If you were a stepparent who divorced, did you feel used by your spouse and stepkid(s)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature.

Only conservatives’ nature, where not giving a crap about anyone besides yourself is a badge of some sort of twisted honor.

The best part about all the conservatives who talk about not helping anyone else (“not investing”) is most of them don’t realize that tripe is all a lie marketed by the Koches and billionaire class to get conservatives to vote to screw themselves while billionaires walk off with all the profits.

What? I gladly pay taxes so that the government deploys all kinds of program to help children who need help.

As for what's left, I will invest it in children I've birthed. Other people can do the same with their own. I wouldn't have married a man with children, nor would I marry again if my DH dropped off.

I don't even vote, for chrissakes.

Speaks volumes of the type of person you are and this has nothing to do with the topic. And, please don't adopt. There is absolutely no reason that Dad cannot give money to his child. You are greedy.

Why would I adopt, with a houseful of kids of my own?

Dad can and should give money to his child. He should also remain married to his mother to avoid these situations. Blended families are too difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyone who marries a divorced man with a living ex wife and children is crazy.

Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature

Kind of wondering what the reaction would be if you reversed the genders here and said “you’d have to be crazy to marry a single mom, it’s fundamentally at odds with human nature”...

Most men will not marry a woman with children and they are crazy if they do unless it is spelled out in a legally binding agreement that he is not responsible for any of their expenses.

which creates some truly heart breaking situations. It is cold hearted to be rigid about it.

Imagine a kid living in a home worth $1m+ in the suburbs but his dad is poor and has developed mental problems that are going to make it hard for him to keep a job. Mom works and struggled to manage for the family. Mom and dad divorce when kid is a toddler. Mom marries guy who is also divorced and has a son and is well off. Mom and new guy have a child. Step dad is rigid that he is not going to pay for someone else's child. He is a nut about his money not going to her son. Kids are in middle school and everyone sees step dad's bio son has everything he wants. Mom's son lives like a pauper in this ridiculous house. The step sons are close in age and are forced to spend lots of time together. Dad's son has money to do everything while mom's son gets to sit and watch. Mom's son gets to sit and watch his entire life. When mom and step dad have a child, that kid gets new clothes, toys etc. Mom's son does not. Mom's son lives with this his whole life. How is this ok? I've seen this situation twice with my kid's friends.

It is really on mom who has brought her son into this situation. Why would you marry a guy like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyone who marries a divorced man with a living ex wife and children is crazy.

Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature

Kind of wondering what the reaction would be if you reversed the genders here and said “you’d have to be crazy to marry a single mom, it’s fundamentally at odds with human nature”...

Most men will not marry a woman with children and they are crazy if they do unless it is spelled out in a legally binding agreement that he is not responsible for any of their expenses.

which creates some truly heart breaking situations. It is cold hearted to be rigid about it.

Imagine a kid living in a home worth $1m+ in the suburbs but his dad is poor and has developed mental problems that are going to make it hard for him to keep a job. Mom works and struggled to manage for the family. Mom and dad divorce when kid is a toddler. Mom marries guy who is also divorced and has a son and is well off. Mom and new guy have a child. Step dad is rigid that he is not going to pay for someone else's child. He is a nut about his money not going to her son. Kids are in middle school and everyone sees step dad's bio son has everything he wants. Mom's son lives like a pauper in this ridiculous house. The step sons are close in age and are forced to spend lots of time together. Dad's son has money to do everything while mom's son gets to sit and watch. Mom's son gets to sit and watch his entire life. When mom and step dad have a child, that kid gets new clothes, toys etc. Mom's son does not. Mom's son lives with this his whole life. How is this ok? I've seen this situation twice with my kid's friends.

It is really on mom who has brought her son into this situation. Why would you marry a guy like this.

This, how is this even an issue. Mom choose to put herself in a situation and she needs to support herself given she has no housing costs. She can work and save her money and spend it on her son. Dad can apply for disability and kid can get a portion. As a stepparent, kids have two parents. I am not one of them and I have my own kids to care for. When in my home I will buy them clothing but I feel no obligation to pay for college and if mom chooses not to spend the child support on the kids, I'm not taking away from my child to send extra money (which we have done) and it not go to the kids needs (we learned to offer to buy what they need vs. cash). It goes many different ways. And, in our case, I'd rather send the money to mom's boyfriend's (AP) ex who really struggles for legit reasons and needs/appreciates the help (and we have sent clothing to her kids as boyfriend/Dad refuses to pay child support).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature.

Only conservatives’ nature, where not giving a crap about anyone besides yourself is a badge of some sort of twisted honor.

The best part about all the conservatives who talk about not helping anyone else (“not investing”) is most of them don’t realize that tripe is all a lie marketed by the Koches and billionaire class to get conservatives to vote to screw themselves while billionaires walk off with all the profits.

