Anonymous wrote:Not sure if OP is still reading, but I would say that you should hear more from your BF before you judge him.

My DH has a child with this ex who moved to a small town a 4 hr drive away after she remarried a few years ago, when DSC was 8. DH is specialized enough that he could not easily find work in this other city, if he could find work at all. He did not move with his ex.

DH has a very demanding job, and works a lot of hours, so he can't go visit DSC as often (every other weekend) like he would like, and there is no flight or transportation DSC can take alone, so one parent has to pick him up for visitation and ex refuses to drive him, even half-way. The ex has also enrolled DSC in summer sleep-away camp, so we don't get long summer visits, just a week or two and winter or spring break.

DH calls DSC daily, visits regularly and tries to stay involved. It was awful for DH the first year after DSC moved, because he had been a fairly involved father and he really missed him. I am sure it was also difficult for DSC, but now everyone has adjusted (it's been 5 years) and it is more normal.

I know both DSC and my DH are really happy to see each other when DSC does visit, but I feel like we are disrupting DSC's life when he visits us - DSC misses his activities, friends, routine, etc. I think that on balance it is better for DSC and DH to have a relationship with DH, but maintaining the relationship with DH means that DSC has to sacrifice in other ways which are unfair to any child.

My DH has 5 years living full-time with DSC, and then 3 more years living in the same area to bond. If you BF didn't have this bonding time living in the same home/area with his DC, it is not as clear-cut as you might think that maintaining a relationship is always in the child's best interest.

Anonymous wrote:If an "established relationship" exists that he doesn't want to "interfere" with its because he created that by not being involved. Yes mom and daughter are probably tight and have a dynamic that doesn't factor him in because it's been clear for years he has no intention of being involved. He doesn't get to facilitate that dynamic and then use it as an excuse to continue to not be involved.
Listen. NO MOM WANTS their child(ren) to have uninvolved, absentee dads. A loving relationship with both parents is every parent's goal and crucial for healthy development. Just because she's made the best of her situation doesn't mean it was her situation by choice, don't get that twisted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm...I opened this prepared to be pretty harsh on him. But I'm not sure it's the case. If the mom has her own life out in California, maybe she really doesn't want him to intrude. Maybe the daughter doesn't really want an awkward twice a year visit with a guy she barely knows? She may have another man (or woman) in her life that she views as her second parent, and not be really interested in this guy filling that role. I guess I'd need to know more about how he interacts with her. I think if he makes it clear to the daughter that he's there for her if she wants him for something (other than 42K a year), I wouldn't judge him too harshly for this.

+1 My friend's husband has a child from a relationship when he was around 21. He didn't even know about the child for several years, mother moved away, she has her own life there, stepfather fills the dad role, they don't want bio dad involved at all. He respects their boundaries, stays in touch and is there if child (now an adult) wants to connect further but this is the situation mom set up. My friend and her DH have been married 15 years and he's a super-involved dad to their three children.

Good points

My dad -- who has always been an amazing, hands-on, super loving father to me -- had a similar situation. His ex-GF got pregnant but did not want to settle down with him, and ended up marrying someone else and then pressed my dad to relinquish his rights so that her new DH could adopt and legally be a father instead of a stepfather. So my dad did that but still sent money, visited occasionally, and encouraged extended family who lived closer to the ex-girlfriend to maintain a connection with her and my half-sister. My half-sister resents my dad and definitely considers him a deadbeat. From the outside, my dad may look like someone of low character. But in reality he is a terrific dad who did what he thought was best.

Anonymous wrote:Not sure if OP is still reading, but I would say that you should hear more from your BF before you judge him.

My DH has a child with this ex who moved to a small town a 4 hr drive away after she remarried a few years ago, when DSC was 8. DH is specialized enough that he could not easily find work in this other city, if he could find work at all. He did not move with his ex.

DH has a very demanding job, and works a lot of hours, so he can't go visit DSC as often (every other weekend) like he would like, and there is no flight or transportation DSC can take alone, so one parent has to pick him up for visitation and ex refuses to drive him, even half-way. The ex has also enrolled DSC in summer sleep-away camp, so we don't get long summer visits, just a week or two and winter or spring break.

