Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it sounds heavenly for all involved. Everyone, including the children, have the opportunity to more slowly transition into the family unit. Everyone gets their space. I think if there were children involved it would be weird.

*wasn't

I agree. i think it is awesome the kids can have their own house with their dad without his new wife being there.

#heaven

What does that say about the marriage though?

What do you mean? People can spend time apart in marriage. In fact, there are marriages in which people are forced, by work or circumstance, to spend a great deal of time apart. Have you heard of military deployment?

Maybe his house isn't as nice as he thinks.

Anonymous wrote:What do you all think of this situation:

Two 40-somethings get married. They’ve both been divorced before, one (he) has school-aged children. They both owned homes, though his is much nicer/bigger than hers. She still occasionally retreats to her old house for a couple nights.

It’s JUST like Carrie in SATC only in real life!

This can’t be healthy for the marriage, can it?

She claims she doesn’t feel comfortable in his home and she needs the familiarity of her home, so every week, she spends days at her home. They can’t move just yet due to a custody agreement regarding schooling the children.

If feasible the couple should move into a new joint house or fully redecorate his house so that she feels at home.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you care?

Maybe I’m the guy. ?

Are you?

No way. Guys don't reference Carrie from Sex and the City. Sounds like a nosy SIL to me.

I travel 2-3 days per week, every week, 6 months out of the year. I don't see how this is any different than me enjoying my time away in a hotel and DH enjoying his time at home without me. It keeps us sane.

This could be me!

Except in our case we also live in two different cities (an hour apart).

He has kids 50% of the time. He needs to stay where he is, he has a great job, nice home, and his life is in City A. I don't have kids but have a fully settled life with a very good job in City B.

In addition, we were both single for a Lin time and very set in our independent ways and in having control of our lives.

His kids has not been impacted by our relationship and he likes it that way. Their lives are already complex enough. They have met me, but other than the occasional time they hear us in te phone, their lives have continued unchanged.

He gets a good mix of still feeling like 100% of his time and energy goes to his kids during dad time and has a relationship that fits into other times.

It isn't perfect but it works! Hopefully when we retire we will then get to grow old together.

Anonymous wrote:This does not seem weird to me. Blended families find lots of ways to make it work and this sounds like a good one for everyone's sanity! If it is financially and geographically feasible, I say great.

+1.

She keeps her buck at the other house.

I can see this happening in my situation. I live in Arlington and have a child in the school system. I'm happy with my commute and the schools. Say I met someone and loved him, but he lived in Fairfax and had kids in that school system. He was happy with the school and commute. I can see getting married and spending some nights at his place and some at mine. why should the kids be uprooted?

I would kill for a house of my own to retreat to.

It could work, but only if both of you are onboard. Did you discuss this prior to the wedding?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it sounds heavenly for all involved. Everyone, including the children, have the opportunity to more slowly transition into the family unit. Everyone gets their space. I think if there were children involved it would be weird.

no, it's weird.
- BTDT on the divorce, kids and re-marriage. No way either one of us would have accepted anything less than 100% commitment to the new blended family and new home (and we both still have our old homes - but they are rented and we consider them as assets, not safe havens to which either of us could "escape")

All the teens/tweens/20-something I know would love to have their parent alone without the entanglement of and "other" adult to deal with.

Maybe you should ask your kids. BTW, steps should not be 100% they are NOT the parent.

well maybe you have screwed up friends with screwed up kids. our kids would not want the non-bio parent to be out of the house. but you do you.

or maybe you don't know you own kids. None of the kids I know complain to their parent, they complain to their friends. They retreat to our house to get away.

#headinsand

do whatever you need to do so that you can pretend you sleep well at night. jeez, you are one clueless bitch.

I have obviously hit a nerve. If you don't trust your relationship enough to give you spouse some room when you kids are over then you might want to evaluate the root of your insecurity.

Clearly one party is feeling pretty uneasy so this arrangement doesn't work.

For what it's worth, my fiance mentioned keeping his place for a while after we got marries and I lost my s*it. No, if I'm risking everything (I have a child who will also have an adjustment period) you don't get to run away to your safe place if things get hard. What is the point of getting married then?

Anonymous wrote:I think it makes a lot of sense. She has a retreat that she feels is her own space, and she's not disrupting the kids' lives by putting her stamp all over the place they consider home.

If they were 25 and just starting out together I would think it was really weird, but as older people with longer individual histories, and kids of his own to consider, I think it sounds great!

I'm 14:45 and forgot to add I'm a 37 divorcee (women) of 2 and this is my exact feelings and our situation.