Elder daughter father giving rules about my younger kids

Who said anything about a full sized piano? Uprights are available for free on Facebook. Her husband already suggested getting another piano, so apparently they do have the space for one.

It’s up to OP and her husband to support their child in learning the piano, it’s not the responsibility of either her daughter or her ex.

The DD spends more time at the OP’s home than her fathers because he is too busy and its not convenient for him to do otherwise. The OP may be happy to have her DD with her most of the time but don’t pretend its for any reason other than the DF’s convenience.

Don't let the facts get in the way:

He sees her often, they have a good and close relationship but and I have to confess I am delighted, that he can’t have her 50:50 as I want her with me.

It's nothing to do with damage and everything to do with ownership and boundaries in a blended house. Most people resident in a home would buy a communal piano. The exception here is that a non resident person has made the purchase and agreed for it to be situated in the OPs home for use of their shared daughter. They have no paternal or financial responsibility for the OPs other children - they have their own father.

It's not the OPs fault for not having extra bedrooms. But it was her responsibility to consider this eventuality when discussions around the piano initially happened. Failure to plan is to plan to fail.

The OP has admitted that she took her eye off the ball with her daughter, its hardly a shocker if the Ex mentions this. It's a direct result of the family blending and new children being added.

If that were the case she wouldn’t say that would be the outcome of removing the piano.

Right now they coparent well and the situation pertaining to their daughter’s residency suits them all. This can change, and if the daughter wants more time with her father, or to be able to access his houses even if he’s not there, there’s nothing to say he wouldn’t be willing or able to accommodate that.

‘Fears retaliation’? Sure. She knows she’s not entitled to get precisely what she wants here, and she’s not going to pursue a course of action that will result in something she’s explicitly said is the last thing she wants.

Presumably at the time OP started the thread she was pissed off and unsure as to what to do. She then updated, having come to a decision, and then left the thread because she had zero interest in defending that position or debating it any further.

She’s accommodating what she and her ex agreed on. They’re accommodating their daughter, not each other.

You wouldn’t have agreed to this in the first place? No shit. You are however not OP, who did. You may be prepared for your child to go without ‘luxuries’, but the degree to which you can enforce that is dependent on you being on the same page as their other parent. OP can choose not to provide them herself, but she cannot prevent her ex from doing so. She cannot make her daughter share her opinion on the matter, and she cannot prevent a 12 year old from deciding to spend more time with her father or at her father’s house. Again, OP is looking at the reality of her situation and what is within her control, not what you think the reality should be, or the level of control you think she should have.

‘It must be shared’. Nope. Evidently not.

The reality is that the child cannot vote with her feet because its not convenient to the Ex to have her even 50/50. It is apparently convenient for him to have the OP store a baby grand in communal space and dictate how the household uses that space.

The 12 year old needs to learn to share, a half way decent father would teach her that instead of using his oversized “gift” as a way to control the OP’s family.

The OP is reluctant to move the piano because she fears , probably rightly , that her daughter will vote with her feet . However this is a 12 yo , who basically is dictating what 2 adults / 2 children can / cannot do in their home , where will it end ? Unless she always cedes to her eldest child’s demands on everything the child will potentially walk , this child now knows this as she has won the battle of the piano . Eventually , in the near future there will be a hill the OP has to die on .

If the OP is so certain of the correct course of action then why did she start this thread? If, as you say, she is reluctant to ‘die on this hill’, I wonder whether that is because she fears retaliation in other quarters. Which is a sad way in which to live one’s life. I’d rather my dd went without a couple of luxuries than I made my household walk on broken glass to accommodate the whims of my ex. And let us not forget that this ‘luxury’ in question is a slight better piano for a grade 5 beginner who will never notice the difference if a cheaper one is purchased for her (unless it is pointed out to her).

That the DD wants the piano to herself too is irrelevant, do you let your children run your household? My own DS got a new piano as one of his birthday presents last year, but if he tried to stop his younger siblings from playing on it he would get short shrift. Thankfully he never would.

The only circumstance in which I would accommodate the ex’s request would be if he also subsidised a house that was large enough to have a dedicated music room for the dd (which obviously isn’t going to happen).

