Aibu? Fallen out with sister over DP

[Ilovepapaya]

Nc for this....im usually in the pregnancy section so be gentle....

I've had a bit of a row with my sister today. We were at our parent's house for Sunday lunch, and I was talking about my wedding plans.

To give a bit of background - DP had split up with an on and off girlfriend of a few years when I met him. When we were together a few weeks, she revealed she was pregnant with his child. His daughter is now 2. We have her eow and for tea twice a week.....we wanted 50/50 but the ex wouldn't agree.

She is really hard work- always wanting to know what we are doing with dsd, where we have taken her. It's been hard for DP to bond with dsd at times because ex won't give him space to be a dad to her without her hovering over her shoulder.

Anyway, she won't let us keep dsd at the wedding overnight, which is potentially awkward as ex doesn't drive so how is dsd going to get back home?

My sister and parents are quite old fashioned. I was explaining the situation to them and asking their advice, and my sister said she was sick of my moaning and how negative I was over dsd. I love dsd and have been in her life from birth, obviously I was cross and things got heated. Dsis has NEVER liked DP and she made this clear

Dsis and I are not talking now. My parents are saying I should apologise but surely Dsis should be the one to apologise?

This is such a mess. My wedding is in six weeks. I am also 8 weeks pregnant and have had horrendous morning sickness and feel stressed and exhausted as it is

Mostly not that spiteful. It seems to be very hard to get through to the OP. To go back to her original question, yes she should do as her parents request and apologise to her DSis.

Queen Liz,
No need to correct me.
'It's the groom 's daughter '
As in 'it's the groom's daughter we are talking about. '
Hope that helps.

So all of you saying how unsuitable a wedding is for a 2 year old just in principle - you wouldn't have your own young children at your wedding ?

And the only reason it would be the first overnighter is because ex has never allowed it !

Of course some people get honest and spiteful, confused.

Quite.

And the only reason it would be the first overnighter is because ex has never allowed it !
Irrelevant.
Point is, it is definitely NOT the circumstances under which to introduce an overnighter.

Have no issue with a 2yr old at a wedding if that is what the couple want.

Ok so your sister thinks he is shit dad, says he is lazy.

You don't deny this yet blame it on ex. You say he hasn't bonded with her.

Well he sees her two days a week one week and three days the next.

That's not bad.

You need to really look at what kind of parent he is.

You can't blame the ex for him being a shut parent.

The fact you and he have the hump because she won't allow the wedding to be the first overnight shows that you both have no bloody idea about toddlers.

What kind off silly person thinks that's a good idea?!

You are certain the ex is mean and your dp is a good dad but is he?

You CANNOT possibly know the truth of their relationship you only have what he/people on his side have said, frankly one week is ridiculous and I would consider that infidelity. At the very least in very poor taste.

You CANNOT be in love in 6 weeks, you don't know a person well enough rose tinted glasses and hormones still welded in place.

As soon as he knew she was pregnant he should have taken a break from you to properly assess the situation and to be able to discuss and agree on how his role as a father would work. To be perfectly honest I suspect if he had there's a possibility he'd have gone back to her, you know this and it scares you.

I don't know ANY primary carer that would agree to 50/50 or overnights this young, not in the child's interests PLUS your dsds mother knows the child better than you or your dp. 2 is still EXTREMELY young.

Absolutely ridiculous idea to have the first overnight be your wedding. Not fair on the child at all.

The child's mother, especially under the circumstances and considering your attitude to both the child and the mother (2 yr olds are hard work - shock!).

You need to back off, apologise to your sister, stop interfering in the contact arrangements of a child that isn't yours (your only active requirement is to treat the child well when in your company).

You do very much come over as immature, entitled and lacking empathy or even the understanding that there's no way you can know how this childs mother feels as you're not yet a mother. Your sister is a mother and as such knows how hard it is to hand over your child, even to someone you trust most in the world. Spend some time reading threads by mothers in her position, or even just new mothers struggling with the first time leaving their child with their own mothers because even that is really tough!

I think she (child's mother) is in an incredibly difficult situation and has handled it better than a lot would! (Again just read some threads on here on similar situations).

The child's mother (under the circumstances etc) has kept things as amicable as possible. That paragraph should say.

Anyway, why do you need the 2 year old there? To prove a point? To rub it in? She is 2! She does not need to be there!

Spot on.

I understand it must be hard for the ex as a single mum, but we are willing to help her out by keeping dsd more, when she needs childfree time or wants to go out, and she refuses.

The wee one is never going to be yours. And that is what this is all about. You not wanting the wee one or her mum to have been on the scene before you.

I think the ex more than has the measure of you.

The 2 yo wont like it but wont remember so she will be fine ultimately, it wont scar her for life.

Actually it could if it went very very badly. However the OP and her dp aren't going to be scarred for life if dd attends the wedding then goes home. Which the ex is happy with.

The point is that the dp sees the child enough to to bond with her, but hasn't . That very telling and I can imagine the ex also knows that which is why she hasn't agreed to overnight stays.

The OP seems to be convinced that she should be a decision maker when it comes to the child. She shouldn't.

A wedding in a strange hotel with the father not present is not the place for the first overnight stay.

But back to the OP. Whilst the ops relationship isn't the sisters business, the sister has seen all this and clearly heard the OP moaning about the ex and dsd a lot. She sat there while the op moaned that she wanted dsd at the wedding but was unwilling to try and arrange transport home.

The sister then spoke up. The I think more people should speak up when they see their family heading into a car crash situation.

The sister has kids, she sympathises with the ex. She understands that it's the rights of the child that comes first not the father.

