though to be honest I love my Thai son a bit more as he is only 6 but my UK son is 33 and I became a Granddad last month.

[inthepink]

I wouldn't consider taking financial responsibility for my own children as giving money away.

If they live with someone else, call someone else daddy, and you are not allowed access to them, in what way are they your children?

Are you entirely certain you were even there at the conception? (my former wife claimed I wasn't, so I see no reason at all to have contact with what I previously considered my children)

In the UK alone, it is considered 1 child in 8 has no biological connection to the man that thinks he is the father. (more likely to be yours for 1st child, getting less likely as you have more, apparently some women get tired of having sex with their husbands after a while)

Yes I'm entirely sure I was there at the conception. I tend to remember that sort of thing.

I think you are drawing broad conclusions based on your own narrow experiences and whilst it is understandable that you feel this way, the OP never said that they he was unsure about the paternity of his children, or that it was even his wife who initiated the break up. He didn't say that he was being denied access either. I don't see, therefore, what your own issues with your ex-wife have to do with this subject. I thought we were discussing how much one should pay, not whether or not the father should pay anything at all. I assumed that everybody on here was decent enough to want to pay for their own children's upkeep.

Edited May 12, 2011 by inthepink

[sarahsbloke]

I thought we were discussing how much one should pay, not whether or not the father should pay anything at all. I assumed that everybody on here was decent enough to want to pay for their own children's upkeep.

Invariably a topic takes on a life of it's own beyond the first post. Please try to keep up.

As for decency, honesty, integrity, etc., etc. (valor, justice, mercy, hope, nobility, generosity, faith, mercy, honesty, loyalty, humility)

Those who rule us don't appear to have much of any of those attributes (rule from government or bedroom), and they seem to be only used to oppress the weak and gullible.

You may still have all those rather old fashioned male values (well I see them as uniquely male attributes), but don't believe for one second it will protect you when your turn comes round.

The OPs original question was answered on the first page, there can be no more correct answer than what a Thai judge decides ........ which appears to be between 100bht and 150bht a day per child. If anyone wants to pay her and her 'meng daa' more, feel free.

Edited May 12, 2011 by sarahsbloke

[inthepink]

I thought we were discussing how much one should pay, not whether or not the father should pay anything at all. I assumed that everybody on here was decent enough to want to pay for their own children's upkeep.

Invariably a topic takes on a life of it's own beyond the first post. Please try to keep up.

As for decency, honesty, integrity, etc., etc. (valor, justice, mercy, hope, nobility, generosity, faith, mercy, honesty, loyalty, humility)

Those who rule us don't appear to have much of any of those attributes (rule from government or bedroom), and they seem to be only used to oppress the weak and gullible.

You may still have all those rather old fashioned male values (well I see them as uniquely male attributes), but don't believe for one second it will protect you when your turn comes round.

The OPs original question was answered on the first page, there can be no more correct answer than what a Thai judge decides ........ which appears to be between 100bht and 150bht a day per child. If anyone wants to pay her and her 'meng daa' more, feel free.

It's difficult to keep up when you move the goalposts every time you are unable to defend your point of view. What on earth have "those who rule" got to do with me taking care of my own children? I don't look to politicians and business leaders for moral guidance.

Your stream of silly comments paints a rather sad picture. You claimed earlier not to be bitter, but your posts would suggest otherwise. Speaking for myself, my partner is unlikely to shack up with a meng daa, owing to the fact that she isn't a prostitute. If you choose to marry such women then any conclusions drawn from your personal experiences will only be of use to people in a similar position. I would guess that the OP is long gone so it is not possible to ascertain if he married a lady of the night or not, but it's quite odd that you assume everybody does.

Edited May 12, 2011 by inthepink

[cdnvic]

I've never seen a case where a man wasn't allowed any access to his children without good reason. Even if that happened, whilst fighting for access I would think one would want to provide for that child as best as possible. Five or six dollars a day would be the furthest worry from my mind.