AIBU or is OH?

[hippoesque]

Will only give a brief description as I'm not sure if people involved are on here :)

We have one DC and another on the way. Finally got around to sorting wills recently and we have to decide who we would want to be their legal guardian. I was under the impression we would have my sibling (not in a relationship but we see them daily and they live where we live) and OH was under the impression that his sibling would be the more likely choice (married with children of their own, nice enough but live far away and move around a lot. We see them 3 or 4 times a year)

I'm unwilling to uproot our children if the worst happens and send them away from what is familiar to them when my family are here. OH is unwilling to believe that anything other than a married couple would be the best choice. We are not married FWIW!!

Have you asked how these people feel about it? Surely you want your children to go to the person/people who would look after them the best and have the seem outlook on things as yourselves - not about who lives closest.

Have you asked all the siblings what they think. You could decide only to have them turn you down...

That's a tough one. We had the same dilemma. Eventually agreed that as my sister sees DS the most and has a better relationship then DS would go to her.

Please bear in mind this is highly unlikely to happen!

They are both happy to do it which is where the problem lies! My sibling has been around from day one like I said so that would cause minimum disruption in terms of familiarity, schooling etc. which is why I think that is the best choice. I know I need to see both sides but just horrible to have to think about it at all. Maybe I'll see it clearer in a few days?

From the kids' point of view, could you imagine losing both your parents then being uprooted and moved across the country to live with a family you barely know?

If your sibling is happy to take on this hypothetical responsibility then I'd go with them.

However, you have to consider the sister. You are asking her to become a parent. I had no idea how all-consuming it is until I did it with my own. She is also, then, a single parent by default, without having her own.

At least DH's sibling knows the commitment.

On that your sibling as she is more involved might be best. But I'd she is single, how would she cope financially etc. she would also be a single parent, so not full aware how consuming it could be.

The other thing to consider would be that my sibling is surrounded by lots of family, DC's godparents etc. where as OH sibling has no-one living (apart from OH) on her side or her husbands.

It does depend on the people involved, which only you know, and if you tell us will be your opinion not your dh's, so i don't think we can say you're R or UR.

There are some childless people I would be very confident in asking them to take on the dc, knowing they would know roughly what it involves. There are other people, whom my dc are very happy to be with, that I wouldn't want them to be in charge 24/7 because they would not cope with the reality of three (probably traumatised) children doing normal children things.

And there are people who we don't see often, but my dc would be very happy (as much as they could be) to find they were going to live them them. And people we see frequently that they wouldn't want to-despite getting on very well for an hour or more when we see them.

I think one of my concerns with a single person would be if they met someone to be in a relationship with, but they were not prepared to take on your children too. Could that person turn their back on a relationship for your children? I don't think any of us could say definitely yes, unless we were in that situation.

But equally well a couple can split up, you have potential jealousy issues with children of their own and space issues in their housing-if their children end up sharing to make way for your dc they might horribly resent it.

See it's such a minefield of what if's :( I think I'm quite prepared to accept that I am being unreasonable in the fact that I don't believe that anyone other than my relatives would be good enough/capable enough/willing enough to put themselves in this position. I just can't see me wanting to sign them over to someone I'm not blood linked to.

My guardians fir the children are my mum and best friend. Neither might actually take them in-they just make the decision. We have however, stipulated who we don't want to have them.
You could them both as guardians and the decision would be made at the time-not move kids across the country if sitting exams, etc.

I think that is the issue. It's not about practicalities, it's emotional. If DC are with your sister they are still a small amount with you. Acknowledge this with DH and yourself. FWIW, I think DH might be right. A family knows what they are letting themselves in for.

We settled on DH's sister. I know it's hard. DD will end up in a Catholic school but it is what is best.

YANBU. If they lost their parents then surely they would want to be with people who are familiar to them not other relatives that they hardly know

Watching with interest, because we are in a very similar position- on the one hand, DH's sister and b-I-l, married with no kids (and unlikely to have them due to medical reasons), but live a distance away, with busy work lives which they'll want to keep; my sister, who already has 4 kids so happy family life with people who ds2 sees regularly and loves but with a DH I and DH aren't keen on; or one of my brothers, who is not married and has no children but is the most likely to uproot himself to live in our house with ds2 and be sensitive to his emotional needs.

It's very hard, I know. I also feel that I don't want to hand him over to someone who's not a blood relly. Plus I have ds1 to consider, who is nearly 18 but is ds2's half-brother, so no blood link at all to DH's sister ... oh it's so easy to tie yourself up in knots about it all! I like redandwhitesprinkles' idea though- having guardians who'll make the decision about where the children will go.

We've settled on a joint guardian situation where both of our siblings have equal say and will decide what would be the best option at the time. It's very much an uneasy truce :)

Thanks so much for updating. I can't stand not knowing if there has been a truce happy ending.

I have done this and it is very hard trying to decide who is best. They are our children, they should be with us.

A few years ago i decided on my single sister who had no children. I thought she would have made a good 'mum'. That was until she had kids.

Now my other sister is down as guardian. She has a long term partner & kids.

I think ur OH was being a bit silly. Marriage doesnt make a good parent. I looked at what was best for my child and who would love them & care for them the most.

We went through this a couple of years back. We'd had dh's brother and wife as Guardians until then. But BIL is unwell and now has 2 ds's of their own.

No one in my (large) family is appropriate to take on 3 big children.

So in the end we asked my best friend, who has looked after them n and off for 5 years. They love her, she's ver attached to them.

My dad and dh's brother are executors so friend will have to run any big expenses by them, but if we both died she'd have our house (paid off by life insurance) and a very healthy endowment.

My parents aren't too pleased, dh's mm is meh. But it's our children, we want best for them, and Paula is the best!!

We went with my sister since she'd make a lot of effort to ensure the DC saw both families. She's good like that.

I don't think marriage has anything to do with it. I'd prioritise how well I thought my DC would fit in the family.

Presumably your sibling won't be single forever? Likewise your DH's sibling's relationship could break down. Who knows. We decided with reference to which sibling we felt would most accurately reflect the upbringing we would want for our children. The sibling we chose is my unmarried childless sister but we also had the choice of my married with 2 same age/sex kids, DH's unmarried childless gay sibling (who is a total relationship carcrash) and DH's married with 1 kid sibling. It has to be a decision based on beliefs/lifestyle and also location to a certain (but less crucial) extent, not relationship status.

We have a childless friend listed as guardian if we die. Siblings live far away and have children of their own - having ours as well would be a huge inconvenience to them, would probably mean buying a new house and would mean that our children would have a huge upheaval of going to people they don't know well and changing school, losing all their friends etc added to the distress of being orphaned.

Whereas our friend sees the children most weekends, is very much a surrogate aunt, would love to have kids of her own but it hasn't happened, and is local so the children would retain a familiar structure in their lives. We've taken out fairly hefty life insurance that should pay to support the kids and all the extra expenses incurred. She's not family but she knows both of us and our children and how we raise them far better than any of our family do. Most importantly we'd both trust her to always do her best for them. We also have more shared values with her than with our siblings.

But it's a tough call. I had feared that DH would want his brother but when I raised the issue he agreed straight away that the friend was by far the better option.