To not want to pay for his kids to come on trip

[CbeebiesDelirium]

My aunt has kindly gifted us a day out to the zoo as she's aware lockdown has been hard on the children.

She has a close relationship with my DC but hasn't met DP's other children who don't live with us and she didn't factor them into the day out. She has bought tickets for me, DP and our children.

We are going tomorrow and it is all paid for in advance. DP isn't due to see his DC until Friday and he doesn't have a penny to his name at the moment. He lost his job as a result of the pandemic and has just began a new one.

His children aren't aware we're going to the zoo but I'm apprehensive that when they come on Friday they may feel left out when they hear about the trip.

I suggested DP invite them along if their mum is happy to pay for them.

He doesn't want to ask their DM as he said it's his job to pay for them when they're with him. Fair enough.

That leaves the only option being that I pay.

Given the fact he lost his job and we are in financial hardship (that we'll soon be coming out of thankfully) I've had to be very frugal with what we do have and can't really afford to pay for their tickets, plus meals, ice creams etc.

If my aunt hadn't treat the children to the day out I wouldn't be taking them as it's a luxury we can't afford again yet.

AIBU?

What would you do?

Pay for them and penny pinch for the rest of the month..

Insist DH asks his ex if she can pay for them..

Not invite them?

Enjoy
The zoo!

Do you feel the same way in a nuclear family situation by the way? My mum or dad would take one of us out as a treat every now and again on our own, it was never a problem, I know lots of other people who did similar, had a 'dad and daughter day' or whatever.

I bet no one would say it was wrong if dad took just the step children out for a cinema trip or whatever one time without the resident children. In fact it's often suggested so they still get one on one time with just their dad.

But resident children don't deserve the same... obviously.

Can’t you delay the trip until you can afford to take them all? My dc was bought a London zoo ticket and it was valid for a year.

@Andwoooshtheyweregone

Can’t you delay the trip until you can afford to take them all? My dc was bought a London zoo ticket and it was valid for a year.

Why would they need to do this? The step children are having a day with their other parent. They could be doing something fun themselves with their mum that day for all we know.

she wants them all to as a family which is something her step-kids will never get to do again

So his younger children must be penalised because their father has children from a previous relationship? They should in no way benefit from living with both parents because of that?

And put so manipulatively too. 🙄

The OP, her DH and their children are a family. Just as much as they are a family when the DH's elder children are there. Do you seriously think that the OP should act like a single parent on non-contact weekend in case it upsets the DSC on the basis that they can't go out as a family with both their parents any more? Really?

And put so manipulatively too. 🙄

Always the case on here!

I bet no one would say it was wrong if dad took just the step children out for a cinema trip or whatever one time without the resident children. In fact it's often suggested so they still get one on one time with just their dad.

Exactly. It’s always suggested and as soon as it’s the resident children getting that quality time it’s suddenly wrong.
And then a huge irony is that there was a thread about a stepmum spending time alone with just her children and people couldn’t stand it. But the dad can spend time with just his first children no problem. I can see a pattern here showing which children have more importance placed on to them. According to some.

I think people are actually in denial that resident children and stepmums get a raw deal. So what if the resident children’s parents are still together? Should they be grateful? They still deserve a normal happy childhood where they can enjoy things ffs.

A normal happy childhood that doesn’t entail them living in their older sibling’s shadows.

Yes I love the argument that resident children should just shut up and be grateful that their parents are still together 🙄 give me a break.

The attitude toward resident kids on this site is appalling and always has been.

The way I see it, each parent should parent their own children equally and not show favouritism. So (on a slightly simplistic analysis):

SC's mum has 2 children (assuming no new children with a new partner). So each SC should receive 50% of SC's mums' parental time and effort.

DH has 4 children. Each child should receive 25% of DH's parental time and effort. This is difficult since the SC mostly live with their mum, and so may justify DH giving them more attention than the OP's children (for instance, taking them out by himself) when they are staying at the weekend or during holidays.

