Anonymous wrote:My kids are all well into adulthood now. My two sons from my first marriage have said to me, of their own initiative, "We completely understand why you and Dad divorced, and you are both much happier now. We just don't understand why you got married in the first place." They have always had a close, loving relationship with their sister from my second marriage (with a 9 and 11 year age gap from my sons). They have a very close relationship with their stepdad.
Anonymous wrote:My husband says HARD pass. Eight kids with the first and two after. A complete S*IT SHOW.
Anonymous wrote:So basically the question is: "My teen has already experienced the loss of their intact family. How can I withdraw a lot of my time, energy, and resources, and also make them live with a new partner and a baby, and have them not be permanently psychologically damaged by it?"
Anonymous wrote:I agree with the folks saying that it works best when the kids already live with the parent having the new baby. It feels like getting a new sibling, which is a pretty normal experience.
The more common scenario, though, is the non-custodial or limited-custodial father starting a new family, and that brings up some huge feelings for even older kids along the lines of "Why was he not willing to help raise me, but is willing to live full time with the new kids?"
Anonymous wrote:It depends on your ex’s household. I think it works the best in situations where:
1. The parents having the baby have full custody
OR
2. The relationship with the ex is extremely amicable and respectful AND
3. Both households are on equal footing financially.
Otherwise, the kids from the first marriage go back and forth and never really feel like a “full time” member of the family.
Anonymous wrote:Huh? You don’t know anyone who has half siblings?
I am an only from mom/dads marriage #1. I have 3 siblings from my dad’s marriage 2. We are very close. I truly dont understand your concern.
Anonymous wrote:From blended family here. It worked well for us because the older kids’ were my mother’s kids and she had custody so we all grew up together.
Anonymous wrote:So basically the question is: "My teen has already experienced the loss of their intact family. How can I withdraw a lot of my time, energy, and resources, and also make them live with a new partner and a baby, and have them be happy with it?"
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So basically the question is: "My teen has already experienced the loss of their intact family. How can I withdraw a lot of my time, energy, and resources, and also make them live with a new partner and a baby, and have them be happy with it?"
How would it be different than an "intact" family having more kids. With every kid a parent has it takes away attention and resources.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So basically the question is: "My teen has already experienced the loss of their intact family. How can I withdraw a lot of my time, energy, and resources, and also make them live with a new partner and a baby, and have them be happy with it?"
How would it be different than an "intact" family having more kids. With every kid a parent has it takes away attention and resources.
Well, I think in an intact familly the teens are often not that happy about a new baby either.
But it's different because the older child still gets to live with both their parents. They don't have to do joint custody or experience a loss of parent-child interaction time, and they don't have to deal with a new adult being forced into their home whether they like it or not. They also don't have to deal with stepsiblings if there are any (as distinct from half siblings). A remarriage and a baby after a divorce is a disruption after a disruption after a disruption. It's three disruptions rather than one.
So, by your logic no adult should have more than one kid. As, any 2-3-4th kid regardless of the age difference, takes up parents' time and resources. My husband's ex put all her energy into the AP/boyfriend not the kids so even if they had more kids, none would have been the priority.