I remember listen to a colleague moan that she couldn't afford another child with her dh because of the maintainence he paid for his first two children. The ex had bought a car and my colleague really resented that 'her money' was paying for a car for the ex. She had no concept that, as long as the kids were cared for, it was non of her business. Had no understanding that those two kids already existed andbshpildnt be pushed out because she wanted more kids. Had I not been at work I would have told to give her head a wobble.

Lo and behold. 4 years later she has another child with her dh but he is now the ex and she is moaning that he thinks he can dictate what she does with maintenence, that she would get more if he hadn't already had two kids, she is passed off his new girlfriend is pregnant etc.

She is in the same position the ex was and all of a sudden that position is shit. A few years ago, the ex had the perfect life.

I think the ops sister and family can see what's going on, that he is lazy, that he is the problem but the OP blames the ex and are concerned.

Let's be honest, if he really wanted over nights and thought it was in the child's best interests. It would have gone to court. Sounds to me like he is saying it, because that makes him look good and the ex as awful. But he isn't really bothered.

My DSS got married when his son was 2. Was a PITA. My DH ended up looking after him loads and not enjoying his ownly son's wedding. 2 year old was entirely oblivious to the whole thing and just got upset when his mum wasn't as huggy as usual (trying to avoid toddler muck and grime getting on her dress).

I agree 2 is too young for an overnight. When it comes to babies, it is surely best for them to be in their own home & I do think your DP should have remained single. A baby/toddler should notake be subject to another adults insecurities/jealousy (and I understand why you would feel insecure given what posted about dp)

Why should he stay single

The ex may also have a partner.

So all of you saying how unsuitable a wedding is for a 2 year old just in principle - you wouldn't have your own young children at your wedding?

There's not a chance in hell I'd have my toddler there, no. Baby, fine. 5 year old, probably fine. Anyone between about 18 months and perhaps 3ish, absolutely not. I can see the argument for the ceremony, though even then my child currently in that age bracket would kick off if they could see me and not get to me so I'd have to think very carefully about it. Definitely not the reception. Would be a miserable nightmare and serve the interests of absolutely no-one.

And the only reason it would be the first overnighter is because ex has never allowed it!

Which makes not one iota of difference to the problems identified with OP and DPs plan, especially as she presumably won't be with him for the overnight anyway. He could've had her 50% of nights since birth and that still wouldn't have prepared her for sleeping in a hotel room with DPs mum.

How far from the wedding venue do ex and DSD live? If it's taxiable, that's the solution - DP pays for a taxi for his mum to take DSD back to ex after the formal photographs and then return his mum to the wedding.

No overnight in these circumstances where adults' attention is divided. A 2 year old would need total care and supervision.

The OP asked whether her dp should have remained single & I think that would have been best with a pregnant ex (seeing as the OP asked)

I'm confused, possibly because I don't have children. Don't two year olds go to bed at about 7/8pm at the latest? Is MiL really going to miss that much of the wedding?

Op - I am a stepmother and mother and you seriously need a reality check.
Fact is you don't seem to be taking the overwhelming view on board so you aren't going to get it, maybe you will when you have a child.
One thing I did want to pick you up on is your dsd's mother always wanting to know what you have done - this is perfectly normal, she is still a baby - I always want to know what my dd has done when she is not with me, just out of interest, I like to know how her day has been. Her mother sounds totally reasonable it's only you and your husband to be that need to get a clue about parenting and the needs of a 2 yr old!

I have a friend n a vry similar situation. Three years down the line she's getting divorced.

Magaret - if the daughter goes to bed at 7/8 then the MIL would need to go with her if she was staying over!

Can you see why the ex is upset with you two? She announces pregnancy then finds her partner in a serious relationship with someone else. Then you ask for 50:50 residency and overnight visits while she is still under two!

Think how you would feel if your DP now left you for another woman, baby comes and they ask for 50:50

I'd say cut the ex some slack. Can't be easy to see you guys playing happy families. You would probably get on really well with her. Seeing her daughter will be a half sister, why not start building bridges by inviting her to your wedding? It will show your are trying to build bridges.

Then again she might think you are rubbing her nose but it's something to think about.

OP

Given they'd been together for years and been on off, as far as the ex is concerned, I imagine she didn't see their relationship as dead after a week apart. As you say, they'd split up before and seen other people so it could well have been the same this,time.

There's no evidence there was a physical overlap but certainly there was an emotional overlap.

When she discovered her pregnancy, she may well have thought she would get back together as had happened before with less "reason". It would have been hard to go through pregnancy alone

Whether DSD stays all day and night at the wedding or just a couple of hours, it needs to be someone's job to look after her. Is this Mil for the whole day? Is she happy about that?

I think DSD going home before it gets too late will mean both she and MIL have a better time, otherwise mil will be stuck in a bedroom.from 7pm with an overexcited child who hasn't stayed with her before. Plenty of posters,who have their resident children at weddings arrange for then to be picked up at some point.

cece - sorry, that's exactly what I meant but rereading what I posted I wasn't very clear. My confusion was about the desire to have her stay over when the daughter is clearly going to have to be put to bed long before the end of the party whatever happens - surely it would be better to take her home than to a hotel room at that point? So I agree with you - sorry that I wasn't clearer!

"They'd been on and off for years and they had been split up a week when we got together. Then a few weeks after that she came and told him she was pregnant. They'd been on and off for years and she was used to him running back to her so I think she was cross about that"

This is quite a minimising way to talk. As they were together so long, albeit with breaks, I assume they had strong feelings for each other. For you to describe her upset at the finality of the break up (even without the pregnancy) as her being cross that he didnt run back to her isn't kind. Cross is what you get if your door is painted the wrong colour. If she thought they would get back together to raise their child and it didn't happen, I expect she was devastated.

None of this is to say he was cheating on her or whatever and there may be more back story, but you seem overall dismissive of her as a feeling human being.