AITA? Teens and extended summer trips

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is right? I work fully remote and have permission to work from anywhere. So during the summer I am talking the teens to my hometown (amazing, cool city) for 2 months. Kids love it. DH put himself in a position where it’s a bit harder to join, due to a complicated per situation he caused himself. Also he just doesn’t want to do it. Now he’s angry. AITA?

Yes, not only are YTA but your DH also has grounds for legal proceedings. You don’t get to unilaterally decide to relocate your kids for two months and deprive the other parent of access without his consent.

This is hilarious.

DH is shorthand for husband. They are married and until they divorce they both have full custody of their children and there is no scenario where a summer trip would be a legal issue.

It sounds like the husband is jealous the mom and kids are going to have fun without him.

I honestly don’t get how people are saying this is okay. So as a mom who has a non telework friendly job, my teleworking DH can just inform me that he is taking the kids to spend the entire summer with his family in another state and I have no recourse to prevent him from doing so and effectively depriving me of seeing my children for 8-10 weeks? Thankfully he isn’t an a**hole and would never dream of doing so but still that just doesn’t seem right.

What if rather than being teens the children were preschool aged or younger? Does that change your perspective? This isn’t a case of DH just being jealous of missing out on a fun experience but rather a significant chunk of time in his children’s life.

I’m a mom with a non-telework job, and I would be very happy for DH to do this.
It sounds like a good experience for the kids and for OP. Maybe it’s a chance to spend some time with extended family.

I mean, people send their kids to summer camp for 8 weeks all of the time. This doesn’t seem horrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is right? I work fully remote and have permission to work from anywhere. So during the summer I am talking the teens to my hometown (amazing, cool city) for 2 months. Kids love it. DH put himself in a position where it’s a bit harder to join, due to a complicated per situation he caused himself. Also he just doesn’t want to do it. Now he’s angry. AITA?

Reading between the lines, it sounds like there’s more to this story. Not sure what “per situation” was supposed to be before the typo/ autocorrect, but it kind of sounds like you’re punishing him for some decision you didn’t agree with.

Possibly it’s unconscious on your part, or maybe that’s just his interpretation of the situation, but I’d highly suggest dealing with it before you leave. Two months apart to stew isn’t going to improve the situation, and it’s going to keep spilling over.

+1 I wondered about this too. I also want to understand what “a bit harder to join” means. Like can he come for half the time? Weekends? A week? Not at all? If he can come for some or most of the time and just is refusing to, NTA. If he can’t come (like he’s a doctor or something), yeah you’re kinda TA here. I’d hate to be apart from my kids for weeks on end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is right? I work fully remote and have permission to work from anywhere. So during the summer I am talking the teens to my hometown (amazing, cool city) for 2 months. Kids love it. DH put himself in a position where it’s a bit harder to join, due to a complicated per situation he caused himself. Also he just doesn’t want to do it. Now he’s angry. AITA?

Yes, not only are YTA but your DH also has grounds for legal proceedings. You don’t get to unilaterally decide to relocate your kids for two months and deprive the other parent of access without his consent.

This is hilarious.

DH is shorthand for husband. They are married and until they divorce they both have full custody of their children and there is no scenario where a summer trip would be a legal issue.

It sounds like the husband is jealous the mom and kids are going to have fun without him.

I honestly don’t get how people are saying this is okay. So as a mom who has a non telework friendly job, my teleworking DH can just inform me that he is taking the kids to spend the entire summer with his family in another state and I have no recourse to prevent him from doing so and effectively depriving me of seeing my children for 8-10 weeks? Thankfully he isn’t an a**hole and would never dream of doing so but still that just doesn’t seem right.

What if rather than being teens the children were preschool aged or younger? Does that change your perspective? This isn’t a case of DH just being jealous of missing out on a fun experience but rather a significant chunk of time in his children’s life.

So even if it were a great opportunity for your kids, you'd say no because it's not good for you?

That's a bummer.

They’re going to spend a summer in a op’s (self-proclaimed) “amazing cool” hometown”, not participating in some transformative irreplaceable opportunity. Sure it will probably be fun for the kids but it doesn’t justify or necessitate shutting DH out and separating the family for an entire summer rather than just spending a couple weeks there.

Are people who send their kids to camp for the shutting the parents out of the kids’ lives?
You are being very dramatic here.

[Anonymous]

So you want him to have an affair? Different strokes for different folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So you want him to have an affair? Different strokes for different folks.

that was my thought too--didn't you see Hamilton? You take the kids upstate for the summer and he finds someone all too willing to have a fling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is right? I work fully remote and have permission to work from anywhere. So during the summer I am talking the teens to my hometown (amazing, cool city) for 2 months. Kids love it. DH put himself in a position where it’s a bit harder to join, due to a complicated per situation he caused himself. Also he just doesn’t want to do it. Now he’s angry. AITA?

