To think you don't sleep with your phone off if your children are elsewhere

[eslindanunez]

Have been up all night with a vomiting toddler. I live on my own with her and her dad sees her once a week on a Sunday. She started throwing up about midnight last night and carried on doing so for a few hours. We cosleep so the bed was covered in sick, so was I, so was much of the bedroom and the living room and she needed a few changes of pyjamas so that in itself was quite difficult to deal with it as she wouldn't let me put her down. I tried calling and WhatsApping her dad to ask him to come over so that he could at least hold her while I changed the bed and had a shower and just for moral support ( was quite worried as she's never been sick before) but his phone has clearly been turned off as the messages haven't even been registered as read. That's still the case now at nearly 8 AM. Am I being unreasonable to think that if you're somewhere other than where your children are (he also has two other children from a previous relationship) that you don't just turn your phone off and go to sleep? Because things happen and obviously this wasn't even that bad but it could've been a lot worse! I can't imagine being away from DD and not having a means to be contacted should something happen.

I'm a single parent with a bloody awful (now NC) mother. I have nobody related to call when DS is ill/injured etc.

I have always been the only person to mop up his bodily fluids, I have nobody else to call.

While I'm sympathetic that the OP felt panicked at the time, but it was wrong of her to expect that the child's father, who lives elsewhere, should be on call.

I think Hissy, that it does kids no good at all if we accept men viewing their responsibilities as less because the biological relationship is different. I think society has indulged this far too much tbh. The one person the OP should be able to call is the child's father.

I don't think a mother should give up her whole life/interests/friends to be at the back and call of her dc. Not at all. I haven't. My children know that the whole world doesn't revolve around indulging their every whim, because I do agree that children need to respect their parents as individuals.
But, I do leave my phone on when I'm out and if I or my dc are somewhere else overnight, then I am contactable.

contactable yes, if poss but not obligated/expected to drop everything/stay sober or in range, it was this expectation that caused the controversy on this thread.

If I'm in the pool or a lake/river/body of water I'm out of contact. If it's for a day, usually DS will be with someone, a friend etc, otherwise if it's just training he's fine on his own, but he is older.

Sure there are whole herds of MNers on AIBU that will froth and rant that everyone no matter the circumstances needs to 'suck it up' at all times. it beggars belief here at times, but I do think that there are far too many who doubt their own ability to function, and that for many of us, there is no option and it really isn't as big a deal as they think it is.

The saddest thing I ever heard was some yummy braying to a child that 'Daddy's money pays for all the boring things like bills, Mummy's money pays for all the fun stuff'

What kind of message is that to my DS? that His role is to work like a dog and not get any of the fun? that mummy's job isn't important? that women working isn't important?

It really upset me at the time, because without his Mummy's money, DS and Mummy would be living in a cardboard BOX!! Even DS was horrified and just looked at me

Being biologically different doesn't reduce the ability to care, no, but often a woman sees the child as HERS more than they belong to their father.

That said I know that I would say that DS is mine, and mine alone. His dad has done sweet FA and I don't trust him because he can't put anyone except himself first. I've given him chances, he failed every single time.

Society needs a huge overhaul, for sure.

Adeyrn is it your view that those who at times can't be contacted, view parenting as a "part time obligation"?

Exprmsive, I think I've explained my pov pretty clearly. Go back and re read my posts. Take from them what you will.

I'm asking a straight question.

Okay, there is a difference between cannot be contacted, or cannot be contacted easily, which will happen sometimes in the normal course of events and choosing not to be contactable because your child is with the other parent and you don't see why you should be.

If you are a parent who deliberately makes yourself unavailable for extended periods of time and takes the view that whoever has the child can just get on with it, then yes, I consider that to be part time parenting.

So. In my case.

I choose to go to my very elderly father because he needs support. (Washing, cleaning, personal care, cooking type support)

I choose to do that when my kids are with their other parent.

My father has no phone signal at his house and no internet.

Therefore, in your opinion, I am a part time parent.

I also go abroad with my boyfriend for the weekend/a holiday.

Again I choose to do this when my kids are at their dad.

They are with their father. He is as equal a parent as me and it is his job to get on with it when he has them, just as much as it is mine when I have them.

I'm astounded that I'm viewed with such disdain for having a life post break up.

Expemsive, I'm not getting into this with you anymore. I don't think it is helpful. We are just going around in circles.

Aderyn: which side of your line is a parent who is contactable but too far away to be able to come and help?

Oh yes Andrew. I was on a site on Monday. Hundreds of miles from home. No mobile. But if I'd got a message I couldn't have come (and indeed wouldn't for a bit of puke)

Andrew, I think contactable is the key thing for me. If you know, then you can decide whether or not the situation is serious enough for you to change plans. Or there may be something you can do from wherever you are, even if it moral support to your dc rather than physically being there. If you can't be contacted then you don't have that option.

So does one have to tell one's ex if one is doing something that might mean one is going to be uncontactable?

This thread makes awful reading.
The original poster was a mum with little experience of how to handle a very sick child. She was doing all the childcare on her own, although the father looked after his daughter for a few hours on a Sunday.

She wanted help, was panicked with a distressed toddler and sleep deprived. The obvious solution was to call and ask the father for some help.
In all likelihood he was local. He wasn't working the next day as he was scheduled to look after his dd.

Why the fuck not ask him? Is it really too much to expect he might have helped?

