Anonymous wrote:I am the OP. i know i cannot take them in. The pressure from my mother that i should be doing more to help them has led me to question myself and i just feel so rotten about this. can't help feeling guilty in a weird way i don't really understand.

Your mother is feeling guilty that SHE is not helping and is obeying her husband about not helping. You shouldn't feel guilty, and if you need to be brutally blunt with your mother, so be it. Let her know you are not the solution, that your brother needs to get a real job that meets his family's needs better, and that you just cannot give up your own source of income or sacrifice your family's precarious stability because your brother can't get/keep a full-time job. You will NOT sacrifice your own kids and put your whole family into a downward-spiral situation. It's not on you to suddenly be looking after all those kids (plus your brother) for an indeterminate and possibly lengthy amount of time. Give her push-back on her own situation of not being willing to force the issue with her husband. After all, SHE is your brother's MOM; SHE should be taking the lead on helping.

Why do I keep seeing so many disfunctional relationships between mothers and sons? It's everywhere! It's the mothers crippling their son's ability to grow up and function. Why??

You have already determined that you can't take them in (and rightly so) and you should be firm about it. Stop letting your mother "guilt" you into to helping your brother. If anything, you could probably use some help yourself. Your brother has been enabled by your mom and other family members and he is expecting them to provide financial rescue once again.

Yes, it is a distressing situation but you are going to be in distress yourself if you you try to carry him when your priority should be your own family.

Be prepared to distance yourself from your enabling mom--she is going to bring out her claws on this one. State your position with no expectation of your mother's approval. And then don't engage her any further about it.

It is unrealistic to think that you can say no and still have your mother's support. Her support is going to your brother as usual.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
To the PP who refused to take in a toddler without his problem parent, I think that's a bit harsh on your part.

OP is talking about a whole family living in a house with a home-business.

What was your excuse PP?

Single mom of two. I also have multiple chronic illnesses. We live in a small 2 br apartment.

I'm PP you were responding to - my sincere apologies, and I hope you are doing well.

Thanks --I know that it sounds callous without the background. I'm hanging in there. One reason to stay in this overpriced area is that the medical care is top notch.

Even if you were perfectly healthy, taking on a toddler is a lot of work. If you don't have a lot of space and money to spare, it could make a huge impact on your life! People are far too quick to judge.

Anonymous wrote:For those who have said they would take in the family or "would if they could," under what circumstances would you actually do this? It sounds like the situation OP describes would not be temporary. And it involves multiple children - which presumably would be in her care if the brother is to be able to work. Is this correct OP? Would you be able to arrange and pay for daycare when they are not in school or be able to take care of them yourself? How many of you would really be able to handle taking care of several young children in addition to your own on an ongoing basis? Be honest.

I could realistically take in 2-3 of my siblings' children on a temporary basis and see to it that they're cared for and loved, but I'd need to either have financial support from my sibling (or if my parents decided to foot the bill) or have guardianship signed over the the duration of the stay so that I can make use of the childcare subsidy available to me through my employer. ANd I know not all families are in the position, but in mine, if that sort of situation arose, probably all the siblings would pitch in a bit - some to cover groceries, some to cover summer camp, while the other sibling took on the day to day duties of childcare. So if my brother got sick, his wife left him or wasn't able to manage, and my parents weren't in a position to care for the kids, then I could take them until he recovers and I think overall, that would be less traumatic for the kids, so we'd do our best to make it work.

But if one of my siblings wasn't holding down a job and was well and capable, like with OP's brother, I can't imagine me housing the kids would be the best kind of help. My parents would probably take the grandkids in, but I'm not sure how long my dad would give before kicking the adult out for refusing to be responsible. We were always told that you can work and have support or you can be out on your own, but you don't get to just be an adult living off mom & dad's sofa.

I am the OP. i know i cannot take them in. The pressure from my mother that i should be doing more to help them has led me to question myself and i just feel so rotten about this. can't help feeling guilty in a weird way i don't really understand.

Your mom should step up. Don't be strong armed into anything.

Anonymous wrote:OP, obviously you cannot give up your own source of income to let your brother and his kids move in. Why is this even a question? What good would it do anyone if you lost your income? Do what you can to help, and ignore your mother. I'm sorry.

