To stipulate that we only get back together under this condition?

[FedupofbeingtoldIcantusemyname]

Dp and I broke up for a few weeks over the summer. I went away for a while and we realised how much we love and miss each other and have agreed to give our relationship another go.

One major sticking point though, one which was instrumental in us breaking up in the first place, is his reluctance to consider living anywhere other than where we currently live (very rural town). I love the place where we live, it is scenic and peaceful but it is not great for me in a lot of areas, mainly:

Jobs are very hard to come by here.

Wages are very low, much lower than national average.

It is very far from my family (4hrs+ drive).

I will be graduating from uni in the next few years and I'm realising just how hard it will be to get a decent job in this area. Also my parents are getting into their 70's now and, although they are still mostly fit and well at the moment, DM still works full time because they can't afford not to. So the distance may become a problem in the future because we have no other family in this country other than myself and my siblings, none of whom live close to my parents to help out if they need it.

So my condition to DP would be that he at least consider the possibility of moving somewhere closer to my parents, that would be better for work, in the future, if it was necessary.

However, I totally understand why he has been reluctant to consider this in the past becuase all his family live in this area, and he has a son with his exP who lives here also. I completely understand that his DC is his priority and that will never change, I'm not asking him to abandon his child - far from it! I just want him to consider the possibility that, in the future, either for work or for my family, we might have to move closer to where they live (not necessarily the same town, just closer).

Wibu to ask him to consider this as a future possibility? I have friends here who do think I WBU, as I would be taking him away from his family and child, but I have to consider my own family as well. Do we have a future if we won't/can't leave this area? Before we broke up we were engaged and want to be again and my thinking is that if we are going to have a marriage and a whole life together then we both need to have our wants and needs taken into consideration.

[BitOutOfPractice]

So all he's got to say is "yes, in the future, I'll consider it". Job done. Not much of a condition.

I'd bet my mortgage that in 10 years time you'll still be in exactly the same position with him "considering" a move.

TBH though, if I were him, I wouldn't want to move 4 hours away from my child either.

[shovetheholly]

She doesn't want to move 4 hours from her child - she's suggesting a place that is somewhere inbetween the child's location and her parents'. So it could be an hour away from the child, and 3 hours from the parents. Many, many families cope with greater journey times than this.

[JugglingFromHereToThere]

My initial response is that you should keep the two things separate ... that is 1) You have decided you do love and miss one another and want to be together
2) You realise you need to have serious discussions about important aspects of your future life together, including whether or not you might move, and maybe the balance of your different wants and needs on this issue, and perhaps generally.

I hope you see what I mean about how they are separate things. I wouldn't mix them up and issue an ultimatum, even if you sense it would get you more leverage to get what you want/ those things that are important to you.

[Groaningmyrtle]

I'm going against the grain here and suggesting that if you and dp could both get better jobs in the city an hour away, it might be better for his dc. Earning a decent salary might mean he only works five days a week rather than six, so he'd have more time with him and be less knackered. Plus he might have more disposable income. What good does it do either of them being in close proximity, but not being able to spend time together.

I think the key here is having the flexibility to look at all your options: him to consider all possibilities and you to be mindful of his overriding commitment to his son. If you can come to a compromise together, it bodes well for your future relationship. If not , not so much.

[Andersonsautos]

I don't think an hour or two would be the end of the world but if he disagrees it's irrelevant. We live a couple of hours from my dh child and he collects every other weekend and brings back to us and then drops off home again. Yeah it's a ballache but it still works. There is no midweek contact but they FaceTime every couple of days and have, imo, a good relationship. Would they be closer if we lived nearer? Maybe I suppose but life's not perfect and this works for him and them.

Maybe wouldn't be suitable in everyone's eyes or situations but distance doesn't have to be a huge blocker. My dc father lives about 10 minutes away and bothers with them a lot less than EOW so perhaps my standards are low....

[Cabrinha]

You know that if his job means he can't see his son midweek, he could, you know, change his job/hours?

Plenty of people do.

