Fustrated step mum - had enough of it all!

clearingout

Marisco wrote: »

You're contradicting yourself there! You want the step to treat them like their own, yet your imposing conditions on them. Either steps are equal or they're not. You cannot have it both ways. Otherwise steps are perfectly within their rights to say, no I'm not having them if I'm ill, they are not mine. TBH it sounds like the OP is more than fair, they have them every weekend, what if they wanted to go out one weekend? Would the ex be flexible about it? How would the ex react if they got a babysitter in, you know, like "normal" parents do, when they want to go out.

I see why it looks a contradiction. I would expect a step parent to treat my children with decency and respect and for my children to, reasonably, 'tow the line' when in your care. I think both children and young people can quickly learn that there are different boundaries and expectations in place in different setting (home, school, football club, friend's house...) and for me, a step parent is like a more hands-on teacher/coach/friend's parent.... There are boundaries that the step parent needs to keep just as much as the step-child needs to learn what they can and can't do in the step-parent and parent's home. This is the same as, for example, a teacher not making comments to the child on his/her parent's parenting skills or choices, but still having a decent enough relationship with them to enforce boundaries, support the child, etc. Am I making sense? Is there a reasonable line of difference? I don't think step-parents are 'equal' to a parent - I suspect some step parents do a far better job than the natural parents, that most are perfectly decent people trying to do a difficult job that they sometimes do well and sometimes mess up big time (like parents) and that some are dreadful. This is the same as a significant adult (uncle, teacher, sport's coach, mentor) having a good, bad or indifferent impact on a child's life.

What I don't believe is that a step parent should see themselves as stepping into the 'absent' parent's role and as able to do exactly what they consider appropriate without acknowledging that the child's parents may have different ideas which need to be respected. I think the line is incredibly fine and becomes an issue where there are even minor differences of opinion in 'how to parent' effectively.

I am currently in the early throws of a relationship with a man without children. I have no idea where it is going but I am soooooo glad I don't have to deal with his children as well! I don't envy anyone the step parenting role and I suspect I am, in many ways, the mother from hell and probably change my mind according to which way the wind is blowing. What I do try to do, however, is recognise that there is another person to consider which is far more than can be said about my children's step mother when dealing with me. Ho hum... I shall retreat.

euronorris

Tish_P wrote: »

I don't see anyone giving the OP grief. I see people giving her husband grief for expecting both women, plus his kids, to fit themselves around his schedule. *He* should be compromising here.

Presumably, the shifts are dictated to him by his work, and his job is necessary in order to pay his bills and CM. I'm not really sure where he could compromise with this issue?

He could look for another job, sure, but we all know it isn't easy to find a new job these days and he probably wants to hold onto job security. Plus, for all we know, he isn't qualified to do anything else (or at least that isn't shift based) or even looking for a new job already.

Tish_P

No, he should do what every other working parent with childcare duties is routinely expected to do, which is negotiate a work schedule that suits his children's lifestyle, rather than expecting other people to be at his beck and call. And you're right, that's not easy, but many other people manage it and I don't see why he shouldn't.

euronorris

Tish_P wrote: »

No, he should do what every other working parent with childcare duties is routinely expected to do, which is negotiate a work schedule that suits his children's lifestyle, rather than expecting other people to be at his beck and call. And you're right, that's not easy, but many other people manage it and I don't see why he shouldn't.

So you're assuming that he hasn't already tried?

I'm sure there are just as many working parents, who tried to negotiate a work schedule that suits their children's needs better, but were refused by work. This isn't something you can just dictate to work. Either they agree or they don't, and if they don't...well, tough. It's either keep the current arrangement or lose the job (and income).

Tish_P

I'm all in favour of family friendly laws and workplace policies that make it easier for parents to combine paid work and childcare, by the way. It should be easier for parents. But the double standard that says his work schedule is sacred while she has to make all the compromises is just ridiculous. By opting for part-time work, and a flexible career like nursing, the ex has probably always been making career choices with parenting responsibilities in mind. Yet a man doing so is just unthinkable!

euronorris

Tish_P wrote: »

I'm all in favour of family friendly laws and workplace policies that make it easier for parents to combine paid work and childcare, by the way. It should be easier for parents. But the double standard that says his work schedule is sacred while she has to make all the compromises is just ridiculous. By opting for part-time work, and a flexible career like nursing, the ex has probably always been making career choices with parenting responsibilities in mind. Yet a man doing so is just unthinkable!

