Step daughter and bedroom size

[Squeakysqueal]

I would appreciate some advice on this situation. We have Step DD who’s 11 and lives 50/50 between ours and her mum’s, DS also 11, and DD who’s 6, who live with us full time and a baby on the way. We’re moving house and our new house isn’t quite as big, the same amount of bedrooms but smaller. The plan has been for Step DD to have the smallest room and DS and DD to have the slightly bigger rooms. Step DD is upset by how small her room is, it is a small room so I understand that. There’s only really space for a single bed and a wardrobe or drawers. DH has suggested DD going in the smaller room with her being quite a bit younger but I think it makes sense with living arrangements for step DD to have it. Especially as when the baby is old enough she’ll be sharing the bigger room. Step DD says she wouldn’t mind sharing with the baby in the future but I think she definitely will, she’ll be a teenager by then. We could have DS in the small room but again with him being here full time and step DD part time it makes sense. She feels like there’s some favouritism going on and I can see why it feels that way from her perspective but that’s definitely not the case. I’ve said we can decorate the room however she likes but she’s just not happy with the situation

Full timers have the biggest rooms. No point leaving a big room empty most of the time and having a full time family member squished up.

@SpongebobNoPants

I think my post has been misunderstood… I think giving a room for the sole purpose of a child who is there only half the time is madness, I also think it’s ridiculous to give a full time resident child the smallest room whilst another larger room sits empty for 50% of the week.

Best case scenario I think is either SD gets the box room to herself or she shares the largest of the bedrooms with DD half of the time and baby has the box room as a nursery.

Full time residents of the house take priority as it is their only home.

I agree with you.

But I don't even see it as a matter of priority, just as a matter of common sense. If a room is going to sit empty 50% of the time, it should be the smallest room.

@Definitelynotem

I agree with PP, if it was only weekend then fair enough but 50/50 is a lot of time in a small room, especially when she’s becoming a teenager and needs space for herself and to study

but then who else gets it, considering they live there FT?

"SpongebobNoPants

I think my post has been misunderstood…
I think giving a room for the sole purpose of a child who is there only half the time is madness, I also think it’s ridiculous to give a full time resident child the smallest room whilst another larger room sits empty for 50% of the week. Best case scenario I think is either SD gets the box room to herself or she shares the largest of the bedrooms with DD half of the time and baby has the box room as a nursery. Full time residents of the house take priority as it is their only home."

dont agree with this - with this logic, DSD never will have a good room as she spends 50% in the other house 50% in the OP's house. Through zero fault of her own.

dont agree with this - with this logic, DSD never will have a good room as she spends 50% in the other house 50% in the OP's house. Through zero fault of her own

she has two bedrooms to herself, the other kids only have one - she wont "never have a good room" in fact she has two and just isnt happy about the size of one, well tough, in reality.

dont agree with this - with this logic, DSD never will have a good room as she spends 50% in the other house 50% in the OP's house. Through zero fault of her own.

It's not that SD automatically qualifies for the 'worst' room based on time spent wherever she is, but just in this specific household somebody has to have the box room because there are 4 children in the picture. Even if there wasn't a baby on the way, someone would still have to either have the box room or share.

In this scenario it makes sense that it's SD who is offered the box room because she spends the least time in the home, and whichever girl has the bigger room will need to share with a baby within the next 18 months. Would she really want to be 13 and sharing with a small baby?

Presumably SD would be welcome to share a bigger room with DD? But it's just not reasonable for her to want the bigger room for herself.

A child that age needs a desk and some privacy IMO. Especially with a bunch of step and half siblings running around, I don't see how she can compete academically while studying at a kitchen table in a busy house.

If you can't get one of those desk/bunk bed combos then she needs the larger room purely for this.

Why can't they swap every couple of years? That way the DSD and DS would each spend time in the boxroom and in the better room without DSD having to share with the baby.

There doesn't have to be one solution worked out now which stays the same until one of the children moves out.

@DifferentHair

A child that age needs a desk and some privacy IMO. Especially with a bunch of step and half siblings running around, I don't see how she can compete academically while studying at a kitchen table in a busy house.

If you can't get one of those desk/bunk bed combos then she needs the larger room purely for this.

...but this then leaves DD6 and the baby sharing the box room FT while SD's bigger room sits empty half the time?

Since DS will also need one of the big rooms, being 11 also, and dealing with step and half siblings too, but full-time.

The desk-bed combo is definitely the way to go.

she has two bedrooms to herself, the other kids only have one - she wont "never have a good room" in fact she has two and just isnt happy about the size of one, well tough, in reality.
Based on the assumption that she has a fabulous big bedroom in her other home, which may or may not be the case.

@SpongebobNoPants

I think my post has been misunderstood… I think giving a room for the sole purpose of a child who is there only half the time is madness, I also think it’s ridiculous to give a full time resident child the smallest room whilst another larger room sits empty for 50% of the week.

Best case scenario I think is either SD gets the box room to herself or she shares the largest of the bedrooms with DD half of the time and baby has the box room as a nursery.

Full time residents of the house take priority as it is their only home.

Your post wasn’t misunderstood

You very clearly said things were unfair on DS even though that’s untrue. Now if you’d said DD, you may have had a point…

@ihtwsf

Why can't they swap every couple of years? That way the DSD and DS would each spend time in the boxroom and in the better room without DSD having to share with the baby.

There doesn't have to be one solution worked out now which stays the same until one of the children moves out.

And what happens when the tears start then about being "thrown out of her room" when she's got to move.

Children say whatever in the moment to get what they want now. Her saying she'll agree to move in a couple of years doesn't mean she will.