[furryminkymoo]

Could you find a job with travel? When I lived in a shitty town I got a role with a large base to cover, enjoyed my time in London etc

[AddictedtoSnickers]

It's tough he only gets to see his DC EOW. When they are older, with a later bedtime and a bit more independence, he may get to see them a bit more, possibly MW. Taking away the chance of more contact for them all is not good. Stay there with him and accept it if you really love him and want a future together. Maybe your parents could move closer to you after retirement?

[Cocklodger]

You're being quite selfish op.
He doesn't want to move, he doesn't want to leave his child and he likes where he lives.
Either stay with him or leave without him and have done with it

[ShatnersWig]

Shovetheholly I know the OP has said she'd be happy to go one hour nearer but the back of my brain says that if her parents to require more support in a couple of years, that three hours will seem just as long as the current four and she'd want to move even closer. Which, at that time, may well be reasonable. But still be a sticking point for him.

The problem with all this is we're dealing in hypothesis that may never come to pass. The OP's family may stay fit and healthy for 10 years and never require any greater assistance at all.

Surely the time to discuss this is IF AND WHEN it happens. There really isn't any need to do so now. We've all said the condition isn't exactly binding anyway, he can still say no if and when the time comes and the OP will be in exactly the same place then as she is now. Choosing not to restart the relationship means she can move where she wants, when she wants and if she moves to either of these nearer cities as opposed to the rural place she is now, she'd probably find plenty of potential new partners anyway! They aren't tied by marriage or joint children.

Hence, either don't bother restarting the relationship, or continue as things are but accepting and realising it may well have a shelf life (and lets be honest, the numbers of people under 40 having relationships that last 20+ years now are in the minority).

[Kewcumber]

I totally don;t understand why you've come in for so much flak. I don;t see why moving an hour away (or even the prospect of moving an hour away) is such a heinous crime and why no mid-week contact makes him a crap dad without knowing the reality of the situation (I'm not saying he isn't crap btw just that it seems a bizarre conclusion to jump to).

I suppose living in London and working in the finance field I know many people (mostly men if I'm honest) who have no mid-week contact with their children - and they live at home with their families and aren;t divorced!

It also would be uncommon to travel for an hour across London with divorced parents as it's so hard to get between certain parts of London and no-one would raise an eyebrow if one parent lived in Brentford and one lived in Streatham.

[Kewcumber]

It also wouldn't be uncommon

[FedupofbeingtoldIcantusemyname]

Yes, cabrinha, and plenty of people don't. Because not everyone has a job that allows them to be that flexible. Trust me, DP is working on changing his job but it's difficult when there are not many jobs to choose from. We live in an area of relatively high unemployment.

I agree groaning. It isn't just about me and my parents in the long term it's also about what makes us all happier and more fulfilled in the short term too. DSS has already expressed a desire to do more 'fun stuff' with daddy but when DP finishes work (a very physical job) and then goes straight to pick DSS up, he has no energy to do anything strenuous and no disposible income to spend anyway.

Yes, holly, that is exactly what I'm suggesting. You are right about the trust issue and that is a separate thing. Before, if he had said he would consider it I'm not sure I would have believed him but after our time apart his attitude seems very different.

Apologies if I had not made it clear that I was looking for a compromise. I agree that it WHBU to make him move 4hrs away from his child but that isn't what I'm aiming for.

[Kewcumber]

I do however suspect that you're wasting your time - he doesn't want to move and he is quite happy for you to live somewhere you don't enjoy for the rest of your life provided he gets to stay put comfortably.

I think all this conversation will do is put off the inevitable for 5 years.

But talk to him about it.

[furryminkymoo]

I also think that you could both relocate but not 4 hours away?

[TheNaze73]

I think he'd make it work, if he was that bothered.