Yes, not only are YTA but your DH also has grounds for legal proceedings. You don’t get to unilaterally decide to relocate your kids for two months and deprive the other parent of access without his consent.

This is hilarious.

DH is shorthand for husband. They are married and until they divorce they both have full custody of their children and there is no scenario where a summer trip would be a legal issue.

It sounds like the husband is jealous the mom and kids are going to have fun without him.

I honestly don’t get how people are saying this is okay. So as a mom who has a non telework friendly job, my teleworking DH can just inform me that he is taking the kids to spend the entire summer with his family in another state and I have no recourse to prevent him from doing so and effectively depriving me of seeing my children for 8-10 weeks? Thankfully he isn’t an a**hole and would never dream of doing so but still that just doesn’t seem right.

What if rather than being teens the children were preschool aged or younger? Does that change your perspective? This isn’t a case of DH just being jealous of missing out on a fun experience but rather a significant chunk of time in his children’s life.

So even if it were a great opportunity for your kids, you'd say no because it's not good for you?

That's a bummer.

They’re going to spend a summer in a op’s (self-proclaimed) “amazing cool” hometown”, not participating in some transformative irreplaceable opportunity. Sure it will probably be fun for the kids but it doesn’t justify or necessitate shutting DH out and separating the family for an entire summer rather than just spending a couple weeks there.

FWIW, if my husband wanted to take our kids to his hometown for the summer, I'd encourage it and come visit for a couple weekends. Great memories for them. But different strokes, apparently.

[Anonymous]

There should be a discussion, and maybe one month is better than two, but it is selfish of the husband to act like no one should go just because he can’t/won’t. My spouse is very supportive of me taking the kids on trips like these… usually much shorter of course, but during the pandemic, it was 2 months. He was the one encouraging us to stay longer. He did visit once or twice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There should be a discussion, and maybe one month is better than two, but it is selfish of the husband to act like no one should go just because he can’t/won’t. My spouse is very supportive of me taking the kids on trips like these… usually much shorter of course, but during the pandemic, it was 2 months. He was the one encouraging us to stay longer. He did visit once or twice.

+1. It seems selfish to me too.

[Anonymous]

Did you both initially agree to be out of town during the summer and then he messed up and it's harder for him to do it?

I'd do it and have DH come out for part of the time or shorten. Both sides are right and need to compromise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NTA but could soon be the ex if not the choice of wife and husband to be apart. For some this works, but should be in agreement and not ha-ha, you can’t be remote so you can’t come! Lots of NY families have dad work in NY while kids and wife in Hamptons or Cape Cod for summer.

But I said in my OP he’s remote as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you want him to have an affair? Different strokes for different folks.

that was my thought too--didn't you see Hamilton? You take the kids upstate for the summer and he finds someone all too willing to have a fling.

Some people can keep their pants on. Sorry you didn't meet one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did you both initially agree to be out of town during the summer and then he messed up and it's harder for him to do it?

I'd do it and have DH come out for part of the time or shorten. Both sides are right and need to compromise.

We live a sweltering city in TX, where he insisted on moving. So yes, if I can, I won’t spend summer there. He knew I was never keen to live there. It was agreed before marriage that I’d spend as much time in my hometown (with kids), as I want to, especially during the summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is right? I work fully remote and have permission to work from anywhere. So during the summer I am talking the teens to my hometown (amazing, cool city) for 2 months. Kids love it. DH put himself in a position where it’s a bit harder to join, due to a complicated per situation he caused himself. Also he just doesn’t want to do it. Now he’s angry. AITA?

Yes, not only are YTA but your DH also has grounds for legal proceedings. You don’t get to unilaterally decide to relocate your kids for two months and deprive the other parent of access without his consent.

This is hilarious.

DH is shorthand for husband. They are married and until they divorce they both have full custody of their children and there is no scenario where a summer trip would be a legal issue.

It sounds like the husband is jealous the mom and kids are going to have fun without him.

I honestly don’t get how people are saying this is okay. So as a mom who has a non telework friendly job, my teleworking DH can just inform me that he is taking the kids to spend the entire summer with his family in another state and I have no recourse to prevent him from doing so and effectively depriving me of seeing my children for 8-10 weeks? Thankfully he isn’t an a**hole and would never dream of doing so but still that just doesn’t seem right.

What if rather than being teens the children were preschool aged or younger? Does that change your perspective? This isn’t a case of DH just being jealous of missing out on a fun experience but rather a significant chunk of time in his children’s life.

So even if it were a great opportunity for your kids, you'd say no because it's not good for you?

