If a step parent is a SAHP...

[PurfectlyCatish]

AIBU to ask your opinion?

Another thread inspired this but I'm interested in opinions as it may possibly be my situation at some point.

If a step parent was a SAHP, would you also expect them to be so for their step children when they were due to be at that parents home? I.e. school runs, holiday care etc...

YABU - the SAHP should do the care for all the children when they stay, step or not.

YANBU - the SAHP only has responsibility for their own DC and the parents of DSC should make their own arrangements for things like school and holidays.

Just a hell of a lot of whataboutery which has absolutely zero relevance to the situation in the OP.

You have to be prepared to deal with the consequences of whatever major or minor change in circumstances arise when there are children involved; whether they are biologically yours or not.

But this is true for everybody in every walk of life, not just those with children or stepchildren. So not sure why it's more relevant here than any other thread on this site.

The parent due to have the child at any time is responsible for the child being adequately cared for. Eg. If dad is due to have child on Saturday but is working, then he should ensure the child is cared for, whether that be childcare or spouse (etc.), it is not the responsibility of the stepparent to offer care. This would be between dad and stepmum, not between mum and stepmum.

@FloconDeNeige

So what you're saying is any situation or decision a step parent makes she should first think 'what would I do if their Mum was dead?'

No, I’m saying that before becoming a step-parent in the first place, you should think ‘what would I do if their Mum was dead?’

And if your answer would be to shrug your shoulders and say ‘they’re not my responsibility’, then you should walk away and leave their father alone.

Okay, but again.... We're not talking about what would happen if their Mum was dead.

For all you know OP may have already said to herself if their Mum dies she'll take on all the responsibility.

It doesn't mean she has to do it now when their Mum is alive just in case she dies one day.

I just feel like this logic is mad though...you may as well consider that your own DH might die unexpectedly so you better not be a SAHM just in case. Or you better not get a mortgage together in case one of you dies and the other can't pay it anymore

Actually, having been the child in this situation, i didn’t become sahm because I saw my mother trying to cope with no work experience as a widow. So no, i didn’t give up work in case I ever did end up a lone parent, death or divorce. I also have mortgage payments etc all covered by life insurance.

@reallyreallyborednow

I just feel like this logic is mad though...you may as well consider that your own DH might die unexpectedly so you better not be a SAHM just in case. Or you better not get a mortgage together in case one of you dies and the other can't pay it anymore

Actually, having been the child in this situation, i didn’t become sahm because I saw my mother trying to cope with no work experience as a widow. So no, i didn’t give up work in case I ever did end up a lone parent, death or divorce. I also have mortgage payments etc all covered by life insurance.

These situations are slightly different though imo. You can choose whether or not to become a SAHP and risk your DH losing his job, dying etc... You can take our life insurance to cover your mortgage in such an event etc...

There is nothing I can do to protect against the fact my DSCs Mum may die one day.

I can accept that if that did happen I would step up and be more involved with DSC but it doesn't mean I have to act that way now when she's alive.

@FloconDeNeige

So what you're saying is any situation or decision a step parent makes she should first think 'what would I do if their Mum was dead?'

No, I’m saying that before becoming a step-parent in the first place, you should think ‘what would I do if their Mum was dead?’

And if your answer would be to shrug your shoulders and say ‘they’re not my responsibility’, then you should walk away and leave their father alone.

Why would the kids be any worse off even if that was the case?

But this is true for everybody in every walk of life, not just those with children or stepchildren. So not sure why it's more relevant here than any other thread on this site.

It’s relevant here because the entire thread is specifically about stepchildren.

@FloconDeNeige

So what you're saying is any situation or decision a step parent makes she should first think 'what would I do if their Mum was dead?'

No, I’m saying that before becoming a step-parent in the first place, you should think ‘what would I do if their Mum was dead?’

And if your answer would be to shrug your shoulders and say ‘they’re not my responsibility’, then you should walk away and leave their father alone.

And again this is why I don't get what you're banging on about.

OP hasn't said 'if my DSCs mother died I'd shrug my shoulders and say not my responsibility'. You've no idea how she'd act if their mother died.

The point is, she's not dead and therefore it's an entirely different situation to if she were

I can accept that if that did happen I would step up and be more involved with DSC but it doesn't mean I have to act that way now when she's alive.

Nobody’s saying you should have to act as if their mother is dead. But it’s unreasonable to bemoan a more minor change in circumstances, when you knew the possibility existed by the fact the children exist.

@FloconDeNeige

But this is true for everybody in every walk of life, not just those with children or stepchildren. So not sure why it's more relevant here than any other thread on this site.

