Step Family Advice

Seanymph

No, the OP wants to be able to put HER children first.

It's rather different.

elvis86

Seanymph wrote: »

No, the OP wants to be able to put HER children first.

It's rather different.

Unfortunately she doesn't have that luxury (at least, not in the way she wants it), because the man she chose to father her child already has 2 children with someone else.

Why should HER daughter with him come any higher in his priorities than HIS children with his ex?

affordmylife

your husband is doing exactly what he should do and that is spending time doing activites with his absent children. he had them before he had you so they really come first especially as they are only there 4 days a month as you say yourself.

i have two step daughters myself so i totally understand where you are coming from but what would you want his kids to do stop going to football and parties - that would definitely make you a wicked stepmother x

FBaby

You seem to blame all your current frustrations on your partner's children and their mum and the rest of the world when your situation is as it is because of YOUR circumtances. If you are not getting good maintenance for your eldest daughter, it is not the fault of your step-children or their mum. If your ex has accumulated csa arrears, it is not their fault (not even the CSA, you should have been putting the money aside during the reassessment however long it took). If you have been made redundant, chose to have another child, and can't find a job, it is not THEIR fault in anyway.

What really got me is how you can resent your step-children's mum when SHE works and therefore contributes towards her children when YOU don't. You rely 100% on your partner to support your children, she doesn't. So who are you to judge her and what she spends on her children? Do you think you and your children should have the same disposal income when you don't work but she does? Should your partner be contributing less because SHE can afford to support their kids and contributing more torwards your joint and your own DD because you are not currently working?

I'm sorry OP because I know you came here for support and sympathy and I tried to tell myself not to post, but this is too close to my situation and I couldn't stop myself.

FBaby

Seanymph wrote: »

No, the OP wants to be able to put HER children first.

It's rather different.

I don't think there is anything wrong with this, any mother wants to put her children first, the problem is that she also wants her partner to put her children's first, and that is the problem.

Lara44

OP it sounds like you are really in a position of financial difficulty. If you are in really bad financial shape then I can see where your resentment might come from.

So this issue of the CSA thinking you receive WTC etc. - have you posted on the benefits boards here? Please do get out all the facts and figures and post them up - there are a lot of people who know the system well here, you will get some good advice. The other place to go is CAB.

Second if you're getting into debt every month through normal living expenses you need to remedy this as soon as possible. Can you do a statement of affairs in the Debt Free Wannabee forum? People are very friendly and supportive there.

The only thing that can help with the anger and resentment is taking action. If you feel your money situation is back under control then you may feel a lot differently about everything else. Can you get your OH on board with sorting out the finances? It might be a bit easier to talk about generally improving financial health than battling specifically about the amount of maintenance he pays. The other thing you could do as others have suggested is to work yourself. There may be options for home working that suit you.

It would be such a shame if step-family stress caused your relationship to break down and start the cycle over again... would that really help things in the long term? Isn't it better to put in the extra investment with your current OH?

Seanymph

elvis86 wrote: »

Unfortunately she doesn't have that luxury (at least, not in the way she wants it), because the man she chose to father her child already has 2 children with someone else.

Why should HER daughter with him come any higher in his priorities than HIS children with his ex?

Because his children with his ex have a mum putting them first. THEIR MUM is doing that job. The OP doesn't have to.

She needs to mum HERS not HIS.

Yes, he needs to parent, there needs to be a balance - but her kids shouldn't come second in any way shape or form because he has other children and by goodness she has nothing to prove to you or anyone else by putting his kids first and hers second.

She should prioritise her children because they have their mum prioritising them.

And her issue - if everyone stops shouting 'bad stepmum' for a minute and lets her speak is between her and her partner.

princessdreamer

By that sentiment he should put his children first and not support the oldest child. How would that be fair?

fannyanna

princessdreamer wrote: »

By that sentiment he should put his children first and not support the oldest child. How would that be fair?

I don't think anyone suggested he should put her children first.

There was the suggestion that OP should put her children first just as the ex presumably puts her children first.

FBaby

She needs to mum HERS not HIS.

But that's the point, at the moment, she doesn't 'mum' them from a financial support stand. She relies solely on her partner. Now it might not be her fault she is in this situation, but it's not because it's not her fault that others should bear the consequences of HER situation.

Yes, he needs to parent, there needs to be a balance - but her kids shouldn't come second in any way shape or form because he has other children and by goodness she has nothing to prove to you or anyone else by putting his kids first and hers second

They are not coming second, they are having to do with less because the eldest has two parents who are not contributing financially towards her needs, and the second child only has one parent. The two first have two parents contributing, so yes, they will most likely end up with more money spent on them.

She should prioritise her children because they have their mum prioritising them..

That is the one statement that infurates me. It comes down to saying that his ex should support his new partner because she should be contributing more towards her kids so her ex new partner can have more for her children. That is exactly my new partner's view to. She has chosen to have a 3rd child, she has chosen not to work and relies on my ex to support her and her 3 children (one together). Yet because I work full-time and so does my partner, she believes that my ex shouldn't have to contribute towards them. Why should ALL my disposable money go and them and nothing for myself so that my ex can spends all of his on her and family? Their choice of life is THEIR choice, not for me to judge, but our divergeant financial situation should have no consideration as to the fact that he should contribute towards all his children.