What? I gladly pay taxes so that the government deploys all kinds of program to help children who need help.

As for what's left, I will invest it in children I've birthed. Other people can do the same with their own. I wouldn't have married a man with children, nor would I marry again if my DH dropped off.

I don't even vote, for chrissakes.

Speaks volumes of the type of person you are and this has nothing to do with the topic. And, please don't adopt. There is absolutely no reason that Dad cannot give money to his child. You are greedy.

Why would I adopt, with a houseful of kids of my own?

Dad can and should give money to his child. He should also remain married to his mother to avoid these situations. Blended families are too difficult.

Staying married isn't always possible. My husband tried to stay married to continue to be a Dad but Mom left and took the kids while he was at work one day and she moved them cross-country to be with her AP. Everyone blames Dad but sometimes Mom is to blame. In this situation OP is really shady. A trust has nothing to do with anything and no reason Dad cannot help his kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature.

Only conservatives’ nature, where not giving a crap about anyone besides yourself is a badge of some sort of twisted honor.

The best part about all the conservatives who talk about not helping anyone else (“not investing”) is most of them don’t realize that tripe is all a lie marketed by the Koches and billionaire class to get conservatives to vote to screw themselves while billionaires walk off with all the profits.

What? I gladly pay taxes so that the government deploys all kinds of program to help children who need help.

As for what's left, I will invest it in children I've birthed. Other people can do the same with their own. I wouldn't have married a man with children, nor would I marry again if my DH dropped off.

I don't even vote, for chrissakes.

Speaks volumes of the type of person you are and this has nothing to do with the topic. And, please don't adopt. There is absolutely no reason that Dad cannot give money to his child. You are greedy.

Why would I adopt, with a houseful of kids of my own?

Dad can and should give money to his child. He should also remain married to his mother to avoid these situations. Blended families are too difficult.

Staying married isn't always possible. My husband tried to stay married to continue to be a Dad but Mom left and took the kids while he was at work one day and she moved them cross-country to be with her AP. Everyone blames Dad but sometimes Mom is to blame. In this situation OP is really shady. A trust has nothing to do with anything and no reason Dad cannot help his kid.

+2 to it's not always possible to stay married.

I'm almost 55 and also a second wife. Maybe it is my social circle, but almost every divorce or near divorce I've seen during my adulthood has been initiated by the woman, most commonly due to her own infidelity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature.

Only conservatives’ nature, where not giving a crap about anyone besides yourself is a badge of some sort of twisted honor.

The best part about all the conservatives who talk about not helping anyone else (“not investing”) is most of them don’t realize that tripe is all a lie marketed by the Koches and billionaire class to get conservatives to vote to screw themselves while billionaires walk off with all the profits.

What? I gladly pay taxes so that the government deploys all kinds of program to help children who need help.

As for what's left, I will invest it in children I've birthed. Other people can do the same with their own. I wouldn't have married a man with children, nor would I marry again if my DH dropped off.

I don't even vote, for chrissakes.

Speaks volumes of the type of person you are and this has nothing to do with the topic. And, please don't adopt. There is absolutely no reason that Dad cannot give money to his child. You are greedy.

Why would I adopt, with a houseful of kids of my own?

Dad can and should give money to his child. He should also remain married to his mother to avoid these situations. Blended families are too difficult.

Staying married isn't always possible. My husband tried to stay married to continue to be a Dad but Mom left and took the kids while he was at work one day and she moved them cross-country to be with her AP. Everyone blames Dad but sometimes Mom is to blame. In this situation OP is really shady. A trust has nothing to do with anything and no reason Dad cannot help his kid.

+2 to it's not always possible to stay married.

I'm almost 55 and also a second wife. Maybe it is my social circle, but almost every divorce or near divorce I've seen during my adulthood has been initiated by the woman, most commonly due to her own infidelity.

Thank you.

And why a man should be doomed to unhappiness/"putting the kids first" for the rest of his life because the mother of his children is a toxic narcissist and precipitated the difficulties that now face her children is beyond me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyone who marries a divorced man with a living ex wife and children is crazy.

Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature

Kind of wondering what the reaction would be if you reversed the genders here and said “you’d have to be crazy to marry a single mom, it’s fundamentally at odds with human nature”...

Most men will not marry a woman with children and they are crazy if they do unless it is spelled out in a legally binding agreement that he is not responsible for any of their expenses.

which creates some truly heart breaking situations. It is cold hearted to be rigid about it.

