Does a blended family actually work?

[Anonymous]

SMC here. I have both a bio kid (iui) and an adopted kid. After reading this sh*tstorm, I plan to never, ever marry. Christ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SMC here. I have both a bio kid (iui) and an adopted kid. After reading this sh*tstorm, I plan to never, ever marry. Christ.

You can marry. Just pick a partner without kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SMC here. I have both a bio kid (iui) and an adopted kid. After reading this sh*tstorm, I plan to never, ever marry. Christ.

You can marry. Just pick a partner without kids.

Which childfree person would pick the PP though?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By the way, the “Evil Stepmother“ is an historic archetype for a reason, she‘s existed in oral tradition even predating written history. Since women died so often in childbirth, widowers always remarried with their children and fathered more with new wives. If you ever venture into the sewage of Steptalk, you will witness how little has changed. The studies show that men admit to disliking their stepchildren at about a 50% rate and women hate them even MORE. A lot of this is because the childcare falls almost always on the stepmom. But you cannot ignore the preference you instinctively have for your children over another woman’s (who birthed them with your husband!). How people in the 21st century think they will escape the biological imperative imprinted in their DNA (and thousand year old fairy tales!) is baffling.

You are right in some respects. But there is a world of difference between a historic-era woman trying to raise a deceased woman's kids along with her own, often with highly limited resources, compared to today's scenarios where the biological mother (and father) are very much involved in day-to-day life.

The most vital element in any potential "blended" success story is the children's biological mother. Numerous studies which have shown that if the children's mother can show them she is accepting of the SM - not as an actual mother, per se - but as an important adult in the child's life, there is a potential for the family to succeed. Unfortunately, this rarely happens since most women are imprinted in their DNA to fear other women who form bonds with their kids. It is next to impossible to let another woman become a important to your children without jealousy eventually rearing its head, especially when that woman is now with your former husband.

Different poster here

I think that actually proves pp's point even more. For the historic-era step mother, the previous wife/mom was dead, she was no longer any type of threat or competition. Modern day step mother, the ex wife/bio mom is still there, showing up at the house several times a week to exchange custody of the kids, right there in the same room at school plays and baseball games, etc.
Yes, historic era step mom had a lot of the work/responsibility of raising her husband's kids, but she also had a lot of authority and power as the sole "mother figure" in their life.
Today's step mom still has some of the work/responsibility, still has her time/schedule disrupted by the events/activities in her stepchild's life--yet really has NO authority or power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By the way, the “Evil Stepmother“ is an historic archetype for a reason, she‘s existed in oral tradition even predating written history. Since women died so often in childbirth, widowers always remarried with their children and fathered more with new wives. If you ever venture into the sewage of Steptalk, you will witness how little has changed. The studies show that men admit to disliking their stepchildren at about a 50% rate and women hate them even MORE. A lot of this is because the childcare falls almost always on the stepmom. But you cannot ignore the preference you instinctively have for your children over another woman’s (who birthed them with your husband!). How people in the 21st century think they will escape the biological imperative imprinted in their DNA (and thousand year old fairy tales!) is baffling.

You are right in some respects. But there is a world of difference between a historic-era woman trying to raise a deceased woman's kids along with her own, often with highly limited resources, compared to today's scenarios where the biological mother (and father) are very much involved in day-to-day life.

The most vital element in any potential "blended" success story is the children's biological mother. Numerous studies which have shown that if the children's mother can show them she is accepting of the SM - not as an actual mother, per se - but as an important adult in the child's life, there is a potential for the family to succeed. Unfortunately, this rarely happens since most women are imprinted in their DNA to fear other women who form bonds with their kids. It is next to impossible to let another woman become a important to your children without jealousy eventually rearing its head, especially when that woman is now with your former husband.

