AITA for not wanting to pay for my son’s dentist?

When it comes to co-parenting, splitting expenses for a child’s health care is supposed to be straightforward. But when personal pride and professional expertise get mixed in, tensions can rise unexpectedly. In this case, a 34-year-old dentist and father, sharing 50/50 custody with his ex-wife, is upset because she recently chose to have their six-year-old son’s routine dental appointment performed by her own dentist rather than letting him take care of it for free.

He argues that, as a dentist and his son’s father, he could have provided the care at no extra cost. Yet his ex-wife maintained that she made the decision unilaterally—citing convenience when the child was with her—and now expects him to split the expense 50/50 as agreed upon. Is his refusal to pay for what he sees as an unnecessary expense justified, or is he overstepping?

‘AITA for not wanting to pay for my son’s dentist?’

Financial agreements in co-parenting arrangements are meant to simplify decisions regarding a child’s welfare. Family law experts often stress that any significant changes in a child’s health care should be communicated and mutually agreed upon. In this scenario, the unilateral decision to switch dentists for a routine procedure appears to sidestep the collaborative spirit of the 50/50 cost-sharing agreement.

However, from a medical ethics standpoint, it’s not uncommon for professionals to refrain from treating their own family members due to potential conflicts of interest or the emotional complexities involved. Many dental professionals avoid working on their own children to ensure objectivity and to minimize potential liability issues. This perspective might justify the ex-wife’s decision to choose a third-party provider, especially if she felt that a neutral setting would benefit their son.

On the other hand, the OP’s frustration stems from the fact that he could have provided the service at no cost, thereby reducing the financial burden on both parents. Dr. Laura Benson, a family mediator, notes, “When one parent’s professional expertise overlaps with child care, it can create tension if the other parent perceives the decision as a personal slight rather than a practical choice.” In this case, his remark about the “stupid expense” may reflect deeper feelings of exclusion from making decisions that affect his child’s care.

Ultimately, the core issue is communication. If both parties had established clear guidelines for how and when decisions about dental care would be made, this dispute might have been avoided. A joint discussion with a mediator or even a financial counselor familiar with co-parenting agreements might help realign their approach. The balance lies in respecting professional boundaries while ensuring that both parents feel equally involved in significant decisions regarding their child’s welfare.

See what others had to share with OP:

While the financial split for routine dental care should be straightforward under a 50/50 agreement, the conflict here reveals deeper issues around communication, professional pride, and parental involvement. Should changes in routine medical decisions be made unilaterally, or do both parents need to collaborate every time? What do you think is the best approach when professional expertise overlaps with parenting? Share your experiences and thoughts—let’s discuss how to navigate these tricky co-parenting waters.