Imagine a kid living in a home worth $1m+ in the suburbs but his dad is poor and has developed mental problems that are going to make it hard for him to keep a job. Mom works and struggled to manage for the family. Mom and dad divorce when kid is a toddler. Mom marries guy who is also divorced and has a son and is well off. Mom and new guy have a child. Step dad is rigid that he is not going to pay for someone else's child. He is a nut about his money not going to her son. Kids are in middle school and everyone sees step dad's bio son has everything he wants. Mom's son lives like a pauper in this ridiculous house. The step sons are close in age and are forced to spend lots of time together. Dad's son has money to do everything while mom's son gets to sit and watch. Mom's son gets to sit and watch his entire life. When mom and step dad have a child, that kid gets new clothes, toys etc. Mom's son does not. Mom's son lives with this his whole life. How is this ok? I've seen this situation twice with my kid's friends.

It is really on mom who has brought her son into this situation. Why would you marry a guy like this.

This, how is this even an issue. Mom choose to put herself in a situation and she needs to support herself given she has no housing costs. She can work and save her money and spend it on her son. Dad can apply for disability and kid can get a portion. As a stepparent, kids have two parents. I am not one of them and I have my own kids to care for. When in my home I will buy them clothing but I feel no obligation to pay for college and if mom chooses not to spend the child support on the kids, I'm not taking away from my child to send extra money (which we have done) and it not go to the kids needs (we learned to offer to buy what they need vs. cash). It goes many different ways. And, in our case, I'd rather send the money to mom's boyfriend's (AP) ex who really struggles for legit reasons and needs/appreciates the help (and we have sent clothing to her kids as boyfriend/Dad refuses to pay child support).

So wait a minute. In the example above, two kids live in the same house, not across the country, and there is also a new child mom and her new husband have together. You are telling me the husband is justified buying things for his son and their joint child but not mom's child. What else? paying for his brother's activities, travel, hobbies, toys but the stepson is all on mom?

Look, if the guy has a philosophy of not ever paying for the children not his own, I admire that, but marrying a mother in these circumstances is a bad match for him. I'm very pro step-parent but this type of attitude is just cruel if a kid observes it on a daily basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyone who marries a divorced man with a living ex wife and children is crazy.

Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature

Kind of wondering what the reaction would be if you reversed the genders here and said “you’d have to be crazy to marry a single mom, it’s fundamentally at odds with human nature”...

Most men will not marry a woman with children and they are crazy if they do unless it is spelled out in a legally binding agreement that he is not responsible for any of their expenses.

which creates some truly heart breaking situations. It is cold hearted to be rigid about it.

Imagine a kid living in a home worth $1m+ in the suburbs but his dad is poor and has developed mental problems that are going to make it hard for him to keep a job. Mom works and struggled to manage for the family. Mom and dad divorce when kid is a toddler. Mom marries guy who is also divorced and has a son and is well off. Mom and new guy have a child. Step dad is rigid that he is not going to pay for someone else's child. He is a nut about his money not going to her son. Kids are in middle school and everyone sees step dad's bio son has everything he wants. Mom's son lives like a pauper in this ridiculous house. The step sons are close in age and are forced to spend lots of time together. Dad's son has money to do everything while mom's son gets to sit and watch. Mom's son gets to sit and watch his entire life. When mom and step dad have a child, that kid gets new clothes, toys etc. Mom's son does not. Mom's son lives with this his whole life. How is this ok? I've seen this situation twice with my kid's friends.

It is really on mom who has brought her son into this situation. Why would you marry a guy like this.

This, how is this even an issue. Mom choose to put herself in a situation and she needs to support herself given she has no housing costs. She can work and save her money and spend it on her son. Dad can apply for disability and kid can get a portion. As a stepparent, kids have two parents. I am not one of them and I have my own kids to care for. When in my home I will buy them clothing but I feel no obligation to pay for college and if mom chooses not to spend the child support on the kids, I'm not taking away from my child to send extra money (which we have done) and it not go to the kids needs (we learned to offer to buy what they need vs. cash). It goes many different ways. And, in our case, I'd rather send the money to mom's boyfriend's (AP) ex who really struggles for legit reasons and needs/appreciates the help (and we have sent clothing to her kids as boyfriend/Dad refuses to pay child support).

So wait a minute. In the example above, two kids live in the same house, not across the country, and there is also a new child mom and her new husband have together. You are telling me the husband is justified buying things for his son and their joint child but not mom's child. What else? paying for his brother's activities, travel, hobbies, toys but the stepson is all on mom?

Look, if the guy has a philosophy of not ever paying for the children not his own, I admire that, but marrying a mother in these circumstances is a bad match for him. I'm very pro step-parent but this type of attitude is just cruel if a kid observes it on a daily basis.

The scenario you painted above does happen and there are kids who grow up like that.
I bet that the other kids accept it that this one child is being treated badly and also start to mimic the adult behavior.
The other kids are still just kids, but later in life regret being such brats, even though that bad behavior is in part being supported by the parents, family culture

Overall it is toxic for everyoy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature.