Different poster here

I think that actually proves pp's point even more. For the historic-era step mother, the previous wife/mom was dead, she was no longer any type of threat or competition. Modern day step mother, the ex wife/bio mom is still there, showing up at the house several times a week to exchange custody of the kids, right there in the same room at school plays and baseball games, etc.
Yes, historic era step mom had a lot of the work/responsibility of raising her husband's kids, but she also had a lot of authority and power as the sole "mother figure" in their life.
Today's step mom still has some of the work/responsibility, still has her time/schedule disrupted by the events/activities in her stepchild's life--yet really has NO authority or power.

Exactly. It does prove the point. Since the old stereotype continues to persist, the modern stepmother is often reviled and blamed for stepfamily issues by society at large despite her best efforts. Children learn to hate stepmothers at an early age even if they don't have one. Think Cinderella. If someone says "I hate my stepmother." they are immediately sympathized with. If a stepmother says, "The situation with my stepkids is very difficult." she is immediately told, "You knew what you were getting into. Suck it all up without complaint because the kids [no matter their ages, including adult kids] come first."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When i married my husband i had a 3 year old daughter (Single Mom by Choice) and he brought 2 boys to the marriage, ages 2 and 1. It can work when the kids are so young like this and they grow up together.

I did specify when he finally convinced me to marry him that I would be financially responsible for our daughter and he for our sons. Its a good thing because there is no way I could afford to feed the boys who each grew to be 6'2" and 6'1" (we called him the little guy). They are now 18 and 19 and on the way to becoming semi-professional soccer players. On the other hand our petite daughter is majoring in Violin performance.

I am confused as to how your timeline has worked. He has brought children aged 2 and 1 to the marriage when he FINALLY convinced you to marry him. If convincing you took some time (let's say a year), how did he manage to father two young children in quick succession in the meantime? You have a talented multitasker of a husband? Or was he hedging his bets with the mother of his children just in case you'd say no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By the way, the “Evil Stepmother“ is an historic archetype for a reason, she‘s existed in oral tradition even predating written history. Since women died so often in childbirth, widowers always remarried with their children and fathered more with new wives. If you ever venture into the sewage of Steptalk, you will witness how little has changed. The studies show that men admit to disliking their stepchildren at about a 50% rate and women hate them even MORE. A lot of this is because the childcare falls almost always on the stepmom. But you cannot ignore the preference you instinctively have for your children over another woman’s (who birthed them with your husband!). How people in the 21st century think they will escape the biological imperative imprinted in their DNA (and thousand year old fairy tales!) is baffling.

You are right in some respects. But there is a world of difference between a historic-era woman trying to raise a deceased woman's kids along with her own, often with highly limited resources, compared to today's scenarios where the biological mother (and father) are very much involved in day-to-day life.

The most vital element in any potential "blended" success story is the children's biological mother. Numerous studies which have shown that if the children's mother can show them she is accepting of the SM - not as an actual mother, per se - but as an important adult in the child's life, there is a potential for the family to succeed. Unfortunately, this rarely happens since most women are imprinted in their DNA to fear other women who form bonds with their kids. It is next to impossible to let another woman become a important to your children without jealousy eventually rearing its head, especially when that woman is now with your former husband.

Different poster here

I think that actually proves pp's point even more. For the historic-era step mother, the previous wife/mom was dead, she was no longer any type of threat or competition. Modern day step mother, the ex wife/bio mom is still there, showing up at the house several times a week to exchange custody of the kids, right there in the same room at school plays and baseball games, etc.
Yes, historic era step mom had a lot of the work/responsibility of raising her husband's kids, but she also had a lot of authority and power as the sole "mother figure" in their life.
Today's step mom still has some of the work/responsibility, still has her time/schedule disrupted by the events/activities in her stepchild's life--yet really has NO authority or power.