Plus 1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get how one person can tell another person that they have to take in a child. Or even have such a strong opinion about what is right and wrong in this way. This is in regard to pp who did not take in toddler relative. We are talking about the care of children! In my opinion not willing or feeling incapable of taking in a relative's child/children = disqualified! Think about it.

Ok, but what if it means the child goes into the foster care system and lives with strangers?

Sometimes trained and well-equipped strangers are a better choice than relatives who have no experience with kids or are overloaded with the ones they already have.

I wonder what the kids would prefer.

Unless the relatives was someone they actually saw with some frequency, the strangers are probably not much different in a child's mind. My kids would consider a relative they saw once a year or less to be the same as a stranger.

How old are your kids?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who have said they would take in the family or "would if they could," under what circumstances would you actually do this? It sounds like the situation OP describes would not be temporary. And it involves multiple children - which presumably would be in her care if the brother is to be able to work. Is this correct OP? Would you be able to arrange and pay for daycare when they are not in school or be able to take care of them yourself? How many of you would really be able to handle taking care of several young children in addition to your own on an ongoing basis? Be honest.

SAHM so child care is no issue. We'd make it work. The only catch would be I would want legal custody through the court to be able to put them on our insurance.

+1. In the process of taking in two minor children of a relative. Whoever is the primary insured will need to be designated the child's (children's) guardian by the court.

I had a different experience with this. I took in one of my sister's minor children and was able to put her on my insurance by stating that I was the family member primarily responsible for her care and that she lived with me. No one ever required a court appointed designation.

Glad to hear you were successful. DH checked with his HR department and was told he had to be designated the children's guardian.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who have said they would take in the family or "would if they could," under what circumstances would you actually do this? It sounds like the situation OP describes would not be temporary. And it involves multiple children - which presumably would be in her care if the brother is to be able to work. Is this correct OP? Would you be able to arrange and pay for daycare when they are not in school or be able to take care of them yourself? How many of you would really be able to handle taking care of several young children in addition to your own on an ongoing basis? Be honest.

SAHM so child care is no issue. We'd make it work. The only catch would be I would want legal custody through the court to be able to put them on our insurance.

+1. In the process of taking in two minor children of a relative. Whoever is the primary insured will need to be designated the child's (children's) guardian by the court.

I had a different experience with this. I took in one of my sister's minor children and was able to put her on my insurance by stating that I was the family member primarily responsible for her care and that she lived with me. No one ever required a court appointed designation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get how one person can tell another person that they have to take in a child. Or even have such a strong opinion about what is right and wrong in this way. This is in regard to pp who did not take in toddler relative. We are talking about the care of children! In my opinion not willing or feeling incapable of taking in a relative's child/children = disqualified! Think about it.

Ok, but what if it means the child goes into the foster care system and lives with strangers?

Sometimes trained and well-equipped strangers are a better choice than relatives who have no experience with kids or are overloaded with the ones they already have.

I wonder what the kids would prefer.

Unless the relatives was someone they actually saw with some frequency, the strangers are probably not much different in a child's mind. My kids would consider a relative they saw once a year or less to be the same as a stranger.

OP, so tough but stand your ground. Please be explicit to the effect of "I have my own tenuous hold on my finances and creating a floor for my family - this addition would probably rip that out from under us." Hugs to you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get how one person can tell another person that they have to take in a child. Or even have such a strong opinion about what is right and wrong in this way. This is in regard to pp who did not take in toddler relative. We are talking about the care of children! In my opinion not willing or feeling incapable of taking in a relative's child/children = disqualified! Think about it.

Ok, but what if it means the child goes into the foster care system and lives with strangers?

Sometimes trained and well-equipped strangers are a better choice than relatives who have no experience with kids or are overloaded with the ones they already have.

I wonder what the kids would prefer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who have said they would take in the family or "would if they could," under what circumstances would you actually do this? It sounds like the situation OP describes would not be temporary. And it involves multiple children - which presumably would be in her care if the brother is to be able to work. Is this correct OP? Would you be able to arrange and pay for daycare when they are not in school or be able to take care of them yourself? How many of you would really be able to handle taking care of several young children in addition to your own on an ongoing basis? Be honest.

SAHM so child care is no issue. We'd make it work. The only catch would be I would want legal custody through the court to be able to put them on our insurance.

+1. In the process of taking in two minor children of a relative. Whoever is the primary insured will need to be designated the child's (children's) guardian by the court.