It’s relevant here because the entire thread is specifically about stepchildren.

But it's not relevant at all to the actual situation at hand?! Theoretically you could go onto every step-parent thread and write that the OP should consider how she'd feel if her SC's other parent died before making any decisions.

If the ex had a life-limiting illness then it would be relevant.

Nobody’s saying you should have to act as if their mother is dead. But it’s unreasonable to bemoan a more minor change in circumstances, when you knew the possibility existed by the fact the children exist.

I don't get how or why the dad is being absolved of any responsibility here?? The 'minor change in circumstances' seems to be him deciding that he no longer wants to do school runs and would rather his wife did them instead. OP has not mentioned a genuine reason why he needs help now that he didn't before.

The reason why he was even doing those school runs is because it's his contact time with his children. We don't know their mum's circumstances, it may be that they do 50/50 to enable them both to work full-time and therefore she would not be able to do do more than she does, but it also may be that DH wanted 50% of time with the children and mum has agreed to that so he has time with the kids despite being more able to manage the practical elements herself (which would be the case with my DP's ex). If he's not even intending to spend that time with them going forward then it really should be discussed with her first.

And again this is why I don't get what you're banging on about.

You seem unable to grasp that I’m talking about step-parents more generally rather than the specific detail of the OP’s situation.

But it still applies to the OP anyway as if you aren’t prepared for the possibility of taking on some responsibility for your stepchildren, (be that major, like in death, or minor, like in picking them up from football if their Dad’s work schedule changes), then don’t get involved with a man who already has kids.

It really isn’t anywhere as difficult as you’re trying to make it out to be.

@FloconDeNeige

I can accept that if that did happen I would step up and be more involved with DSC but it doesn't mean I have to act that way now when she's alive.

Nobody’s saying you should have to act as if their mother is dead. But it’s unreasonable to bemoan a more minor change in circumstances, when you knew the possibility existed by the fact the children exist.

I think the two situations are so vastly different that it's useless comparing them.

This is a choice. OP can choose to become a SAHP or not (obviously with the support of her DH).

If taking on responsibility for her DSC is expected if she does become a SAHP but that means she'd rather not be one at all then, that is perfectly valid and she is allowed to choose to do/not do that. It's not detrimental to the children to just carry on as they have been doing before if their SM decides she no longer wished to be a SAHP.

Your DSCs Mum dying is not a choice. Its a tragic event that no one has any control over and entirely different.

When you first mentioned their mother dying I asked how it was relevant to the OP, you replied that it absolutely was relevant. I still don't, imo, believe you've proved that it is.

Perhaps it's best just to discuss the actual OP rather than go off on tangents which have nothing to do with the situation being discussed.

And I wouldn't consider taking on full day to day responsibility for your DSC a minor change either. We aren't talking running them to one football match because their Dad had to work late.

This is school runs, holiday cover etc... That is a big thing not minor. In my opinion anyway.

And the father is not absolved of his responsibilities, no. Nor the bio mother, neither. However, life is a continuously changing set of circumstances and the
practical realities of blended families mean that the likelihood of a step-parent sometimes having to inconvenience themselves for the sake of their step-kids, is pretty high.

If you’re not up for that, then walk away from that person and their children as they should come as a package, or not at all.

No, I’m saying that before becoming a step-parent in the first place, you should think ‘what would I do if their Mum was dead?’

I would have played a more active role in my ex’s child’s life wrt clubs, school runs, school plays, appointments etc.. but the very fact that they have a living breathing and involved mum meant that I stepped back from willingly getting involved with these things.
I don’t see why I should have done a club run for dsc if the mum was available whether it was her day to have the children or not. I know you think that makes me “vile”, but it’s logical and common sense to me.

If the mother wasn’t around, then of course I would have done it.
And I did do many things anyway, but like I said I had my limits.

I think the likelihood of you having to inconvenience yourself at some point for your step children is high also. In the case of emergencies, Dad working late, Mum ill whatever...

But this is different this is a choice the SAHP is making. She doesn't have to be a SAHP and she can decide not to be if she doesn't want to take on responsibility for her DSC as well as her own child. There would be absolutely no detrimental effect to the DSC in this situation.

This is why it should be discussed beforehand and the parent should be upfront about their expectations so that the SAHP can make an informed decision.

@CrackALack

I think the likelihood of you having to inconvenience yourself at some point for your step children is high also. In the case of emergencies, Dad working late, Mum ill whatever...