Exactly. It does prove the point. Since the old stereotype continues to persist, the modern stepmother is often reviled and blamed for stepfamily issues by society at large despite her best efforts. Children learn to hate stepmothers at an early age even if they don't have one. Think Cinderella. If someone says "I hate my stepmother." they are immediately sympathized with. If a stepmother says, "The situation with my stepkids is very difficult." she is immediately told, "You knew what you were getting into. Suck it all up without complaint because the kids [no matter their ages, including adult kids] come first."

and that’s correct? stepmothers are adults and need to act like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like the general consensus here is if you divorce, no family for you. I get divorce is awful, and it’s awful for all involved, not just the children, but how is it that you should then be doomed to a life of solitude? Marriage and family are normal desires, and those that are divorced still have normal human desires.

If you are able to navigate a blended family in a reasonable, responsible, mature way, I think it can work. We only live once, one shouldn’t deprive themselves of happiness because of a past error.

No, I think the general consensus here is that it is dishonest to pretend that there is not a very high probability of significant negative consequences on the first set of kids. You have to make your decision and live with the consequences; it is the pretending that there aren’t, or shouldn’t be, any such consequences that people are reacting so negatively to.

Just speaking for myself, who was in a relatively late and relatively benign situation: it is at minimum deeply obnoxious to be pressured to pretend that people you aren’t related to, have nothing in common with, and don’t particularly like are “family.” It’s worse when they make bad decisions regarding relationships, money, or substances—your family life is now pressured, and potentially compromised, by people you have no interest in. And they are at every Christmas, Thanksgiving, graduation, etc. Forever. The reasonable best case, it seems to me, is for the initial set of children to distance themselves from the family unit in general, with a reasonably high probability of some sort of train wreck. I’m sure there are a few outliers with very positive experiences. I understand the feeling that it shouldn’t have to be that way. But reality is what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SMC here. I have both a bio kid (iui) and an adopted kid. After reading this sh*tstorm, I plan to never, ever marry. Christ.

You can marry. Just pick a partner without kids.

It's very difficult to tie a no kid partner in the relationship if he isn't interested in getting the work done and only a very few are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By the way, the “Evil Stepmother“ is an historic archetype for a reason, she‘s existed in oral tradition even predating written history. Since women died so often in childbirth, widowers always remarried with their children and fathered more with new wives. If you ever venture into the sewage of Steptalk, you will witness how little has changed. The studies show that men admit to disliking their stepchildren at about a 50% rate and women hate them even MORE. A lot of this is because the childcare falls almost always on the stepmom. But you cannot ignore the preference you instinctively have for your children over another woman’s (who birthed them with your husband!). How people in the 21st century think they will escape the biological imperative imprinted in their DNA (and thousand year old fairy tales!) is baffling.

You are right in some respects. But there is a world of difference between a historic-era woman trying to raise a deceased woman's kids along with her own, often with highly limited resources, compared to today's scenarios where the biological mother (and father) are very much involved in day-to-day life.

The most vital element in any potential "blended" success story is the children's biological mother. Numerous studies which have shown that if the children's mother can show them she is accepting of the SM - not as an actual mother, per se - but as an important adult in the child's life, there is a potential for the family to succeed. Unfortunately, this rarely happens since most women are imprinted in their DNA to fear other women who form bonds with their kids. It is next to impossible to let another woman become a important to your children without jealousy eventually rearing its head, especially when that woman is now with your former husband.

Different poster here

I think that actually proves pp's point even more. For the historic-era step mother, the previous wife/mom was dead, she was no longer any type of threat or competition. Modern day step mother, the ex wife/bio mom is still there, showing up at the house several times a week to exchange custody of the kids, right there in the same room at school plays and baseball games, etc.
Yes, historic era step mom had a lot of the work/responsibility of raising her husband's kids, but she also had a lot of authority and power as the sole "mother figure" in their life.
Today's step mom still has some of the work/responsibility, still has her time/schedule disrupted by the events/activities in her stepchild's life--yet really has NO authority or power.

Exactly. It does prove the point. Since the old stereotype continues to persist, the modern stepmother is often reviled and blamed for stepfamily issues by society at large despite her best efforts. Children learn to hate stepmothers at an early age even if they don't have one. Think Cinderella. If someone says "I hate my stepmother." they are immediately sympathized with. If a stepmother says, "The situation with my stepkids is very difficult." she is immediately told, "You knew what you were getting into. Suck it all up without complaint because the kids [no matter their ages, including adult kids] come first."

and that’s correct? stepmothers are adults and need to act like it.

