Anonymous wrote:
if you have never had children or been married before you really have no way of knowing or understanding what you are getting into.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Well, as someone who was the step-parent once, and "married into" a family, I think what you're seeing is more a reflection of the attitudes of people who put the children at the top of the priority list, ahead of spouses. They do this to the biological parent while still married to them as well as to step-parents, but it's not as obvious because the other biological parent may have the same prioritization of the child, and does have an equal status or footing as a parent.
That is: in a remarriage, the child's needs are a "justification" used to have the biological parent's priorities or desires trump the step-parent's priorities or desires. It's not always just entirely selfish on the part of the biological parent - a lot of times there is a ton of divorce guilt, none of which they feel towards the step parent. There is also a lot of "suck it up, you knew I had the kiddo before you signed on", although most childless step-parents have no idea what they are signing up for.
I have seen biological parents do this to each other plenty - use the kids as a way to get their own way, or to trump the other parent's wishes.
After my experience, which ended in divorce, I didn't even consider dating a single parent. I am happily married and a biological parent now myself, and I cannot imagine ever needing to go through dating or marriage again, but if I somehow wound up a single parent, I might consider another single parent since I also have my own "trump card". That's pretty cynical, but it is a real dynamic...I just heard "my kid, my way" so many times, it's drilled into me.
PP here. This is my point exactly...and how that sort of thinking would kill a marriage.
I don't think it should be "my kid, my way." However, consider this anecdote.
Two good friends of mine divorced when their son was about a year old. He got remarried shortly thereafter with a younger childless woman, who immediately insisted that the little boy call her "Mama" and demanded to be included in all parenting decisions (including whether/when to vaccinate, what kinds of foods the little boy should be allowed to eat, what daycare he should be placed in, etc.). The boy's mom understandably was pretty upset about this and played the "my kid, my way" card as often as necessary.
Yes, but my point was that the "my kid, my way" was coming from the father to the step-mother, not from the ex-wife to the step-mother.
the issue lies with the remarried parent, for failing to have appropriate boundaries with his new spouse about parenting. Perhaps he has decided "my kid, my way" is the way of it.
Yes, it does, that was my entire point: the step parent is affected by the parenting decisions made by the ex-spouses and since they are affected, their input has to be taken into consideration, just as the ex-wife who remains a parent gets input. The parent who decides to remarry does take on an extra juggling act - which they also choose freely to do.
And to those who say it's the step-parent's problem because they are an adult who chose to join the family: if you have never had children or been married before you really have no way of knowing or understanding what you are getting into.
As several people have said, in a mentally healthy and responsible household, everyone deserves to have their needs and wants addressed - that's not the same as getting everything your own way, but putting anyone "ahead of" others is basically wrong.
Anonymous wrote:In order for my DH to be viewed by his ex and children as putting his "first children first" he would have to:
Give them every dollar they ask for, no matter how much, how frequently, or how ridiculous the request.
Drop everything in his life, his other children's lives, his job, family,etc for every whim they asked for of his time.
Never remarry or have additional children.
Have a job that he can leave anytime to meet their demands while still being paid enough to afford all of their request on top of legal obligations.
You people don't get it. There's no winning in these situations.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Well, as someone who was the step-parent once, and "married into" a family, I think what you're seeing is more a reflection of the attitudes of people who put the children at the top of the priority list, ahead of spouses. They do this to the biological parent while still married to them as well as to step-parents, but it's not as obvious because the other biological parent may have the same prioritization of the child, and does have an equal status or footing as a parent.
That is: in a remarriage, the child's needs are a "justification" used to have the biological parent's priorities or desires trump the step-parent's priorities or desires. It's not always just entirely selfish on the part of the biological parent - a lot of times there is a ton of divorce guilt, none of which they feel towards the step parent. There is also a lot of "suck it up, you knew I had the kiddo before you signed on", although most childless step-parents have no idea what they are signing up for.
I have seen biological parents do this to each other plenty - use the kids as a way to get their own way, or to trump the other parent's wishes.
After my experience, which ended in divorce, I didn't even consider dating a single parent. I am happily married and a biological parent now myself, and I cannot imagine ever needing to go through dating or marriage again, but if I somehow wound up a single parent, I might consider another single parent since I also have my own "trump card". That's pretty cynical, but it is a real dynamic...I just heard "my kid, my way" so many times, it's drilled into me.
PP here. This is my point exactly...and how that sort of thinking would kill a marriage.
I don't think it should be "my kid, my way." However, consider this anecdote.
Two good friends of mine divorced when their son was about a year old. He got remarried shortly thereafter with a younger childless woman, who immediately insisted that the little boy call her "Mama" and demanded to be included in all parenting decisions (including whether/when to vaccinate, what kinds of foods the little boy should be allowed to eat, what daycare he should be placed in, etc.). The boy's mom understandably was pretty upset about this and played the "my kid, my way" card as often as necessary.
Yes, but my point was that the "my kid, my way" was coming from the father to the step-mother, not from the ex-wife to the step-mother.
the issue lies with the remarried parent, for failing to have appropriate boundaries with his new spouse about parenting. Perhaps he has decided "my kid, my way" is the way of it.
