to want to hang out with my ex? or is his new girlfriend the unreasonable one?

[HidingNemo]

Me and my ex broke up when our daughter was 6months, so around 4 years ago now.

It was a very mutual decision and we even stayed living together until she was 1. We do quite a few things as a family, such as he comes over for dinner or we go out or we go to the cinema etc.

I really enjoy his company and he really is one of my best friends. But we don't work as a couple and would never consider getting back together.

He has now been seeing someone for a year and she had just moved in, and is pregnant with his child - I'm really happy for him and DD seems to like her and is excited about a new brother.

However the gf has said she doesn't want ex to do family things anymore, as it would be unfair on her child when he gets older because he will be seeing his dad be a father to a different family.

When I first found out they were serious I offered for her to be a part of these activities but she declined saying it would be weird.

I just feel so sad, I feel like I've lost a really good friend and that DD has lost out too.

Aibu?

That would be fine if it were the same for both children, but it's not going to be is it?

One child will get to see both of their children together and one of them won't. One child will get one to one time with their Father and one of them won't.

You really think that's not going to alienate siblings?

No I don't think it will alienate them at all.

The day's family unit is with his partner and his dd and their child. His dd should be encouraged to be very much a part of that.

dd's **

Fucks sake.

Dad's **

Also, the OP has a seperate family that their dd is a part of.

So does dd get to spend alternate weekends with her dad and dad's new partner? Is she happy to be playing stepmum?

Proper boundaries mean that children can learn to understand that both their parents love them but are no longer together so spend time with them separately. They can then build independent relationships with each of their parents and adapt more easily to the inevitable changes in circumstances that having separated parents brings (like new partners, siblings etc). I'm not suggesting that the relationship should be acrimonious, just clear.

Family breakdown is rarely 'fair' on the children but that's not a new partner's fault.

I agree with that, the older dd should very much be encouraged to be part of the family unit that exists between her Dad, her sibling, and her Dads partner.

But that doesn't have to be done to the detriment of the family unit that is most important to her, which is her Mum and her Dad and her. The two family units don't have to exist in complete isolation from each other to be right.

Mine doesn't. It's really not that difficult to have an extended family where all the children are considered equally, and all get to spend time with both of their parents together. Where's the harm in that? Except to the new partner that doesn't like it?

Well, I guess I am going off personal experience that must prevent me seeing the bigger picture.

My SD has a family here and a family with her mum. She has siblings on both sides. In the time that her parents have been split she has seen two seperate families form before her and she has embraced it she truly has. As cheerup said, she has built independent lives with her parents, her life here is completely different to the the life she has with her mum. All of her siblings' parents are still together, but that doesn't bother her one bit.

I'm sure your SD is perfectly well adjusted and happy, but I am speaking from personal experience too. Different things work for different people, and it seems that in OPs situation, the arrangement they have works for all except one person who is only thinking of themselves.

The fact is that if she has things the way she wants them, OPs dd will end up spending less time with one of her parents. And there is no good reason for that to have to happen.

The Op's main concern was about her missing her ex, their friendship, their time together etc. it wasn't so much about the daughter - read the OP. Realistically if the OP wanted that cosy family unit to stay forever then they shouldn't have split.

Things change when you split and nothing usually stayed the same no matter what. I've been through some big ups and downs in my marriage and one of the things that probably made us stick it out at times was having to deal with the fall out with splitting and how that would affect the kids and everything that would bring. I knew if we split things would never be the same, especially if we both went on to new partners, possible new children etc. isn't that just the way it usually goes?

her life here is completely different to the the life she has with her mum. All of her siblings' parents are still together, but that doesn't bother her one bit.

I think this is the bit that makes me uncomfortable, and that situation is something my ex and I worked very hard to avoid for our children. We didn't want them to have to have two separate lives and two separate families. I as an adult wouldn't like to live like that, so there's no way I'd force that upon my child. I think it's better for children to grow up with all of ten significant adults in their lives to be singing off the same sheet. Consistency in rules and behaviour boundaries matters to children, they need to know where they stand. This is something that our family works on constantly, as I'm a stricter parent than my ex's new DP is with her own children, but we have both had to compromise.

Things change Begonia, but the parents that two people are to their children doesn't have to change just because they aren't together anymore.

Okay I can see your point.

I do think though, their dd should be included in his new family unit as much as possible. Spend time with just her dad and his family and likewise with her mum. There could be a time when they want to something as a family without including dd's mum. It doesn't mean that her mum is any less important to dd, of course not. But like my SD, she will have to learn that dad has a life away from mum and this is his family, including her siblings, who I think is so majorly important that they form a bond with. The new sibling is his gf's child so his dd's mum shouldn't be involved in their family time.

But I know what you're saying. I really do. The above paragraph is just my take on it also.

Spend time with just her dad and his family and likewise with her mum. There could be a time when they want to something as a family without including dd's mum

I agree with this too. This happens for my children in both 'sides' of their family.

