'Taking on my children'

[tinkerbellone]

I’m a single mother to four. I have heard this phrase so many times from people when I’ve been dating, ‘well he’s going to be taking on four children’ like he deserves a medal. One exBF actually said this to my face, almost like I should be thankful to him!
My children are great kids. Not perfect. But funny, independent and bright.

AIBU that if I did ever meet a man who I wanted to marry etc, no one is ‘taking on’ anything and they should be happy to become part of my family? Rather than implying it’s a burden?

Or am I seeing this from the wrong point of view.

I see what you’re all saying.
This thread has been good for me to get perspectives.

It’s hard being single parent. But often it’s harder being in a difficult relationship/marriage. I left their father due to DV.

It really upsets me when someone says ‘take on’ - makes me feel angry and tearful TBH.
This thread has helped me explore my reasons why.
Thank you for all your posts and especially the kind ones :)

YABU I think taking on one DC can be hard work at times and I love her to bits. I can't imagine taking on 4 DC. As others have said, think about how you'd feel if the situation were reversed and you found yourself falling in love with somebody who has 4 DC. I'd be more concerned about somebody who didn't find it a big deal as it's a huge commitment financially, emotionally, in lots of way it's such a huge change to go from 0 DC to 4. You don't have any of that build up of TTC or being pregnant (or your wife / gf being pregnant), the newborn time, toddler years etc. All of a sudden you just have 4 DC and you're expected to know what to do and in many ways you can't win as a step parent (how close should you be to them, are you overstepping the line, are you going to upset the other parent, are the DC going to accept you etc).

I have taken on 3 DSC ... I am a high earner ... however the DSC bleed me dry ... I don't feel appreciated by the DSC ... the term taking on other people's children isn't a nice saying .. however it's true ... some days I feel like I go to work to put food on the table for DSC who don't appreciate me or the financial responsibilities that go with it. I could of spent my hard working money on myself.. but I would feel guilty that the DC are wearing poor fitting clothes, dated clothes ... don't have money for activities the list is endless.

Dating / marrying someone with DC is a thankless task.

Someone who is able to "take on DC" is pretty okay in my book ... and to take on an ex as well is pretty awesome!

It implies that your new partner would be financially supporting your children which I imagine is not the case

The OP is talking about meeting someone she'd like to marry. So yes he would be financially supporting her children (as would the OP).

I get what you are saying and I think the underlying thinking that you and your children should be grateful that you found a man who didn't run screaming in the opposite direction is frankly insulting.

If he doesn't want to be in a relationship with you because of the children fair enough but he doesn't get an award for "taking you on"

A man who played that card would be waving a huge red flag for me.

I am a Step-mother to an 8yr old and I’ve been with my DH for 4.5yrs. It is a big responsibility to ‘take on’ someone else’s child and it is extremely difficult at times. However, when I met my DH I knew that being with him involved accepting that he had a child too and they came as a package. So even though it’s not easy, I knew from the beginning what I was getting into. If someone falls for you then they’ll Know that includes your children too x

I grew up with my mum being greatful to my step dad that he took me on....wtf...I wasn't greatful..he had 2 kids of his own that lived with us...no one said he had to be greatful to her for taking his kids on...left me very bitter ,hated being part of a step family

But that phrase "taking on" is NOT used when someone adopts or gives birth.

Because they have chosen to have a child. Someone that falls in love with the OP gets 4 children, whether or not they chose to have 4 children. I certainly wouldn't get into a relationship with someone with 4 children as that is a lot to take on. I wouldn't choose to have that may children of my own, let alone any one elses!

If it's just because children are such hard work - why don't we use that phrase when someone adopts /gives birth/both single parents already. Surely adoption would never work if it required blood relationship to make it possible to 'take on' the burden of parenthood.

The phrase is ONLY used when it's a single person in a relationship with a single parent, almost always a single man with a single mother. It's very much a gendered term that flatters the single man, and completely fails to acknowledge the single mother who has already 'taken on' the kids full time for years.

I know it's a shock to become a parent and going from single to parent & partner at once IS a big life change (but I'm assuming someone would spend at least a few months easing into the relationship) but it does imply that step-children are a burden in a way that adopted or birth children aren't. I can't imagine living in the same house as someone who thought like that about my DD.

I don't think the adoption or birth analogy really works. In those situations you are actively wanting a child...that is the main goal. With a single parent you want the relationship with them....the dc are secondary to that.

Fwiw my DH's best friend is one of 3 boys and his stepdad is still lauded for taking them on even though they're all in their 30's now!

If you're choosing to fall in love with someone with 4 children, you're choosing to become an adult in a family with 4 children, just as much as if you're their blood relation or adopted. I'm sure the OP is wonderful person, but are you suggesting that she's so totally irresistible that someone would be endlessly, hopelessly in love with her, moved in and married BEFORE they knew that she had 4 children? Anyone who loves OP enough to marry her should also love her kids, not be thinking that they're taking on a burden.