Just like adult stepkids need to act like adults, too. Minor children, then that's one thing. Why do adults in their 30s, 40s and beyond act like they can still dictate their parent's partnership choices?

I know many middle-age or older couples who have serious problems because adult stepchildren still act like ... children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By the way, the “Evil Stepmother“ is an historic archetype for a reason, she‘s existed in oral tradition even predating written history. Since women died so often in childbirth, widowers always remarried with their children and fathered more with new wives. If you ever venture into the sewage of Steptalk, you will witness how little has changed. The studies show that men admit to disliking their stepchildren at about a 50% rate and women hate them even MORE. A lot of this is because the childcare falls almost always on the stepmom. But you cannot ignore the preference you instinctively have for your children over another woman’s (who birthed them with your husband!). How people in the 21st century think they will escape the biological imperative imprinted in their DNA (and thousand year old fairy tales!) is baffling.

You are right in some respects. But there is a world of difference between a historic-era woman trying to raise a deceased woman's kids along with her own, often with highly limited resources, compared to today's scenarios where the biological mother (and father) are very much involved in day-to-day life.

The most vital element in any potential "blended" success story is the children's biological mother. Numerous studies which have shown that if the children's mother can show them she is accepting of the SM - not as an actual mother, per se - but as an important adult in the child's life, there is a potential for the family to succeed. Unfortunately, this rarely happens since most women are imprinted in their DNA to fear other women who form bonds with their kids. It is next to impossible to let another woman become a important to your children without jealousy eventually rearing its head, especially when that woman is now with your former husband.

Different poster here

I think that actually proves pp's point even more. For the historic-era step mother, the previous wife/mom was dead, she was no longer any type of threat or competition. Modern day step mother, the ex wife/bio mom is still there, showing up at the house several times a week to exchange custody of the kids, right there in the same room at school plays and baseball games, etc.
Yes, historic era step mom had a lot of the work/responsibility of raising her husband's kids, but she also had a lot of authority and power as the sole "mother figure" in their life.
Today's step mom still has some of the work/responsibility, still has her time/schedule disrupted by the events/activities in her stepchild's life--yet really has NO authority or power.

Exactly. It does prove the point. Since the old stereotype continues to persist, the modern stepmother is often reviled and blamed for stepfamily issues by society at large despite her best efforts. Children learn to hate stepmothers at an early age even if they don't have one. Think Cinderella. If someone says "I hate my stepmother." they are immediately sympathized with. If a stepmother says, "The situation with my stepkids is very difficult." she is immediately told, "You knew what you were getting into. Suck it all up without complaint because the kids [no matter their ages, including adult kids] come first."

and that’s correct? stepmothers are adults and need to act like it.

Just like adult stepkids need to act like adults, too. Minor children, then that's one thing. Why do adults in their 30s, 40s and beyond act like they can still dictate their parent's partnership choices?

I know many middle-age or older couples who have serious problems because adult stepchildren still act like ... children.

Declining to provide a command performance in a sad charade of a family is hardly dictating their choices. They are the ones trying to dictate my choices, and even my own feelings and emotions, with their constant pressure.

[Anonymous]

The resentment toward step-relations is astounding. Is it anger about divorce? Competition? Wouldn’t life be easier if you embraced and formed relationships with steps? I know multiple people whose relationships with step-siblings is incredibly strong, and I do think with the right attitudes it is possible to create a family dynamic that works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The resentment toward step-relations is astounding. Is it anger about divorce? Competition? Wouldn’t life be easier if you embraced and formed relationships with steps? I know multiple people whose relationships with step-siblings is incredibly strong, and I do think with the right attitudes it is possible to create a family dynamic that works.

