Ex-wife has to pay maintenance to ex-husband because the children live with him

In a divorce, one parent, usually the father, is legally required to financially support the wife, who usually cares for the children, through alimony, unless there are certain circumstances in which the roles are reversed.

A Singaporean man has gone to court to demand that his ex-wife pay the same maintenance amount as before, despite the ex-wife's low income, as their children are currently in his care.

The couple divorced in 2018 and have two children, ages 10 and 13, who lived with their mother until 2021 and then moved in with their father for reasons not detailed in court documents.

CNA reported that the father had to pay S$2,640 (RM9,119.06) when the children lived with their mother, and now he has asked the court to overturn the order, even though his ex-wife has paid S$3,000 (RM10,362.06). ) earned per month as a financial advisor who also works on commission after losing her job in September 2021.

The mother told the court that she could only afford to pay S$790 (RM2,728.82) per month, estimated to be a quarter of her monthly salary, accounting for about 10 to 15 per cent of the children's expenses.

Meanwhile, the court found that the father earned a higher amount of S$20,000 (RM69,086.28).

She added that she was fired from her previous job following her ex-husband's complaints to her former employers and the regulator about misconduct.

District Judge Adriene Cheong ordered the mother to pay S$1,000 (RM3,454.31) a month after assessing the parents' “earning capacity”, noting that the mother needed some time to settle into a “new position.” “Industry” to establish.

“This is particularly the case when the father is in the fortunate position of being able to step in and care for the children. “Affordability is not an issue for the father,”

“Had the marriage remained intact, spouses would normally be expected to do the same; “We support each other in times of financial (or other) difficulties,” Judge Cheong said.

The judge also rejected the father's request to backdate the change to November 2021, telling the court that it would be “an overly technical mathematical exercise that is not meaningful to parents who care about their children.”

Judge Cheong also pointed out in court the approach of both parents in co-parenting their children, wanting to consider every penny they spend on their children.

“It is certainly not a holistic approach to treat the children as an accounting expense that should be reimbursed.

“If you take this concept to the extreme, it would be like parents demanding reimbursement from the custodial parent or deducting amounts from the monthly maintenance obligation for toys or an ice cream that they bought for their children during access,” he said Judge.

Judge Cheong further said this was “certainly not healthy” for their co-parenting relationship and not what the law requires.

She then advised both parents to “exercise grace and patience” in raising their children as co-parents in the future.

“I hope that after a long period of litigation, the family can finally begin the path to recovery and healing, especially with the support of counseling,” she said.