Children want to live with their dad, I’m devastated

[HawaiiCount]

3 DC. Split with their father when they were little, now early/mid/late teens.

Initially we did the every other week/weekend thing. Ex re-married 6 years ago and we’ve done 50/50 since. No maintenance either way.

Our household incomes are poles apart. He and his wife are very wealthy. I work full time but still eligible for universal credit. Very different houses, they share bedrooms at mine, no foreign holidays, expected to do chores, cook dinner etc.

Older teen started staying at their dads more often around 6 months ago. Two younger teens have now said they want to move to their fathers and come to mine every second weekend.

Im devastated. I hid it when we were discussing and said I’d think about it and needed some time to think how that would work. The second they left I broke down. These are my babies, I grew them from scratch, I never thought I would be in a position where my children don’t live with me and I see them twice a month. I never wanted any of this, the reason we split is because of his affair, karma is bullshit, he’s remarried, wealthy and now has our children. I have nothing.

I want to be fair to the kids and support what they need but my heart is broken

I think longer term the kids may way judge their father very harshly when they are old enough to appreciate that he left their mother in this situation.

This ⬆️

Absolutely this!

How do we know he ‘persuaded’ them? It sounds as if they asked him, there was a discussion and they then let OP know they wanted to live with their father.

When they asked him, should he have refused because it would be unfair in their mother?

@whumpthereitis I agree with you. The double standards on MN are ridiculous.

Imagine if OP wrote “DC have been 50/50 with me and ex but they now want to live with me FT. Their house is cold, they have to share rooms and now they are teens they would like to spend more time with me. I have the financial means to support them. Ex is struggling financially. I think ex will be really upset if they leave so should I say no?”
MN response: “Of course they should be with you! You are their mother. A cold house with shared rooms is unacceptable. Do not let ex gas light you. Your DC deserve more” There would be no mention of greedy, ungrateful teens.

You are incorrect.

If the father was doing his best, focusing on them and working hard to support them (having done the lion’s share since they were babies) then I would certainly castigate the OP for trying to split him from the DC.

Such a good post.
I hope the OP who has understandably retired from this thread (and I would have done the same given some of the nasty self absorbed posts) takes some comfort from the mass of women who understand and empathise.
Look after yourself OP. Allow yourself to share your feelings with those who you know won't judge. Your children will know deep down that what their Dad has manipulated is unkind and monumentally selfish - but they're teenagers and understandably self centred. Keep that door open as they will return - and use the space to invest some time in yourself.

From everything we’ve heard about this though, no parent is trying to split the parent from the other. The younger two children have decided that they want to spend more time with their father (as the older sibling already does). I don’t think fairness to either parent comes into it when the children are old enough to decide where they want to spend most of the time and that parent has the means and ability to care for them. It’s very sad for the OP that her children will be spending less time with her, but I don’t think it’s unfair.

It was the failed ivf journey and then suddenly wanting the children living with them

Also the way it was done without any consultation. Not trying to work things out so everyone is happy, Just telling HawaiiCourt what her life will now be.
You are only going to see your children EOW

Making it so unpleasant at the mothers house so the children won’t want to return. Why if the problem with the mums house is because of the mums income then couldn’t their father pay the heating bills instead of letting his children live in a cold house.

Only letting them do fun things with the children
Again if there is such a disparity between income why couldn’t the father pay for a few nice treats his children could do with their mother
This bit hasn’t played out there yet but I wonder if there will be some sort of “deflation” to anything HawaiiCourt plans to do. I.E she mentions she is going to take children somewhere on her next visit I.e to see a particular theatre production or to the Zoo and they take the children a few days before.
Or she plans to book to go on holiday and suddenly the children need money to pay for holidays the school has organised etc so she is presented with a bill that wipes out the holiday plans

It is not clear whether it is the step mum who is the wealthy person in this or the money comes from the father or both of them to make them so wealthy

If there is any suggestion it is the father then I would want to know where the money came from and was it hidden/misvalued during the divorce.
In hindsight the EOW he accepted 10 years ago should have stayed and CM rising with every salary increase.
Things would look a lot different if that had happened

Sometimes being reasonable for your children ends up with people thinking you will accept anything no matter how hurtful or cruel it is to you

It's only a double standard if all else is equal.

I am so sorry OP.
I think that if this plan is going to significantly reduce your income to the point where you have to downsize, you really will have to explain this to your DC. I can imagine your ex would use this to tell them that you were so glad to be rid of them that you have moved and are living the single life.
I guess you will have to research the financial implications.
What a sad situation.

You have no idea what the impact of the failed IVF, if any, was on this decision making. You’re assuming it was father and stepmother led too, when there’s every chance it was led by the children themselves. They’re independent entities, not inanimate objects.

you’ve already decided you dislike these people so you’re treating their motives as obviously nefarious. It couldn’t just be that he’s grown as a father, loves his children, and wants to accommodate their wishes to live with him. He’s not obliged to discount the wishes of his children, who are old enough to have formed their own opinions, to be ‘fair’ to his ex wife.

There’s no guarantee that the kids wouldn’t be making the same decision if OP were wealthy herself. Aside from this however, a divorce that was concluded with a financial order a decade ago is going to be nigh on impossible to challenge. Why on earth encourage OP to spend thousands of pounds she doesn’t have on futile endeavours?

And it never is. But it won't stop people from refusing to see that because men have dicks.

Well the father is clearly focusing on them now and respecting their wish to live with him.