I just think that can happen without the good relationship between the OP and her ex being destroyed. Them having a coffee together once a week and the occasional dinner together with their child doesn't prevent their child from learning that their parents have relationships with other people, and their other children.

I don't think that the new partner is only thinking of themselves - although as we only have the OPs point of view here, I may not be right. I think that the new partner, believes, as I do, that if a family has broken down (which it has, unfortunately, when parents no longer want to be together) it's better to be honest about it rather than pretending that nothing has changed.

I'm sure that my now dh's ex thought I was being like the OPs new partner not long after we first got together and I put my foot down about them meeting up with his parents together as a family when they visited. They weren't a family, otherwise he shouldn't have been with me. I certainly wouldn't have been happy to be treated/considered like their family's plus 1! It sounds as though others feel differently - good for them. In the case of the OP, I think that her ex really should have sorted all this out before his new partner got pregnant, as BegoniaBampot has put it "if they wanted the cosy family unit to stay together forever then they shouldn't have split." You can't have it every way.

Yeah I can see what you mean. Obviously there are some exceptions like going on holidays, I don't think I could deal with that. But a coffee or having tea together is a bit different. Like you say so long as the child recognises the other people important in mum/ dad's life, and wants to spend time with these significant people too, then that is okay.

They are being honest about it and they are not pretending that nothing has changed!

The bit that hasn't changed is they they are both still parents to the same child!

And actually, you can have it every way if you put some effort into it an neither parent chooses to get together with someone else who doesn't agree. My ex's new partner is happy with the arrangement, and my DH is happy with the arrangement. Neither of us would have entertained a relationship that meant we had to stop the way we parented our children.

That's where the OPs ex has either made a massive mistake, or has been manipulated to within an inch of his life. If his GF said she was happy with the arrangement, he should have been able to trust that she was telling the truth. The fact that she has now changed her mind about what she is happy with just because she's pregnant is what makes me think she selfish and controlling.

SoWhat, yes, I agree holidays are taking it a bit too far. Although I went on holiday with my ex before either of us found new partners, we wouldn't do it now. But at the time we just wanted to be able to have a holiday with our children, and as they were still small and it would have been hard work alone, it made sense to go together.

It simply doesn't work to say that the Dad can still see his dd for the same amount of time as long as the OP isn't there. How is that supposed to work when she starts having after school teas at friends houses, or does extra curricular activities? Does she do all of those things as usual, then have the free nights with her Dad, and leave the OP to do nothing but bedtime and breakfast? All just to suit someone else whose interests clearly don't lie primarily with this child?

But that is how it is with children whose parents are separated, they will never get the same amount of time with their parents as those who live with them full time. The separation was done several years ago, so she has never really known a time whan her parents lived together. So I doubt it is going to be so much of a massive change that her Mum m& Dad don't spend as much tiem together, as long as she still gets plenty of time with her Dad. She must be used to him having to leave and not be there all the time because they don't all live together anyway. I honestly can't see a problem with the DD, but I can see that the OP is not liking the shift in the relationship with someone she has known for so long, but then that is just life, things change.

It's fine to say 'that's life and things change' if one of the parents is the instigator of that. It's not when things are being made to change because of a new partner.

Yes, a child of separated parents will spend less time with each of their parents than they would have one if their parents had been together. So isn't that all the more reason to maintain the time that child dies get with her parents? Doesn't it make it more important that time with her dad isn't limited any more than it already has been?

You say 'as long as she still gets plenty of time with her Dad' but what about her time with her Mum, considering that she will already spend a considerable amount of time asleep, at school, with friends, doing extra curricular activities that children do. There are only so many hours in the day, and I think it's important to make sure a child gets time with the absent parent without the result of that being that the resident parent ends up with nothing but school runs, cooking dinner, and the bedtime/morning routine.

Women who pair up with men who already have children from a previous relationship, and then try to hoard all of his time, money, and energy for their own children really annoy me.

If you pick a man who already has kids, then you have to accept that a good portion of his time, money, and energy are already spoken for. You either be happy with what's left over, or you fucking figure out a way to share nicely.

I'm sick of reading accounts of possessive subsequent partners and their resentment of time and money spent on children had before they met. And, for what it's worth, I'm not sure I've ever met a second wife who says the maintenance her husband pays to the mother of his earlier children is fair.

Fucking stupid selfish cows.

Bitter and foul mouthed. Nice.

For what it's worth, I don't resent the maintenance my husband pays and am just relieved that his ex is a reasonable and pleasant person even if I don't want to go to the pictures with her.

Now now come on Katy we're not all like that honestly.

cheerup, and SoWhat, I'm glad that you are not like that.

I'm not bitter, myself. I have no ex with kids or similar situation. It's just based on what I've seen in people around me, from relatives to acquaintances to people posting on internet forums. I am honestly saddened that so many women choose to pair up with a man who already has children and then, when they have children of their own, suddenly seem to see it all very differently. But, I don't think I should be shocked. Because, quite honestly, step-children are competition for our own. It's probably natural to feel that way. I suppose it's the basis of the "wicked stepmother" trope.

As for being chided over being "foul-mouthed..."