No, posters are jumping in to say Get a grip, that's ridiculous, you have to cope, don't expect any help from the father. Expect nothing, there are loads of dads that don't give a shit so why are you even trying to appeal to him?

Even suggesting knocking on a neighbour's door because they might help but God no don't ask dd's father, that's absurd.
It's your job, you're the resident parent, how unreasonable to ask the other parent for help.

That attitude towards a struggling mum on her own, and the excuses made for her absent father are fucking depressing.

The neighbour thing is ridiculous. I mean, on what planet is expecting a neighbour to help, a better option than expecting the child's other parent to step up?

Often a woman see a child as HERS more than they belong to their father

Well, that's weird given that, historically, the child was seen very much as the man's property (as indeed was the wife of course). Still is in many cultures.

Doing all the childcare certainly doesn't, in a patriarchal society, equate to being the more important person.

Being the mother does equate to being expected to do all manner of things unaided.

Being the father does equate to being 'allowed' by society to be absent, uncontactable, useless to a much greater degree than the mother.

Ilostit
Why the fuck not ask him?

Umm because it was 2 am in the fucking morning and it was puke, nothing serious or life threatening.

Expemsive it certainly does come across that Aderyn thinks you, my DP and most parents are no are "part timers" because of various situations where you/we/they are uncontactable. Don't take it personally. Some people just have a very odd view of things which aren't shared by most normal / reasonable people.

This thread is depressing. OP has an agreed upon custody arrangement which who are we to question since she's obviously long gone from this thread, her ex was uncontactable for one night and yet that somehow makes him useless. Maybe he hired out prostitutes, maybe he was partying all night, maybe he was in timbuctoo with no signal or maybe (just a slight possibility of course) he had his phone on do not disturb because it was the middle of the night and like most of us he appreciates his sleep when his DC is being looked after someone who should be perfectly capable (although perhaps not so capable if this thread is anything to go by)

Slightly depressing reading posters - some pretty judgemental types out there. But then my 2 year old had proper Gastro whojiwatsit on the 3rd Sept. Sick 10 times in about 3 hours; followed by twice more the next morning - went to check on him at midnight, sat up: "messy, very messy" - sick all over his bed poor tyke! Had to do 7 loads laundry Mon 4th!! OP I completely empathise, I had horrendous night (2 of the pukings were in car seat on way to A & E and down back of my coat as we got out of car into car park round 3am). Guess what - I wasn't doing it on my own - nope hubby of 12 years, so I am a totes lucky, lucky b*h.

Explain to me other superhuman, single-parent posters how you would actually feel at the time yourselves when this appears to have been on the day the ex-bloke was meant to have the tyke - as well as the sheer fear, worry, desperation to be be clean, etc. all parents go through in this type of situation? If the answer is like things are ff-ing poo at the mo & I'm pretty sure I'm gonna be cream crackered 2moro, then have some compassion & find a leg to stand on - cos your missing one now. Remember please that people are human & find shit stuff difficult.

It's weird how people read such different stuff into a situation.

No one said OP's ex is totally useless based on one night. There may be ironclad reasons as to why he only sees the child one day a week. And other perfectly good ressons why he was unavailable once.

But OP was asking if, in general, he should (all other things being equal) be available in case of emergency. I think yes.

Lots of posters have argued that, because there are times when they can't be available, that means they have a right to be deliberately, arbitrarily uncontactable. I think that's just perverse. I am unavoidably uncontactable sometimes. I do my best. I don't choose random, arbitrary times and assert my right to be unavailable. As a parent, I don't think I have that right.

It would be a bit like having a newborn baby who keeps crying, and trying to assert your right to have some peace and quiet. It doesn't work like that. Your children's rights do sort of trump yours. The single resident parent knows this very well. The non-resident parent perhaps does not.

It is awful dealing with it on your own. My Ex was crap too and didn't once help even though I had proper feverish flu and so had out 3 year old. One of the reasons I moved nearer to family who could support me during an emergency.

One thing you could do is phone him in the morning and ask for a bit of time today. However going forward, in the future, when you both have partners it isn't healthy imho to be 'flexible' a lot, occasionally yes, but then the kids have less really exhausting up all night sick bugs etc.

Merchant there is a huge difference between ignoring a crying newborn who is crying right next to you and taking some time out when your DC is with a perfectly capable, responsible parent. Equally if there are two parents home with the newborn I can't see anything wrong with one of them taking some time out to sleep / get some peace.

9 times out of 10 the mum pushes to have way more than 50:50 custody because for some unknown bizarre sexist reason they feel they should have more time with the DC than the dad who was equally responsible at conception. Sorry but if you push to be RP then you have to deal with consequences including instances such as those the OP mentioned re cleaning up sick in the middle of your night. You can't just make the NRP involved when it suits you and not let them in when it doesn't

Because so many men are desperate to share residency 50/50 Pixie. But those wicked single mothers, actively depriving men of their right to co parent equally

We're never going to agree Aderyn so let's just leave it at that

Pixie I know there's a massive difference between a newborn and the scenario in question. My point was really that you can't decide when and if your child needs you. Once you have a child, that's it. We did frequently share baby duties when ours were tiny so oneparent got a break. But if the on-duty parent was having a hard time and asked for help, we didn't go "sorry mate - your turn". Obviously that's all within reason- you can't help if you're ill/at work etc.

And if you think the sexism which gives us the current status quo is sexism wholly in women's favour you are living in a dream world!!