to think that 'mini-wife' is problematic for exactly the same reasons that 'jailbait' is problematic?

[ArsenicyOldFace]

In that it transfers responsibility from adult men onto female children?

Thankfully one doesn't hear the word 'jailbait' much any more; society has moved on and we now understand the process of grooming etc

I think it is a horrid term although it is a common phenom input among all father/ dd relationships regardless of separation.
I guess it's a bit like the Oedipus complex. As a little girl my dad was definitely my fav and I would compete with my mum in order to gain his attention.
My dd dosnt have a dad and is a bit too close to my dad; something which I'm trying to rectify.

It also smacks of two women fighting over a man ... Yawn!

superstar That is exactly how a "spousified" child approaches the situation, though - competing for the status they have been given in their parents life with other adults. Sometimes, even their other parent.
So, in that respect, it does give an accurate reflection of the motives and emotions at play.

What the term MWS doesn't do is give any indication of the underlying abuse that leads to that motive in the child, it describes the situation once it is established.

I don't think, to the casual reader, 'spousification' gives any indication of the underlying abuse either. Most people don't know what the term means.

It would be much clearer when these situations arise to just tell the person asking that the child is showing signs of abuse. That they would understand.

"It would be much clearer when these situations arise to just tell the person asking that the child is showing signs of abuse. That they would understand."

Also, it would stop the putting on a pedestal the father, while demonising the child, that frequently happens on here.

If a child is showing spousification, then their parents have hugely messed up, which IMO should be seen a red flag for anyone wanting to have a relationship with a father of a child with spousification.

If a child is showing spousification, then their parents have hugely messed up, which IMO should be seen a red flag for anyone wanting to have a relationship with a father of a child with spousification.

I agree - but MN is littered with appeals from advice from women who overlooked all sorts of "red flags" and are now enmeshed financially, and emotionally.

Spousification, and parentification, are hidden abuse. It isn't evident to an onlooker, it is a dynamic that only becomes apparent when day to day life is shared with the parent and child. From posts on the Stepboard it's clear that by the time the dynamic is evident and understood by a stepparent there are often other DCs, finances and practicalities like living arrangements to disentangle.

Reading back through the tread it seems that the terms MW & MWS when used in an OP do not give an accurate description of the dynamic in the family that is causing the issues.

It also seems that spousification/parentification cannot be used as a possible label unless the description is accurate (which the term MW does not offer) due to it's complexity.

I don't believe in jumping on a poster for using the term MW/MWS but I feel that pointing out that it is not descriptive enough and can cloud the real issues and ask them to explain in more detail is the way forward.

So my answer to your question Arse is YANBU the term MW is problematic and not just because it appears to shift the responsibility from adult to child but also because it clouds the real issues which can be much more damaging to the child and the family as a whole.

If posters genuinely do not know that the child they are labelling MW is actually showing signs of abuse, I think that should be pointed out to them.

Once a person understands a possible cause of the actions they might not take them so personally and might be able to take a step back and look at the whole family dynamic.

Rather than being jealous of the child, the adult might feel sorry for them and even go some way towards helping them.