DH calls DSC daily, visits regularly and tries to stay involved. It was awful for DH the first year after DSC moved, because he had been a fairly involved father and he really missed him. I am sure it was also difficult for DSC, but now everyone has adjusted (it's been 5 years) and it is more normal.

I know both DSC and my DH are really happy to see each other when DSC does visit, but I feel like we are disrupting DSC's life when he visits us - DSC misses his activities, friends, routine, etc. I think that on balance it is better for DSC and DH to have a relationship with DH, but maintaining the relationship with DH means that DSC has to sacrifice in other ways which are unfair to any child.

My DH has 5 years living full-time with DSC, and then 3 more years living in the same area to bond. If you BF didn't have this bonding time living in the same home/area with his DC, it is not as clear-cut as you might think that maintaining a relationship is always in the child's best interest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm...I opened this prepared to be pretty harsh on him. But I'm not sure it's the case. If the mom has her own life out in California, maybe she really doesn't want him to intrude. Maybe the daughter doesn't really want an awkward twice a year visit with a guy she barely knows? She may have another man (or woman) in her life that she views as her second parent, and not be really interested in this guy filling that role. I guess I'd need to know more about how he interacts with her. I think if he makes it clear to the daughter that he's there for her if she wants him for something (other than 42K a year), I wouldn't judge him too harshly for this.

+1 My friend's husband has a child from a relationship when he was around 21. He didn't even know about the child for several years, mother moved away, she has her own life there, stepfather fills the dad role, they don't want bio dad involved at all. He respects their boundaries, stays in touch and is there if child (now an adult) wants to connect further but this is the situation mom set up. My friend and her DH have been married 15 years and he's a super-involved dad to their three children.

Good points

Anonymous wrote:New poster here. I have a husband who is kind of like that.
He divorced when his kid was 6, at first they lived close and he woukd see her every week, then he moved across country and now it's skype maybe once every several months and annual visits, plus of course child support and gifts.
Now, he may not be the best dad to our 6 yo, but he plays with him, can stay with him on a weekend, take him out to a museum and such. He doesn't do pick up or drop off, he doesn't know what to cook for the kid (usually they eat out when they are without me), he doesn't know all those little parenting things like his friends' names or how to pack his lunch, but I am ok with it. I am not a fan of his parenting ideas and it's for the better frankly that he is not taking much part. He provides and babysits, can teach him an occasional skill, I am cool with it.
Now, I do love the fact that I only see my stepD once a year, and that I don't need to deal with all the blended family stuff.

Anonymous wrote:

Most adoptees rue the day they get that email, letter or visitor stating they are their biological parent, make some time for me. Some make it work, most do not. Life is very busy, both sides have to want it, but if you are not wanted somewhere, you make the best of it elsewhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guy perspective here: Mother runs off to another state and takes his child with her. He has no control over this, but he does the right thing and pays child support. Mother establishes new life and child is in stable situation. He doesn't want to interfere with that.

I can see the logic in that, especially from a guy who hasn't raised a child yet. Once you do (as most of us here have), it seems unfathomable, but I totally could understand that logic before I had children. It's difficult for men to bond with a baby in the first year anyway (I know from experience), so he may not have had much opportunity to develop a bond with the baby before his girlfriend moved her away.

But once he's in his thirties and the kid is older than an infant, he *knows* he should see her. Even if he still doesn't feel a connection, he knows he has to at leafy work on making a connection with his DD, because she needs it.

You all seem to have some incredibly romantic vision of children, teenagers, young adults reuniting with their biological mothers or fathers miles away, years later.
Sounds like a big PITA to me, for both the kid and the biological contributor.

Most adoptees rue the day they get that email, letter or visitor stating they are their biological parent, make some time for me. Some make it work, most do not. Life is very busy, both sides have to want it, but if you are not wanted somewhere, you make the best of it elsewhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guy perspective here: Mother runs off to another state and takes his child with her. He has no control over this, but he does the right thing and pays child support. Mother establishes new life and child is in stable situation. He doesn't want to interfere with that.

I can see the logic in that, especially from a guy who hasn't raised a child yet. Once you do (as most of us here have), it seems unfathomable, but I totally could understand that logic before I had children. It's difficult for men to bond with a baby in the first year anyway (I know from experience), so he may not have had much opportunity to develop a bond with the baby before his girlfriend moved her away.

Yes, I agree. (And I'm a woman)