OP has 2 children. Each of her own children should receive 50% of the OP's parental time and effort. The SC are not her responsibility, although since she is in a relationship with their dad and has hopefully built a positive relationship with them, she may choose to help her DH discharge his parental responsibilities towards the SC. This is her choice, not an obligation on the OP.

Against this backdrop of who has responsibility for which children, you also need to take into account that generally, when the children are part of the same household (i.e. on contact weekends), they should be treated fairly since this is really important to children's self-esteem. However, fairness needs to be assessed on an overall basis and doesn't mean being included in every treat...

Slightly off-topic and I'm not saying this is your situation at all, OP, but I'm amazed reading these threats how much step-mums do for their SC (literally taking on the parenting role, babysitting, cooking, trips out) and how little their dads often get away with doing. Many step-mums seem to be the primary 'parent' when the SC are there, but receive nothing but criticism for providing free labour to the parents.

threads not "threats"!

So can you suggest how I should support an upset first child who is never anything other than an add-on in his father’s home? Do I tell him he’s an ungrateful, spoilt brat for wanting to be part of his dad’s life and the nice things he does with his new family because he sometimes gets to do nice things with me? Do I just tell him our week camping should be more than enough for him when his siblings are all off for 2 weeks all inclusive in the sun? Shall I tell him he isn’t entitled to any alone time with his dad because even though he’s only there 2 out of 14 nights, his siblings deserve the same alone time as him? Because obviously, they never get to eat a meal with dad or have him help with homework or read a bed time story in those 12 days my son isn’t present? Do you think he would believe that?

In that scenario, it is very clear to me who the second class citizen is.

@Howaboutanewname. I'm sorry, it sounds like a tough situation for your son . Poor little one, it doesn't sound like they're making much effort.

But that wasn't what I meant by parenting effort split equally. Since your DS is only there 2 days a week, his dad should be making an extra-special effort with him during the time they have, including trips out just the two of them and inviting him on holidays. Otherwise, your DS isn't getting his fair share of his dad's parenting since his siblings are with their dad 100% of the time. But that doesn't mean the siblings can't do nice stuff with their parents when he's not there...However, it sounds from what you say that he's being (thoughtlessly? deliberately?) excluded from things and that's wrong.

My point was just that quite often step-mums seem to be landed with day-to-day caring for SC when it's the parents' responsibility. Step-mums should make SC welcome as part of the family but they're not responsible for them. They seem to get the blame for a lot of shit dads.

I'd take them and pay they are your partners children and come as part of the package as yours do.

There is an expectation that everyone will bend over backwards and do somersaults for the children from a man’s first marriage
Sometimes. Sometimes all they want is to be given the same consideration, yet they are than also considered precious for wanting so.

The OH in this situation is also the father of the resident children. Why should they never be allowed a day out with their dad there as well just because he has other children who aren't even there and are likely off doing something fun with their other parent?
Of course they should be allowed, but why can't you see that being on day out with mum and dad and therefore special is something step children will never get to experience again. That doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, but maybe considering that in this instance, it's the resident kids who've got it good. Most kids would like nothing more than their mum and dad together.

@Howaboutanewname

So can you suggest how I should support an upset first child who is never anything other than an add-on in his father’s home? Do I tell him he’s an ungrateful, spoilt brat for wanting to be part of his dad’s life and the nice things he does with his new family because he sometimes gets to do nice things with me? Do I just tell him our week camping should be more than enough for him when his siblings are all off for 2 weeks all inclusive in the sun? Shall I tell him he isn’t entitled to any alone time with his dad because even though he’s only there 2 out of 14 nights, his siblings deserve the same alone time as him? Because obviously, they never get to eat a meal with dad or have him help with homework or read a bed time story in those 12 days my son isn’t present? Do you think he would believe that?

In that scenario, it is very clear to me who the second class citizen is.