There are many stages to a relationship, and if someone thinks they can truly love an adult but 'take on' the kids (rather than love them as an adult should love a child they're close to) then they're making a big mistake.

Kickass - the post literally above yours answers that.

Yeah, yabu. My own kids are hard enough work physically and emotionally, never mind anyone else’s. I’d run for the hills if I was single and dating a guy who had 4 kids regardless of whether he was the RP or not.

They would be "taking on" your children although I admit it isn't the nicest phrase. For me one child or four children, if I'd have met someone before DH who had children, I wouldn't have even contemplated the relationship. It changes everything so much so if I could have the relationship without the extra issues of having children there too, that's the route I would take. Sorry.

I wouldn't date a man who had sole responsibility for four children.
There's a reason I stopped at one as despite being lovely children are bloody hard work especially when there young.

4 children are a burden.

A burden? Very poor choice of words and anyone who actually sees them as such will fail as a step-parent. My wife had kids when we met. When we eventually made the decision to live together I had spent many quiet hours thinking it all through and ultimitely came to the realisation that they had to be my priority, even over her. They've been a big commitment, and I knew that going in, but never a burden. Ultimitely, they've been the biggest blessing in my life.

I agree that it's an ugly phrase, but I'm afraid there is some truth in it.

Living with someone with four children would be life changing in countless ways for a new partner, and that's just a fact. If a potential partner is himself childfree (as I am) then it's just such a daunting prospect.

I'm another person who wouldn't even consider it. Luckily my DP is also childfree.

I think if I understand what you are saying is that it's the phraseology of 'taking on' that upsets you? My mother met my step father when I was about 7, and his mother (my step grandmother- for want of a better phrase?) said to him 'well you've got responsibilities now' which seemed strange, as we were not then nor became his responsibility, I and my sibling were very much my mother and fathers responsibility, my mum and dad made the decisions and my mum and dad sorted out money. I may be being a little naive but I think my step father got the best bits of having children, the beach playing, the fishing etc without the responsibility. whilst I'm sure we weren't angels and he probably witnessed some challenging behaviour, it wasn't him who had to deal with it! I get the jist of what you are saying and think you are right to know you want someone to join your family in a positive light and if I were in your situation I certainly wouldn't want to be with someone who thought I should be grateful for 'taking on' my children!

Men don’t seem to be bothered.

I’m not sure why.

I’ve known women with four, five kids and with a man happy to “take them on” (pay for them) and have more.

I think "taking on" doesn't have to be as pejorative as you assume. "Taking on a debt" is obviously negative but "Taking on Mount Everest" is challenging but rewarding and something people choose to do. I do think there are people though that gravitate towards partners who they feel should be grateful to them - I guess it gives them a sense of power and these men are definitely worth getting rid of.

Not to be awful but it is a burden I "took on" 2 kids and if I knew then what I know now i wouldn't. If me and dp ever split I'd rather remain single than date someone with kids (and I have a child!)

I took on three (as well as my dd) for nearly 5 years. I agree with the phrase “taking them on” because they were with us 50% of the time. That’s a lot of washing, cooking, cleaning and loving.

Loving the kids doesn't put food on the table, clothes on their backs, provide supervision, provide childcare, do school pick ups, take them on holiday, buy birthday and Christmas presents, attend school plays or parent evenings, help with homework, look after them when they're ill, deal with their complaints and arguments, clean up after them, navigate a relationship with their other parent and his/her family, figure out if you discipline them or not, deal with them telling you you're not their Mum/Dad so you can't tell them what to do, balance what your biological children need and/or whether you can have a biological child in this family, have to think about what happens in terms of legal rights and responsibilities if you split up or your DP dies... In this case all x 4.

Any man/woman should love the DC of their partner. That's often the easy bit.

I agree that the phrase itself implies that your DC are a burden, as opposed to being allowed into their lives as a major influence being something that you would hope would be a privilege. However, as a mother of two DC myself I cannot, for the life of me, imagine offering to live with and raise anyone else's DC - let alone four of them! As a stranger coming into that situation I'm sorry to say that four of someone else's DC would be a massive stumbling block for me. I was a step-child myself to two pretty rubbish step-parents, two individuals who clearly saw me and my DSis as burdens. They wanted my parents as their partners, but clearly, to them 'taking on' two DC they didn't have any blood tie to, was a huge and unwelcome burden. It's not nice to acknowledge, it really isn't, and as a result of my own childhood I have decided that should my own marriage break down I would never live with or marry someone else while my DC are still living with me. It would too much to ask - mainly of my DC tbh - who will always be my No.1 priority.