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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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

Seems like a really toxic relationship.

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.

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

This is such a good enviromnent for the kids /s

I don't understand why his current wife is demanding that he pay child support for the two kids he lives with. That's IN ADDITION to everything else? That's the only part I don't get...did I read it wrong?

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.

I smell your second divorce coming up

This comment has been deleted.

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.

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.