If this was a Stradivarius then there would be no issue, that is a personal instrument and I would be happy for a child to keep that locked up in her bedroom. But a piano is furniture. It’s massive. It is to be shared. If the ex want to take the piano back now then fine, it was quite generous of him to provide one in the first place (although I suppose it was compensation for being a bit of an absentee dad). The OP could get a really decent acoustic piano for <£1k, people are just giving them away. Can she not afford that?!

This pretty much stops OP's younger children from learning the piano though. Who has room in their home for two full-size pianos, one for OP's elder daughter and the other for OP's other child who is now learning the piano?

The only way to resolve this is for the original piano to be kept at OP's ex-DH's house and for OP to buy a new piano for the whole family to use.

The DD spends more time at the OP’s home than her fathers because he is too busy and its not convenient for him to do otherwise. The OP may be happy to have her DD with her most of the time but don’t pretend its for any reason other than the DF’s convenience.

Piano’s are not “damaged” or affected in anyway by more junior learners playing on them. Ask any piano tuner - the biggest factor in a piano going out of tune quickly is insufficient use not over use. Any child learning piano knows that its an instrument which is conventionally shared and played by others - even when they are a professional, you don’t pack up your piano and ship it to the Carnegie Hall, you play the instrument which is there.

I would never have let him manipulate me into hosting a sodding great piece of furniture for him but if its there, its needs to be there on the basis that its shared. Its not a barbie doll or a 1/4 size violin which can stay in her room therefore it needs to be for family use. Problems of being in a blended family are being created by the DF with this ridiculous rule - how on earth can she build a positive relationship with her siblings when her DF is behaving like this?

The idea that its the OP’s fault because her house doesn’t have spare rooms for multiple baby grands is ridiculous. The DF is using his money to control the ex’s family (did you miss the bit that he objected to her having other children at all?) and putting his daughter in the middle.

Op has to make judgements based on her actual reality, not her or your preferred one. She’s the one that has to live with the real-life consequences of whatever action she chooses to take, and she’s not going to die on this particular hill because strangers on mumsnet think she should. She said more than once that your preferred ‘solution’ to this would result in the outcome she least desires, that she’s unwilling to countenance. That isn’t being a doormat, that’s being prudent.

Her ex is backing up his child, who doesn’t want to share the piano her father provided for her. He’s not being unreasonable to restate to OP what was established when they agreed on the piano being at her house in the first place. It’s not there to be communal property for her family, it’s there to be used by their daughter. This wasn’t something forced on her.

What happens if the younger daughter progresses? Well, then she’ll have to reconsider getting another piano.

Yes, the OP is clearly a doormat as I said before. She claimed earlier that her ex wasn’t controlling or coercive when they were together, but I wonder.

The OP said she didn’t want her front room turned into a music shop - ie there would be two pianos in one of there general living spaces, which most people would agree is ludicrous. Ironically she also said that she didn’t want there to be a division - but then is planning to buy her you ger daughter a crappy keyboard to learn on! If trying to learn on a keyboard doesn’t put younger dd off for life and she actually manages to move through the grades, what is OP going to do then? She’ll still have the same 2 piano problem.

The rest of it is irrelevant. This thread isn’t about one dd having more than the others because of a different dad. This is about the ex expecting unreasonable accommodations from the OP. Like paying for private school but expecting OP to drive a 60min school run in the opposite direction from work to get there. Or buying her a car and expecting OP to park her own on the road to accommodate it on the driveway.

He can dictate that either OP accepts the rules in place, or he remove the piano. She has decided on the former.

Her husband’s solution was to get another piano for their children, so clearly that is something that can be accommodated.

No matter what, her eldest will always have more than her youngest by virtue of her being the only one with a wealthy parent. She may already go to private school when they go to state. She may have university paid for outright while her siblings rely on loans. She may get driving lessons and new car, or be given/bought a property. That’s just the reality of the situation, and not something OP can either hide from them or change.

She doesn't want the Daughter going to the Ex's house so she won't move it there. It's easier to blame her Ex for being controlling. The OP is possessive about time with her daughter. Maybe the piano was put in the house because of this possessiveness and that was the compromise, no piano or a piano at the OP's house.