This is not the OPs situation though is it so what is the relevance of this to her particular scenario which is what we're discussing.

The OP isn't taking her children on an all inclusive 2 week holiday without the step kids. She's taking them to the zoo on one day and has already said they do days out with everyone as well.

What you describe is obviously not okay but it's also nothing like this situation.

@CurlyMc, you are misinterpreting my words. I do think OP should go and her partner too, as you say, nothing wrong with that....assuming that OP has no issue if in a few weeks time, there's only enough money for him to take his eldest kids on a day out and she totally support this.

Sadly, my experience is that whereas step children are expected to accept their father doing fun things without them (and rightly so), SMs have much more if an issue with their partner doing something special with just his eldest kids.

As said before, it's all about the right balance, but too often, the balance is tup one way and in my experience, it's more commonly the resident kids who get the better deal.

Shall I tell him he isn’t entitled to any alone time with his dad because even though he’s only there 2 out of 14 nights, his siblings deserve the same alone time as him?

And this doesn't make sense to me. No one is saying the step children don't deserve any alone time with their dad. In fact I think most people on threads I've seen agree that dad should make one on one time for the step kids sometimes, I have absolutely no problem with that.

What I have a problem with is people expecting resident children to never have any fun time with their dad when their step siblings aren't there. If you were to expect your son's siblings to never do anything remotely fun with their dad in those 12 days that your son isn't there then yes I'd say that's unreasonable. It is unreasonable of him if he never does anything with your son but does lots with his other children, I agree. But that isn't OPs situation.

We shouldn't be expecting children to just be grateful that their parents are together.

What you describe is obviously not okay but it's also nothing like this situation

So it’s only me who’s got it wrong and shouldn’t post? Yet there’s post after post slagging off those spoilt brat step children who get everything handed to them on a plate? Right, very clear what the agenda is here then, eh?

Sadly, my experience is that whereas step children are expected to accept their father doing fun things without them (and rightly so), SMs have much more if an issue with their partner doing something special with just his eldest kids

My experience has been much the opposite to be honest. I think it's actively encouraged on here that Dad spends time with DSC one on one sometimes. What I don't like is when people act like that's okay (which it is) but it isn't okay for resident children to have the same. Maybe you don't think that way but certainly people on this thread seem to.

Who has slagged off spoilt brat step children?

I myself said that I think people neglect the feelings of resident children in order to pander to step children and I stand by that. Not even in the sense that I think step children demand or are spoilt etc... But in the sense that people tie themselves in knots being concerned about how a step child would perceive something that they don't care how a resident child feels about it. I didn't call anyone a spoilt brat, in fact I specifically said we have no idea if these kids would even care or be upset about the zoo visit.

What I don't like is the expectation that resident children should just be glad their parents are together and that should be enough for them, they should be forever grateful for that fact and therefore never expect anything else. These are children we are talking about. They shouldn't have to feel grateful that their parents aren't separated, if you stayed with someone 'for the kids' that you didn't get on with and wanted to leave, would you expect your child to be grateful for that?

Sometimes all they want is to be given the same consideration

They should definitely be given the same consideration by their dad. He is their parent. He should make sure they are included regularly in family outings and holidays, as well as doing things individually with them as well. If they feel left out, that's his fault.

Step-mums are entitled to give more consideration to their own children so long as they are friendly and welcoming to SC (for example, taking them out by themselves/to friends' parties on contact weekends even if SC can't come). They are not the SC's parents.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, but maybe considering that in this instance, it's the resident kids who've got it good. Most kids would like nothing more than their mum and dad together.

This seems to be the problem - can’t have the resident kids actually benefitting from mum and dad being together, according to some posters logic.
The older children’s parents have separated and it doesn’t matter how much the OP and DP martyr themselves or disadvantage the younger children in the quest to make everything “equal” - the fact is that one set of children’s parents are together and the others are not.
All the children’s worlds have to keep turning when they are sleeping under different roofs and in the care of different adults.