I agree with cabrinha

[nocampinghere]

it's not just about where you live though is it?
it's about the lives you want

• you want to be in a city/town with higher wages, better employment
  
• he wants to stay in the rural backwater earning minimum wage working long hours to make ends meet.
  

is that right?

if he sees his son EOW then living an hour or two away isn't going to change anything on that front. in fact he may have a better life, more money, more to give his son (not just financial, just more out of life re outlook etc...)

being closer to your parents again isn't really the issue. it is just an upside of being out of the rural backwater.

correct?

so the question to ask your dp is what life does he want? you do not want to be stuck in a rural village with few opportunities. fair enough i say. if he doesn't want to grow, change etc then i would walk away as you're only going to end up frustrated.

[daisypond]

I also don't see why the OP is getting so much flak. The DP sees his child once a week, even though they are local. Maybe when the child gets older it would be possible to see him more often as he'll go to bed later. But if you move further away to where there are better job opportunities for you both, say up to an hour and a half away, this is still easily doable. I commute three hours a day every day just to go to work - one and a half hours there and back, door to door, and I've got DC. I think you should finish your uni course and then reconsider and see what jobs are out there. You don't need to do anything now.

[BaDumShh]

I think it’s harsh to say that YABCU by wanting to move just an hour away, for better jobs and more money. He would have more free time with a better paid job, and more disposable income to do nice things with his son. Jeeze, with the way some people on here have reacted you’d think you were suggesting that you and DP move to the moon!

Yes obviously his DC is very important to him, but your parents are important to you too and if you feel you want to support them more in a few years’ time then that is totally fair. If DP is completely unwilling to move away at any point, then it may be best to call time on this relationship. You have no mortgage, no DCs together and no ties – it would be a fairly clean break.

[AGruffaloCrumble]

People who say it's not an issue have obviously never had an ex move away. It will almost always damage a relationship with a child and the father doesn't want to move away so why should he? Even an hour is a big deal when it comes to stuff like parents evenings, birthdays, hospital trips and emergencies. Forcing a teenage to have a two hour trip every other weekend to somewhere that he doesn't have friends and doesn't know the area isn't fair and I don't think many teens would voluntarily do it.

[eightbluebirds]

YABU op. You both have different priorities and I don't think they can work together. He wants to be close to his son. If anything, waiting until his son is 13+ means you'll be moving away at one of the most challenging times in a child's life and all they will see is daddy moving further away to be with you. Try and justify moving further away away to a 13 year old for such reasons as work, money or for your parents etc it's just not going to cut it. Not good enough.
Teenagers lead busy lives as it is so if your OH still wants to see them, the closer the better tbh. What about birthdays, emergencies, school events etc.

[Jaxhog]

I think you're being smart to have this discussion now, before you get married, make a long term commitment now. It isn't selfish of you to want certain things from life. It also isn't selfish for your DP to want to be near his DS. But it IS selfish if he won't even consider what you want. If you want to stay together, you will BOTH have to compromise.

You need to sit down together and discuss the options. Maybe you can find a middle road, maybe you can't. There are lots of good solution here that you could consider together. Good Luck.

[EvansAndThePrince]

I don't see how it can work at all TBH. Even moving half way between his child and your parents would mean 8 hours travelling time 4 of which cutting in to his time with his son which I imagine is precious to him given that he only sees him EOW. Also I imagine he would stay in a physical job and would be equally as exhausted at the end of the week and travelling 8 hours would be horrendous.

As a PP said, you seem to want very different lives (you in the city with high career prospects and him rural working to make ends meet) so that in itself is an issue.

Your parents will never be as important or more important than his child. 1 or 2 hours further away will be hugely damaging to both of them.

[trafalgargal]

Distance is an issue if you allow it to be.
My ex worked more hours than the average working week and lived an hour away with no traffic and up to 3 if the M25 was busy. He attended parents evenings, school meetings. (DS is statemented with SEN), plays, birthday parties etc. He also saw him almost every weekend not EOW. If the will is there then it's entirely possible, if it's too much botherthatsanother matter.

[GeorgeTheThird]

It's not about the travelling time for your DP. It's about the travelling time for his son. When he's a teenager he won't do it. And their relationship will suffer massively. He's absolutely right not to move even an hour away. Yes, YABU.