Secondly the daughter has been damaged by the blending, enough to affect her schooling. Given that, taking something that was purchased exclusively for her, and that will have sentimental value, and saying she must share with children who are not related her father will be damaging. The location of the gift is likely of the OPs doing, her lack of planning is not her daughters mess to fix.

As the OP said:
He sees her often, they have a good and close relationship but and I have to confess I am delighted, that he can’t have her 50:50 as I want her with me.

I don't think it matters about musical experience. It matters that this a blended family so some items in the house were purchased by a non resident parent who does not owe the other children anything, even access to gift acquired for his daughter. In a blended family a gift form a non resident parent is not just a gift.

Sadly the OP's daughter has clearly lucked out in the lottery of blended family resident parents.

She doesn't want that because it would mean more time with her father:

He sees her often, they have a good and close relationship but and I have to confess I am delighted, that he can’t have her 50:50 as I want her with me.

Any attempt to move it is less about disadvantaging the daughter and more about ensuring that she gets the lion share of the time with her, regardless of the cost to her daughters mental health. Maybe one day her daughter will stop being so 'precious' and stop disappointing her.🙄

Then the OP needs to stop pandering to her eldest and get a family piano and this piano can move to her dads house .

So best to just buy a key on ebay. You're welcome.

That would be so illegal. That would be property damage, and not only would the op be responsible for its repair, the locksmith would get in trouble for opening a lock on something for someone other than the owner.

Op does not own the piano or any of the other instruments. They belong solely to her eldest child. Period. OP doesn't get a say in who can use them.

As someone who knows next to nothing about pianos, I can't understand why the ex has an issue with the other child playing it? Is there some sort of damage that could be done? I thought it was fine for them to be played regularly.

If it's not about anything happening to the piano then it seems ridiculous to be insisting it sits there locked rather than someone getting enjoyment out of playing it. It wouldn't have any negative impact on the older daughter or the ex-husband.

Brutally, your daughter is grade 5 at age 12 - playing a good upright or digital piano is going to make zero difference to her progress or future musical career Some digitals can even recreate full size grand sound and touch.

You say your DH is not abusive or coercive - well its pretty manipulative to expect you to host a large instrument and dictate not only what you have to house but also how it is to be used. Bearing in mind you are providing the bulk of parenting because it suits him.

Pianos are not like small instruments, they take up space and need to be shared. All young piano players in families learn this and your DD needs to learn this as well - some things have to be shared. I would not be happy if my eldest was being encouraged to behave in this selfish way - its unfair on her as well as the siblings. Its nonsense to suggest that a learner on lower grades can “damage” a piano by playing it. What other nonsense is DH filling her head with about her siblings (bearing in mind he doesn’t think they should exist)?

As for the Disney dad problem with DD - yes it can be a problem but most children grow up to be adults and can look back and recognise which parent was there for the hard yards and which thought the cheque book was their primary input.

What is it about men who are “too busy” to fully share parenting that they think its ok to dictate their ex wives’ family lives and other children.

Yes , the user name says it all !

He has the authority to reclaim the piano but not to dictate its use in the OP’s house. I believe the OP has said this is a baby grand so taking up a huge amount of space. Ridiculous snd petty to try and stop anyone else from using it - he must realise this puts OP in an impossible position because very few people live in a house where multiple pianos can be accommodated.

No she doesn’t. She’s talked about getting a keyboard for the younger dd to learn on, not a digital piano. The OP won’t be getting a proper digital piano for the younger dd while the elder dd still has her piano, for the same reasons that she won’t get a second acoustic piano.

That’s completely bonkers. It’s not as if she’s an infant prodigy with a Steinway!

He has jurisdiction over his own belongings, and the piano is his.

The piano isn’t at OP’s house for his benefit or hers, they agreed this so it would be available to their daughter. It was never there to be a communal instrument, which OP knew. It’s been there years without it being treated as if it were. OP also knows that her daughter doesn’t want to share it, and doesn’t have to. The elder DD is a child, sure, but at 12 she isn’t without autonomy.

OP doesn’t want it removed because it would mean her daughter would spend more time at her father’s house/with her father, hence why she’s reintroduced the ‘eldest daughter only’ rule.