But this is different this is a choice the SAHP is making. She doesn't have to be a SAHP and she can decide not to be if she doesn't want to take on responsibility for her DSC as well as her own child. There would be absolutely no detrimental effect to the DSC in this situation.

This is why it should be discussed beforehand and the parent should be upfront about their expectations so that the SAHP can make an informed decision.

I agree with this.

I have had to step in with my SCs on occasion, when my OH has had something urgent to do or when he has been too unwell to care for them himself while they're with us. And I always would.

But I wouldn't walk away from my relationship with my DP on the basis that if he had 50/50 care and wanted me to take over all of his school runs I wouldn't be willing to do it.

For me, it would be up to him to walk away if he was looking for someone to take on that level of responsibility for his children. It's not the default that the SP should do it, particularly if there is no reason why the change needs to be made except dad wanting to make things easier for himself.

This is why it should be discussed beforehand and the parent should be upfront about their expectations so that the SAHP can make an informed decision.

But even the best laid plans and most discussed and informed decisions can be blown out of the water by a change in circumstances. Which is why the decisions need to be based first and foremost on the fact that there are dependent children.

It’s not acceptable to say ‘I agreed to X situation at Y time as it meant that I was not inconvenienced by your children. But now the situation has changed and I am being inconvenienced by your children, so I no longer agree’. No. You knew the possibility of being inconvenienced could arise and if you weren’t ok with it then you should never have got involved.

I should say, this doesn’t apply where the bio parents are being massively unreasonable.

@FloconDeNeige

This is why it should be discussed beforehand and the parent should be upfront about their expectations so that the SAHP can make an informed decision.

But even the best laid plans and most discussed and informed decisions can be blown out of the water by a change in circumstances. Which is why the decisions need to be based first and foremost on the fact that there are dependent children.

It’s not acceptable to say ‘I agreed to X situation at Y time as it meant that I was not inconvenienced by your children. But now the situation has changed and I am being inconvenienced by your children, so I no longer agree’. No. You knew the possibility of being inconvenienced could arise and if you weren’t ok with it then you should never have got involved.

I should say, this doesn’t apply where the bio parents are being massively unreasonable.

I do agree with you in principle, but just feel like there are very few situations where this would actually apply in a totally reasonable way, without the parents trying to use the SP to make things easier for themselves.

Genuinely, the only ones I could think of are your point of a parent dying, or your own partner becoming incapacitated to the point where they physically can't manage to collect their children themselves and the other parent isn't co-operative, so SP's involvement is the only way they can see their children.

Otherwise it seems to be mainly a case of the parent wanting to offload some of their responsibilities and jobs onto their partner just because it's easier for them or suits them better.

I think what a lot of posters are saying is different from the OPs position though.

Of course as a step mum, you know there are children that will always take time, resources and energy from their father. My Ex for example, couldn’t come to a big family get together because his wife didnt’ check and took a last minute weekend away. It was annoying but it’s part of him having other kids. Sometimes I’d be there with DS on my own at vital health appointments because he’d be taking a child to their job. Once we had his older daughter turn up aged 21 as her boyfriend had left and she was distraught, so we had her to live back with us for 6 months.

These are just part of what is to be expected.

I think it’s different to being asking to be the parent though.

Otherwise it seems to be mainly a case of the parent wanting to offload some of their responsibilities and jobs onto their partner just because it's easier for them or suits them better.

I would say it’s probably mord even than that; sure there’s plenty of loser men who can’t be bothered to parent their own children but equally there’s plenty of women who get with men and want to whitewash out the existing children in favour of themselves and their own offspring.

Either way, the kids are the losers.

@FloconDeNeige

Otherwise it seems to be mainly a case of the parent wanting to offload some of their responsibilities and jobs onto their partner just because it's easier for them or suits them better.

I would say it’s probably mord even than that; sure there’s plenty of loser men who can’t be bothered to parent their own children but equally there’s plenty of women who get with men and want to whitewash out the existing children in favour of themselves and their own offspring.

Either way, the kids are the losers.

Yeah I do think there are people who try to push out the older kids when they have children of their own, not disputing that at all.

But I do think there are more situations where this isn't the case and people are happy to accept their partner's kids, like them and get along with them really well, but become resentful when their partner dumps loads of the work that an actual parent should be doing on them.

Soooo often, the dad (and let's face it, it usually is the dad rather than the mum) assumes his partner will automatically step into the role of mother/carer for his kids when they're with him. And if she doesn't, he then tries to push her into that role by guilt-tripping her or sulking. It's not fair at all.

As for the kids being the losers, the best thing for kids is to be cared for by their parents, together or not, without someone else being pushed forward into that role as well.