That's a bummer.

They’re going to spend a summer in a op’s (self-proclaimed) “amazing cool” hometown”, not participating in some transformative irreplaceable opportunity. Sure it will probably be fun for the kids but it doesn’t justify or necessitate shutting DH out and separating the family for an entire summer rather than just spending a couple weeks there.

Are people who send their kids to camp for the shutting the parents out of the kids’ lives?
You are being very dramatic here.

Do you truly not see a difference between two parents jointly deciding to send their kids to camp for 10 weeks versus one parent unilaterally deciding to travel for 10 weeks with their kids while excluding the other parent against their wishes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is right? I work fully remote and have permission to work from anywhere. So during the summer I am talking the teens to my hometown (amazing, cool city) for 2 months. Kids love it. DH put himself in a position where it’s a bit harder to join, due to a complicated per situation he caused himself. Also he just doesn’t want to do it. Now he’s angry. AITA?

Yes, not only are YTA but your DH also has grounds for legal proceedings. You don’t get to unilaterally decide to relocate your kids for two months and deprive the other parent of access without his consent.

This is hilarious.

DH is shorthand for husband. They are married and until they divorce they both have full custody of their children and there is no scenario where a summer trip would be a legal issue.

It sounds like the husband is jealous the mom and kids are going to have fun without him.

I honestly don’t get how people are saying this is okay. So as a mom who has a non telework friendly job, my teleworking DH can just inform me that he is taking the kids to spend the entire summer with his family in another state and I have no recourse to prevent him from doing so and effectively depriving me of seeing my children for 8-10 weeks? Thankfully he isn’t an a**hole and would never dream of doing so but still that just doesn’t seem right.

What if rather than being teens the children were preschool aged or younger? Does that change your perspective? This isn’t a case of DH just being jealous of missing out on a fun experience but rather a significant chunk of time in his children’s life.

So even if it were a great opportunity for your kids, you'd say no because it's not good for you?

That's a bummer.

They’re going to spend a summer in a op’s (self-proclaimed) “amazing cool” hometown”, not participating in some transformative irreplaceable opportunity. Sure it will probably be fun for the kids but it doesn’t justify or necessitate shutting DH out and separating the family for an entire summer rather than just spending a couple weeks there.

Are people who send their kids to camp for the shutting the parents out of the kids’ lives?
You are being very dramatic here.

Do you truly not see a difference between two parents jointly deciding to send their kids to camp for 10 weeks versus one parent unilaterally deciding to travel for 10 weeks with their kids while excluding the other parent against their wishes?

I think you intentionally misread - of course he was invited. He chose not to come due to pet reasons. He was the one who got those pets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is right? I work fully remote and have permission to work from anywhere. So during the summer I am talking the teens to my hometown (amazing, cool city) for 2 months. Kids love it. DH put himself in a position where it’s a bit harder to join, due to a complicated per situation he caused himself. Also he just doesn’t want to do it. Now he’s angry. AITA?

Yes, not only are YTA but your DH also has grounds for legal proceedings. You don’t get to unilaterally decide to relocate your kids for two months and deprive the other parent of access without his consent.

This is hilarious.

DH is shorthand for husband. They are married and until they divorce they both have full custody of their children and there is no scenario where a summer trip would be a legal issue.

It sounds like the husband is jealous the mom and kids are going to have fun without him.

I honestly don’t get how people are saying this is okay. So as a mom who has a non telework friendly job, my teleworking DH can just inform me that he is taking the kids to spend the entire summer with his family in another state and I have no recourse to prevent him from doing so and effectively depriving me of seeing my children for 8-10 weeks? Thankfully he isn’t an a**hole and would never dream of doing so but still that just doesn’t seem right.

What if rather than being teens the children were preschool aged or younger? Does that change your perspective? This isn’t a case of DH just being jealous of missing out on a fun experience but rather a significant chunk of time in his children’s life.

So even if it were a great opportunity for your kids, you'd say no because it's not good for you?

That's a bummer.

They’re going to spend a summer in a op’s (self-proclaimed) “amazing cool” hometown”, not participating in some transformative irreplaceable opportunity. Sure it will probably be fun for the kids but it doesn’t justify or necessitate shutting DH out and separating the family for an entire summer rather than just spending a couple weeks there.

Are people who send their kids to camp for the shutting the parents out of the kids’ lives?
You are being very dramatic here.

Do you truly not see a difference between two parents jointly deciding to send their kids to camp for 10 weeks versus one parent unilaterally deciding to travel for 10 weeks with their kids while excluding the other parent against their wishes?

I think you intentionally misread - of course he was invited. He chose not to come due to pet reasons. He was the one who got those pets.

Oh, so the "per situation" was "pet situation"?