Does his failings when they were younger mean they can’t live with him now? Yes it was unfair the OP was stuck doing the lions share when the DC were small but, and this will sound harsh, fair or unfair doesn’t really come into it at this point. DC wish to live with their dad. Preventing them from doing so because their dad didn’t do his share of parenting when they were younger doesn’t make sense.

I get the OP’s sense of injustice but her DC do not feel indebted to her. That may come later when they are older.

And yes, her ex could have set up a family meeting to discuss everything but the outcome would have been the same wouldn’t it? What would the OP have said or done in that meeting? I really doubt her ex has twisted their arms here so she would have just heard her DC repeating why they want to leave. The younger 2 want to join their older sibling in a more comfortable setting. I do not understand why everyone is blaming the ex and his ‘child stealing’ wife🙄

I don’t think the oh so clever if you reversed the situation posts help. Feels unfair the mum does the hard bit then dad gets the (well depending on the type of teen I guess) but the less drudgey potentially easier and fun bit of the parenting journey.

It may be unfair, but it should go without saying that fairness is not guaranteed in life. I mean, it’s not ‘fair’ that OP’s children should have their wishes discounted and be treated like property to be doled out on a schedule. It’s not ‘fair’ that they be called all sorts of selfish arseholes for wanting to live full time with one parent ether, but apparently they should suck that up. Choosing to have children does not mean that you own them, nor does it mean that they should forever be indebted to you no matter their own feelings.

He is equally their parent, and they clearly think of him as parent enough, no matter how many nappies he may or may not have changed, to want to live with him.

OP isn’t asking them to be “forever” indebted ffs. They’re still children. There are lots of ways this could be arranged without her having to lose them. And she’ll never have another child - her ex may well do. He has so much more than her - thanks to his earlier choices to put himself first; that was in no way “fair” of course, but OP took it on the chin - yet he still wants more.

The callousness of some posters here is astounding.

And life would be a lot fairer for many if others weren’t so selfish.

She’s not losing them. Not living with her full time does not mean that she’ll have no relationship with them.

Children should not be made to feel guilty because they want to live mainly with one parent. OP’s wants are not more important than theirs, and them choosing to prioritise their own feelings on this matter does not mean that they don’t appreciate it, give back to her, or love her.

‘He still wants more’

• or the children want this change, and he’s willing and able to provide for them.

Having sympathy for OP is not dependent on demonising the ex, the stepmother, or the children.

Of course there are double standards when it comes to mothers and fathers.
The same double standards that mean in the vast majority of cases the mother is the primary carer.
The mother the one who sacrifices her opportunities to make the kind of money to fund a lifestyle that teenagers find attractive in order to care for her children.
The one who stays with the family when the father decides to leave.
The one who offers the humdrum day to day family security rather than the shiny weekend treats.
If these double standards lead to a feeling that it's much harsher for the OP as a mother to lose her children living with her, than for their father, who chose to leave and chose not to use his considerable means to improve his children's life in the OPs home, to make do with 50/50, then that's fine by me.
How the OP found out is the least of it quite honestly. Though I personally think him very cowardly in allowing it to come from the children, as he would have known very well the impact on the OP and he allowed the children to face that alone.

A couple of practical suggestions for the OP. Hope you're ok, the shock of this news must have been horrible for you.

1. Your ex is a high-earner right? That being the case then there's no point in him claiming the child benefit as he'll just have to pay it back again. Would he be amenable to letting you keep claiming it?

2. I get the impression (apologies if I'm wrong) that you're not currently paying maintainance for your eldest who is already with his Dad. If this is the case, would your ex be OK with not claiming maintainence for your other kids when/if they move in FT with their Dad?

It sounds like it would be in everyone's interests for you to be able to put a roof over your kids heads EOW and regardless of whether it's every day or once a month the size of your house required is the same. The financial implications of you losing the child benefit and paying maintainence for 3 kids are going to be cataclysmic for you.

Maybe it's in your interest to be try and work with their father not against him?

I wish you all the best.

I did this at 14ish moved in with my dad full time and cut the visits to my mums, partly it did make life easier and 50/50 was awful, his house was nicer but there were other reasons too.
Keep the door open in terms of being there to talk.
My mum constantly guilting me about it and initially trying to just say no, really broke our relationship quite a bit.

Well if he, being wealthier than she (thanks to his me me me choices) and now removing the DC against her will was to claim maintenance he would be an utter prick. I sincerely hope that no court would entertain it, otherwise it would be an absolute mockery of what the law is supposed to be for.

I get the impression (apologies if I'm wrong) that you're not currently paying maintainance for your eldest who is already with his Dad. If this is the case, would your ex be OK with not claiming maintainence for your other kids when/if they move in FT with their Dad

it is never ok for a parent not to pay for the children they created.

massive double standard.

fwiw I had similar as a stepmum. Eldest sdc wanted to move in with us ft to attend a college walking distance from our house.

mum stopped it. All the reasons on this thread, can’t afford it, not paying maintenance to have my kid taken off me, i’ve done all the parenting etc (as in wouldn’t let him have a say in any decision regarding their care as she was mum)

really affected the relationship between the dc and their dad. Who still don’t know it was her who had the affair.

It's fine if it's in the best interests of the kids. Parents are allowed (encouraged in fact) to come to agreements between themselves if possible. The CMS rules don't in my opinion reflect the complexities of this particular situation so I think a bit of common sense is needed.

re: the poster who said "I sincerely hope that no court would entertain it".... That's utterly wrong. No court is required, the CMS would handle the claim and in this example it's an open and shut case.