@DifferentHair

A child that age needs a desk and some privacy IMO. Especially with a bunch of step and half siblings running around, I don't see how she can compete academically while studying at a kitchen table in a busy house.

If you can't get one of those desk/bunk bed combos then she needs the larger room purely for this.

Plenty of people (myself included) have managed without our own rooms to study in and have come out top academically. What a stupid excuse

Also presumably the other DD by your reasoning doesn’t all need her own room to study in?

I don't think the current arrangement is unfair on DS. I think it's entirely reasonable considering he lives there all of the time and he is the only boy.

But I think when people start going down the route of "oh you must compensate DSD because her parents are divorced and put DS in the small room instead" they are missing that he is also in the position of having separated parents and actually doesn't even see his Dad (or not as much as DSD at least). Following that logic, there is potential for hurt from him too, possibly even more than DSD but no one seems to care about that and poster's seem very quick to suggest he'd be fine in the boxroom but not DSD.

@Squeakysqueal

Yes DS is here full time. No one particularly wants the small room but DD isn’t as fussed about it so I think maybe the best option is to have her in there for now. Then they can switch when the baby moves out of our room. I don’t believe I’m not providing them with a big enough home, a 4 bed means they’ll be 3 bedrooms between 4 children, that’s not exactly over crowded. I did feel a bit mean when she got upset about it but this thread has at least showed me I’m not as terrible as some posters seem to think I am. I shared a room growing up till I moved out, never had space for a desk, I would have taken a box room happily. I can see how it looks for her at the moment, that the other two get bigger rooms and she gets the little one. She’ll probably be happier to take the box room when the options are have it or share. So yes I think we’ll just do a switch of rooms when the time comes

You'll be setting yourself up if you resolve things like this. Your DSD is not likely to willingly move to a smaller room when she has been happily enjoying the bigger one, despite what she agrees to now.

Given the circumstances, I'd arrange the children's rooms like this:

Big room - DS11
Big room - DD6 and baby
Small room - DSD11

The thing I would do though is set up the second big room for DD6 and baby now, so DSD can see that there will be 2 people living in that big room, and not just one (DD6). Best to start as you mean to go to minimise any ill feeling. I'd also talk up the small room, emphasising how lovely to will be not to share etc etc.

@DuchessDarty I meant if he was in the box room then yes it would be unfair. He should have the 2nd largest of the kid’s rooms as he lives there full time.

@Teenyton it doesn’t matter whether it’s a big room because the room at her mum’s is solely hers.

She therefore has at least one bedroom in her life that belongs to her only and also another bedroom at her dad’s would either be shared or another (albeit small) room to herself.

SD at worst will have 1.5 bedrooms.

DD will either have to share a bedroom with her baby sister or her stepsister… max 1/2 of the largest bedroom full time whilst living there full time.

DS only has one home and 1 bedroom, therefore he should have the 2nd bedroom.

SD should either have the box room or suck it up and share with her stepsister because otherwise it’s completely unfair on the other children.
What makes her more entitled than the 3 full time resident kids when should could potentially end up with exclusive use of 2 bedrooms?

And yes DS does have it harder then DS, he is also from a broken home, has only one bedroom in his life and should not have one box room 100% of the time over a part-time resident.

*DS has it harder than DSD

Your solution of having DD in the small room for the present and potentially swapping rooms later makes sense, OP.

So many on MN seem to think that it's almost abuse or neglect if a child has a share a room, which is utter nonsense. I shared a room almost my entire time before moving out, including several years sharing with my DSis who was 9 years younger. It didn't hurt us to share. If anything, I think sharing was good for our long-term relationship.

[quote SpongebobNoPants]@DuchessDarty I meant if he was in the box room then yes it would be unfair. He should have the 2nd largest of the kid’s rooms as he lives there full time.

@Teenyton it doesn’t matter whether it’s a big room because the room at her mum’s is solely hers.

She therefore has at least one bedroom in her life that belongs to her only and also another bedroom at her dad’s would either be shared or another (albeit small) room to herself.

SD at worst will have 1.5 bedrooms.

DD will either have to share a bedroom with her baby sister or her stepsister… max 1/2 of the largest bedroom full time whilst living there full time.

DS only has one home and 1 bedroom, therefore he should have the 2nd bedroom.

SD should either have the box room or suck it up and share with her stepsister because otherwise it’s completely unfair on the other children.
What makes her more entitled than the 3 full time resident kids when should could potentially end up with exclusive use of 2 bedrooms?[/quote]
Can't argue with that logic.

Also 2 x (potentially) tiny bedrooms for SD is still better than 1 x tiny bedroom for DS.

@DifferentHair

A child that age needs a desk and some privacy IMO. Especially with a bunch of step and half siblings running around, I don't see how she can compete academically while studying at a kitchen table in a busy house.

If you can't get one of those desk/bunk bed combos then she needs the larger room purely for this.

So you think the 6yo and baby should share the box room?

I don't see how she can compete academically while studying at a kitchen table in a busy house

Don't be so bloody ridiculous. Plenty of children "compete academically" and don't have a full blown office set up in their room.

I sat on my bed to revise and did very well in school and beyond. The fact I didn't have a private desk in my room didn't hinder me academically at all.

@Heartofglass12345

I don't understand this. My room was small growing up, some of my friends rooms were tiny. It's just one of those things you have to deal with as a child and nothing to do with being a stepchild. She either shares or has the box room!

Absolutely. It’s still a bedroom at the end of the day. If that’s all she has to worry about in her life than she’s doing ok