Only conservatives’ nature, where not giving a crap about anyone besides yourself is a badge of some sort of twisted honor.

The best part about all the conservatives who talk about not helping anyone else (“not investing”) is most of them don’t realize that tripe is all a lie marketed by the Koches and billionaire class to get conservatives to vote to screw themselves while billionaires walk off with all the profits.

What? I gladly pay taxes so that the government deploys all kinds of program to help children who need help.

As for what's left, I will invest it in children I've birthed. Other people can do the same with their own. I wouldn't have married a man with children, nor would I marry again if my DH dropped off.

I don't even vote, for chrissakes.

Speaks volumes of the type of person you are and this has nothing to do with the topic. And, please don't adopt. There is absolutely no reason that Dad cannot give money to his child. You are greedy.

Why would I adopt, with a houseful of kids of my own?

Dad can and should give money to his child. He should also remain married to his mother to avoid these situations. Blended families are too difficult.

Staying married isn't always possible. My husband tried to stay married to continue to be a Dad but Mom left and took the kids while he was at work one day and she moved them cross-country to be with her AP. Everyone blames Dad but sometimes Mom is to blame. In this situation OP is really shady. A trust has nothing to do with anything and no reason Dad cannot help his kid.

You tell your story every time someone talks about CS, even when it’s clearly not the same situation. You really need therapy. Your DH has brainwashed the f@ck out of you, Lady. You deserve better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyone who marries a divorced man with a living ex wife and children is crazy.

Investing in children who are not your own is fundamentally at odds with human nature

Kind of wondering what the reaction would be if you reversed the genders here and said “you’d have to be crazy to marry a single mom, it’s fundamentally at odds with human nature”...

Most men will not marry a woman with children and they are crazy if they do unless it is spelled out in a legally binding agreement that he is not responsible for any of their expenses.

which creates some truly heart breaking situations. It is cold hearted to be rigid about it.

Imagine a kid living in a home worth $1m+ in the suburbs but his dad is poor and has developed mental problems that are going to make it hard for him to keep a job. Mom works and struggled to manage for the family. Mom and dad divorce when kid is a toddler. Mom marries guy who is also divorced and has a son and is well off. Mom and new guy have a child. Step dad is rigid that he is not going to pay for someone else's child. He is a nut about his money not going to her son. Kids are in middle school and everyone sees step dad's bio son has everything he wants. Mom's son lives like a pauper in this ridiculous house. The step sons are close in age and are forced to spend lots of time together. Dad's son has money to do everything while mom's son gets to sit and watch. Mom's son gets to sit and watch his entire life. When mom and step dad have a child, that kid gets new clothes, toys etc. Mom's son does not. Mom's son lives with this his whole life. How is this ok? I've seen this situation twice with my kid's friends.

It is really on mom who has brought her son into this situation. Why would you marry a guy like this.

This, how is this even an issue. Mom choose to put herself in a situation and she needs to support herself given she has no housing costs. She can work and save her money and spend it on her son. Dad can apply for disability and kid can get a portion. As a stepparent, kids have two parents. I am not one of them and I have my own kids to care for. When in my home I will buy them clothing but I feel no obligation to pay for college and if mom chooses not to spend the child support on the kids, I'm not taking away from my child to send extra money (which we have done) and it not go to the kids needs (we learned to offer to buy what they need vs. cash). It goes many different ways. And, in our case, I'd rather send the money to mom's boyfriend's (AP) ex who really struggles for legit reasons and needs/appreciates the help (and we have sent clothing to her kids as boyfriend/Dad refuses to pay child support).

So wait a minute. In the example above, two kids live in the same house, not across the country, and there is also a new child mom and her new husband have together. You are telling me the husband is justified buying things for his son and their joint child but not mom's child. What else? paying for his brother's activities, travel, hobbies, toys but the stepson is all on mom?

Look, if the guy has a philosophy of not ever paying for the children not his own, I admire that, but marrying a mother in these circumstances is a bad match for him. I'm very pro step-parent but this type of attitude is just cruel if a kid observes it on a daily basis.

The scenario you painted above does happen and there are kids who grow up like that.
I bet that the other kids accept it that this one child is being treated badly and also start to mimic the adult behavior.
The other kids are still just kids, but later in life regret being such brats, even though that bad behavior is in part being supported by the parents, family culture

Overall it is toxic for everyoy

So because this guy married a divorced mom, he’s expected to foot her son’s expenses? That’s crazy and sets up a dynamic of using the stepparent. It’s not like he’s denying the kid any food. He is drawing appropriate boundaries and protecting himself from being a schmuck in case they do divorce.