Yes, it does, that was my entire point: the step parent is affected by the parenting decisions made by the ex-spouses and since they are affected, their input has to be taken into consideration, just as the ex-wife who remains a parent gets input. The parent who decides to remarry does take on an extra juggling act - which they also choose freely to do.
And to those who say it's the step-parent's problem because they are an adult who chose to join the family: if you have never had children or been married before you really have no way of knowing or understanding what you are getting into.
As several people have said, in a mentally healthy and responsible household, everyone deserves to have their needs and wants addressed - that's not the same as getting everything your own way, but putting anyone "ahead of" others is basically wrong.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Well, as someone who was the step-parent once, and "married into" a family, I think what you're seeing is more a reflection of the attitudes of people who put the children at the top of the priority list, ahead of spouses. They do this to the biological parent while still married to them as well as to step-parents, but it's not as obvious because the other biological parent may have the same prioritization of the child, and does have an equal status or footing as a parent.
That is: in a remarriage, the child's needs are a "justification" used to have the biological parent's priorities or desires trump the step-parent's priorities or desires. It's not always just entirely selfish on the part of the biological parent - a lot of times there is a ton of divorce guilt, none of which they feel towards the step parent. There is also a lot of "suck it up, you knew I had the kiddo before you signed on", although most childless step-parents have no idea what they are signing up for.
I have seen biological parents do this to each other plenty - use the kids as a way to get their own way, or to trump the other parent's wishes.
After my experience, which ended in divorce, I didn't even consider dating a single parent. I am happily married and a biological parent now myself, and I cannot imagine ever needing to go through dating or marriage again, but if I somehow wound up a single parent, I might consider another single parent since I also have my own "trump card". That's pretty cynical, but it is a real dynamic...I just heard "my kid, my way" so many times, it's drilled into me.
PP here. This is my point exactly...and how that sort of thinking would kill a marriage.
I don't think it should be "my kid, my way." However, consider this anecdote.
Two good friends of mine divorced when their son was about a year old. He got remarried shortly thereafter with a younger childless woman, who immediately insisted that the little boy call her "Mama" and demanded to be included in all parenting decisions (including whether/when to vaccinate, what kinds of foods the little boy should be allowed to eat, what daycare he should be placed in, etc.). The boy's mom understandably was pretty upset about this and played the "my kid, my way" card as often as necessary.
the issue lies with the remarried parent, for failing to have appropriate boundaries with his new spouse about parenting. Perhaps he has decided "my kid, my way" is the way of it.
Anonymous wrote:Putting the kids first does not mean they get everything the kids and ex wife ask for financially, timewise, or otherwise.
Divorce is not some sort of unlimited ATM or guarantee that your precious snowflake will be put on a pedestal the rest of their life.
If the ex says it's in the kids best interest to go on an expensive trip, and that trip is not feasible because DH can barely pay his mortgage, that does not mean he's not putting his kid first.
Anonymous wrote:To all you "you knew what you were getting into" folks..If you are older and find yourself divorced, good luck finding a partner who doesn't have kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have a story for you OP.
My ex lives with a woman he's been with for years. They are all but married except legally. Woman purchased an expensive house. Woman made my ex call me.
"Because the new house has a bedroom just for our kids (that would be, the guest room), I am reducing your child support by $300 a month." The two of them decided that this money would be earmarked to defray the cost of her mortgage in exchange for the bedroom my kids sleep in four nights a month.
Now, my ex is a real jerk, but I could tell by his voice that he was extremely uncomfortable with this phone call. He was doing this because the new woman made him. He was doing this because he was putting her first, over our kids.
Of course CS doesn't work that way. You don't get to just cut it because your GF bought a house. So I politely declined to have my CS reduced and that was the end of it.
My point, obviously GF is acting in her own self-interest. It is not in the best interests of my kids to have their CS cut by $300 a month. This would seriously impact their quality of life.
GF is a decent person, I don't particularly dislike her. But I was really shocked that my children's stepmom would suggest something so selfish and absurd. If she needs $300 a month that badly she shouldn't have purchased the house.
In my anecdotal experience, not all step parents can be relied on to consistently act in the best interests of the step children. They do not all have the same degree of innate self-sacrifice that a nuclear-family or original parent hopefully has. People are selfish.
That situation calls for a good lawyer to clarify child support issues, which are ongoing under the law.
If a child needs more support than is currently given, a court will order an increase in child support.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I love all the women on this thread who think they should still be able to call all the shots with their ex-husbands after divorce. It doesn't work that way ladies. His new wife calls the shots. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
The issue with the money in these blended families is that typically the man is paying for child support, alimony, and health care, not to mention extras. And because it's NEVER enough for the first wife, they always ask for more.
Doesn't matter what the custodial parent "asks" for. It matters what the court order says.
If you don't want your horrible ex wife demanding that you pay your fair share for the kids you made, don't have kids. Don't get divorced.
Sometimes it's the ex wife that wanted the divorce in the first place.
A point irrelevant to the needs of the child under this scenario.