Woahh! To be fair, you have no idea what was originally agreed between them. It was probably a case of he worked full time to ensure enough income, and she worked part time to fit in the childcare. That may have been (and may still be) what she wanted.

Now, they are separated, and he has his own place to pay for, as well as CM. I don't see how he could, feasibly, reduce his hours.

I certainly don't think there is a double standard with every couple, and every family. Sometimes, yeah, I'm sure there is. But usually it is agreed between the couple when they decide to become parents.

I think you're confusing two different issues here, and perhaps your personal experience is affecting how you view this particular family setup.

You don't know enough to assume that he is being unreasonable.

clearingout

but nor is it unreasonable that the children have regular contact on a regular pattern and that his ex knows where she stands, is it?

so where is the middle ground? how is a compromise going to be reached? by the OP and her husband deciding that the children would be better off in their care and going for a residence order through the courts? assuming they could get a change of residence, it wouldn't happen for months...and then what? how is he going to fit in the children full-time around his work if his wife/partner can't/won't look after them as they jointly believe that they should always be cared for by a parent? Or would it be OK for them to put them in childcare as they'd now have all the tax credit, maintenance payments etc. so they can now afford it?

Mojisola

clearingout wrote: »

so where is the middle ground? how is a compromise going to be reached? by the OP and her husband deciding that the children would be better off in their care and going for a residence order through the courts? assuming they could get a change of residence, it wouldn't happen for months...and then what? how is he going to fit in the children full-time around his work if his wife/partner can't/won't look after them as they jointly believe that they should always be cared for by a parent? Or would it be OK for them to put them in childcare as they'd now have all the tax credit, maintenance payments etc. so they can now afford it?

I thought the main problem was that the children would only be there when he was at work. If the children were living with the couple, he would see them whenever he was off and cord123 would have to care for them at other times.

Maybe the mother's new boyfriend will want to stick around and she'll be happy to hand the children over to their father.

Buttonmoons

Tish_P wrote: »

I'm all in favour of family friendly laws and workplace policies that make it easier for parents to combine paid work and childcare, by the way. It should be easier for parents. But the double standard that says his work schedule is sacred while she has to make all the compromises is just ridiculous. By opting for part-time work, and a flexible career like nursing, the ex has probably always been making career choices with parenting responsibilities in mind. Yet a man doing so is just unthinkable!

I believe they are trying to be flexible, by showing/giving her the rota up until January which is presumably how far in advance they know themselves. I believe OP doesn't have a problem at all with having the step children there, but as they are there mainly to see their father, it's not great for the children and the father, if it's going to be a whole month where he actually only sees them 1 out of 4 weekends.

OP said ex works during the week. So how she can't change the odd Friday to Saturday and vice versa now and then to suit, is beyond me, its just being obstructive for the sake of it - and it's pretty :rotfl:to think the mother has been making any parenting responsibilities, when she is leaving a child with an eye problem, another with rotting teeth and both are crawling in headlice - Responsible parenting isn't what springs to my mind I'm afraid.

and what is with this boyfriend that doesnt like the children? Why on earth would you have someone like that around?

and I'm sure most of us, would love to be able to have work hours that suit everything, but alas, that doesn't happen. I myself work night shift so I don't have to rely on anyone else for childcare, that is during the week, so if my ex can't take DD because he is poorly or a deadline has to be met at work so can't have her overnight (although he'd still take her in the afternoon) then I'd not be complaining, it's just how it goes! Likewise he is reasonable that if I'm away for a weekend, he takes her the whole weekend (making sure work know he is unavailable) and also comes by to feed my cats (which technically I suppose are his too, but he's not actually 'bothered' about them)

We have a very amicable reletionship, so much so that he is welcome to pop by after his work and see DD (and he does about 2/3 evenings a week) and I think it's so amicable because neither of us EXPECT the other to be rigid and uncompromising.

I don't think he'd be too happy if I was being banshee about him being unable to take DD on a Saturday that was his weekend, and I'd not expect him to lump her on someone else either, she is my child too.

clearingout

Mojisola wrote: »

I thought the main problem was that the children would only be there when he was at work. If the children were living with the couple, he would see them whenever he was off and cord123 would have to care for them at other times.

Maybe the mother's new boyfriend will want to stick around and she'll be happy to hand the children over to their father.

there was a comment somewhere about the children needing to be cared for by a 'parent'. From that I saw it as the OP wouldn't have the children on her own - reasons are unclear so I wouldn't guess at them.