You are absolutely right that positive attitudes BY EVERYONE can make it work. This includes biological parents, stepparents, in laws, and all bio/step kids.

Sadly, the vast majority will never be able to achieve this for a variety of reasons including biological hard-wiring favoring their own children, resentment over resources, and just plain anger and jealousy because the family of origin dissolved. Introducing new people into this kind of boiling environment, no matter how decent or well-meaning they are, will inevitably fail.

Most people want their choice of spouse to be at least accepted with an open mind by their loved ones. Certainly most kids would like it if their parents gave their spouse a chance. It also includes parents who want to find a partner. Look at the poster above you for a clue. Words like "command performance" and "sad charade of a family" are telling.

None of this will ever change until education about stepfamilies is approached in a comprehensive manner which deals with the emotional and mental issues that can arise. It includes courts recognizing that parental alienation after divorce is real and can have a profoundly negative impact on children. It also means resolving and dispelling the age-old stereotypes regarding stepparents. The vast majority of stepparents are doing incredible jobs trying to balance everyone's complex lives, not step on anyone's toes, figure out when to step back and when to lean forward, and still be able to love whom they chose without prejudice.

The reality is we are living longer and the odds that most people will stay with one person for 60 years or more is not realistic. Statistically there will be more than one partner in a person's life. It's time we address it.

[Anonymous]

Blended families are usually shit shows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The resentment toward step-relations is astounding. Is it anger about divorce? Competition? Wouldn’t life be easier if you embraced and formed relationships with steps? I know multiple people whose relationships with step-siblings is incredibly strong, and I do think with the right attitudes it is possible to create a family dynamic that works.

You are absolutely right that positive attitudes BY EVERYONE can make it work. This includes biological parents, stepparents, in laws, and all bio/step kids.

Sadly, the vast majority will never be able to achieve this for a variety of reasons including biological hard-wiring favoring their own children, resentment over resources, and just plain anger and jealousy because the family of origin dissolved. Introducing new people into this kind of boiling environment, no matter how decent or well-meaning they are, will inevitably fail.

Most people want their choice of spouse to be at least accepted with an open mind by their loved ones. Certainly most kids would like it if their parents gave their spouse a chance. It also includes parents who want to find a partner. Look at the poster above you for a clue. Words like "command performance" and "sad charade of a family" are telling.

None of this will ever change until education about stepfamilies is approached in a comprehensive manner which deals with the emotional and mental issues that can arise. It includes courts recognizing that parental alienation after divorce is real and can have a profoundly negative impact on children. It also means resolving and dispelling the age-old stereotypes regarding stepparents. The vast majority of stepparents are doing incredible jobs trying to balance everyone's complex lives, not step on anyone's toes, figure out when to step back and when to lean forward, and still be able to love whom they chose without prejudice.

The reality is we are living longer and the odds that most people will stay with one person for 60 years or more is not realistic. Statistically there will be more than one partner in a person's life. It's time we address it.

It's not a matter of a positive attitude! First, a lot of parents make bad choices in relationships. Children shouldn't have to accept a partner who behaves inappropriately or is exploitative, or someone whose family brings problematic things like drugs into the family. People have the right to date and remarry, sure, but they don't have the right to force me to spend time with people whose behaviors are unacceptable. My positive attitude isn't going to sober up my dad's wife. It isn't going to stop my mom's boyfriend from being a racist. I'm not the problem here.

Second, where is all this time supposed to come from? Spending time with people costs time and money, and sorry but I'm fresh out. I'm a working mom with young kids of my own. And I have my own marriage to maintain. It's already an exhausting ordeal just to travel to spend the minimal amount of time with my parents. Yet they can't accept that their divorce means 50/50 time forever. They're always pushing for more, so we can be a big happy faaaaamily. I just don't have time for two step-extended-families in addition to my own two parents in two locations and my in-laws as well. I need to focus on my actual relatives, not my fictional ones. If they would accept that the blending just isn't going to happen, we'd have a better relationship.