To say no dsc this weekend?

[DontGoRhiannonStay]

Dp has a ds (14) and a dd(13). He and I have a ds (23 months) We normally get dsc EOW. Ds has been pretty ill, he spent a few weeks in hospital, he is came home on Wednesday. He is very weak still, he isn't himself and we have been told to avoid him picking up any bugs while he recovers if we can.
Dsd has apparently been sick all week and is still being sick tonight, so dp and I decided that we would have to make the horrible decision not to have them to stay this weekend. i suggested dp take them
Out for the day tomorrow is dsd feels a bit better but he said he is too worried he will pick up this sickness bug and ds will be poorly again and probably end up back in hospital. We don't know what to do without hurting their feelings but at the same time at the moment my unwell little baby comes first. I really don't want to see him so ill again. Aibu?

Well, I can see your point but I think your DP could still see his DC. If he is going out around other people/going to work etc then he is at risk of catching something anyway, so unless your DP is not going out then I don't think the risk is that much greater- especially if he makes sure of good basic hygiene (hand-washing etc).

And halo, it's not a case of 'some are more equal than others'. When you have a sick child who has been ill enough to be in hospital (as I did last year actually, both my twins) even if your children all have the same parents you do have to prioritise the very ill child. I couldn't be at home with my eldest or do all the things I wanted to with him because they were my priority at the time but it didn't mean I loved him any less.

Should one of his older children become very ill when the youngest was well she would be expected to pick up the slack caring for her own child while he went to hospital, saw them extra often, ran errands and gave their mother extra support. I would love to see what you made of a stepmother who demanded a father take time away from a very sick first child (maybe making them travel by bus and exposing them to infection instead of driving them) because her baby was a bit peaky and she wanted to get pissed. But then some mothers are apparently more equal than others.

YANBU

When my children were vomiting they couldn't go round their fathers because he had cancer and a bad immune system. If he lived with them there would have been no choice.

It's the same principle. If a sick child has two homes and in one of those homes is a poorly child out of hospital you stay in the house where your illness is going to do the least damage to the rest of the household.

Common sense.

You are sending the message clearly to them that it's not their home and your DS is more important. That's truly awful. They are children not not old clothes that can be discarded.

Such ignorant bollocks.

"The father has an equal responsibility towards all his children but as always, some are more equal than others."

In this case, the one that has been in hospital for some weeks is more equal than the others. As he would if they all lived together.

I am sure you and partner will be leaving the house and coming into contact with other people at some point. So you could both catch anything from anyone at any time

The NRP should take responsibility on contact weekends illness or illness. The RP shouldn't be lumbered with it all

Yabusothere that's a rubbish argument, it's like when people try to justify all manner of extremely risky behaviour by saying 'well I might get run over by a bus'. Well yeah, you might, but it's more likely if you run out into the traffic isn't it?

He could catch a germ at work or whatever, but he is significantly more likely to do so if he spends extended periods of time in close contact with people who he knows to have a contagious illness.

sheldon

Did you seriously just suggest that a couple should move house in order to transfer residency of two children where one at least has autism from a settled perfectly adequate home where they are happy and are recovering from the early abuse they suffered,
A home that has been deemed by social services to be the best home for them with some obviously much loved and commited grandparents. In order to go live with someone just because the adult in the perspective house house shares a bit more DNA?

Needs a sock. Yes I believe she did. You worded it better than me because I am angry. End of the day I am not going to persue residency for two children who are happy in their home, happy to visit their dad and happy in school to prove a point

End of the day I have a good relationship with the children's grandparents they are happy with a lot of the changes I have in my power to do mainly the oldest one playing video games all day. He used to do that but now he goes out (sometimes reluctantly) but he has experiences. He loves trains so we go on train journeys or to look at old cars. Because they aren't on the computer all day they aren't getting overtired looking at a screen they are doing better in school. My partner has not been perfect a lot of things missed with the benefit of hindsight but they are getting there and the suggestion we remove them from two people they find important is a bit rediculous

Surely the right thing would be for OPs DP to ASK his ex-wife if it would be possible to swap contact weekend given the situation. With any luck his ex will be able to accommodate this request and will be happy agree to the plan.

Equally, if his ex-wife has plans which cannot be re-arranged then it is up to OPs DP to make suitable arrangements for the care of his children. If he is not able to arrange anything suitable, he will have to do it himself- potentially in his ex-wifes home for instance. Responsibility for arranging care does not default to the mother.

If I was in the ex's position and I could swap contact weekend, then I certainly would (assuming my ex was generally reasonable and would do the same for me), but I think there are circumstances where she WNBU to refuse. If I couldn't change plans then I would expect my DC's father to make suitable arrangements rather than just pass on the responsibility to me by default. Their care is as much his responsibility as mine, and in this instance it is his inability to look after them that has caused the problem.

user146

I'm quite glad you have no intention of doing that, because doing so would be putting your needs above some very vulnerable childrens needs.

One could say it would make you a selfish prick. All in all it sounds like your decent enough to understand that those children need to be in the best place and selfless enough to know that is not full time with you.

It was a difficult decision for their dad but now he sees they are catching up with other children and coming on in leaps and bounds under their grandparents care. At the moment it is the right decision for them to stay there
Like I said they enjoy visits and these are frequent they know they are loved by their dad and his extended family but also by the grandparents they live with
Problems arise when negative attitudes come from others, thinking he's a bad parent he's not perfect but who is he's made a difficult decision one that is best for his kids

Jacks Your post explains the situation down to the ground I believe. The OP has not given the impression of demanding anything..in fact she sounds very caring and thoughtful of everyone's feelings. There are subsequent pages and pages of posters saying that basically the OP and her DP are TELLING the mother she has to give up her plans no matter what..she's a bad mother if she doesn't..it's the mother's responsibility not theirs. The OP's one and only post says nothing of the sort nor does it give that impression. People are just assuming this is their motivation and thought process because they are 'only the NRPs' so are automatically happy to shirk their responsibilities

The father has an equal responsibility towards all his children but as always, some are more equal than others

I have an equal responsibility towards both my children, but at times one of them needs my time and attention more than the other. If, for example, one is ill.

Why not have them for a longer period to make it up to them as a special treat when the baby feels better? Something like 3-4 days across a bank holiday etc. Agree you shouldn't really put sick kids together. If these were your kids then you also would have been told to make alternative arrangements - rules need to be flexible when seriously ill kids are involved

I can't believe this thread is still going - but it simply perpetuates my belief that adhering to visitation arrangements seems to trump common sense when step children are involved.

OP - how is your baby?

Op - hope your little one is recovering well.