Who should provide snacks?

[FinestChicken]

Ex collecting dc for his weekend. The arrangement is we take turns in doing the journey so one time I will take them both ways, the next time he will. He sees them one weekend a month (his choice - he was offered more)

When I do the journey I deliver them to and collect them from his door. When he does I have to drop them to and collect them from the station because he doesn't drive and won't collect them from school or their club. It's annoying but I don't mind because it's easier for the children. Also I will not have him come to or near my house due to past abuse.

He is demanding that I provide them with snacks and drinks for the journey to his house. He thinks this is reasonable because I have the children most of the time so I get the child benefit etc for them. He doesn't work and has to pay for the journey to get them and bring them back. He has apparently asked 3 different people who all think it's reasonable for me to provide food for the journey and not him.

AIBU to think he's a dick?
WIBU to send the dc with no snacks?

I don't want the dc to suffer, but I also want to maintain proper boundaries because ex is a 'give and inch and he'll take a mile' kind of a guy.

Who are these 'friends' who are passing judgement on your minor domestic disagreements? Why are their opinions in any way important? If that's the only way that he can justify his position, tell him to piss off and grow up.

He’s being a massive dickhead and a petty one at that. I would never see my kids go without anything they need if I could help it, but my ex has the same attitude as yours does- ie everything falls to me because “you’re their mother” and it pisses me off a lot. Goes on and on about his “rights as a father” but never the responsibility of it

I know op. It's impossible though.

"Why?
He’s in charge of them, he pays"
Yes but what if he refuses? It's all very well taking the moral high ground but not at the kids expense. I'd certainly let him know what a prick he is but wouldn't see the kids go without.

The op only gave this info in response to me asking, so don't try and catch me out. Of course if there is abuse involved then the situation is not clear cut. None the less "my ex is abusive=don't provide snack" doesn't balance

Wasn't trying to catch you out @TheOrigRights - genuinely didn't spot the order of reply or that your own question prompted the update.
So ... apologies! & glad we are 'on the same page' about this appalling father.

@ChargingBuck

The op only gave this info in response to me asking, so don't try and catch me out. Of course if there is abuse involved then the situation is not clear cut. None the less "my ex is abusive=don't provide snack" doesn't balance

Wasn't trying to catch you out @TheOrigRights - genuinely didn't spot the order of reply or that your own question prompted the update.
So ... apologies! & glad we are 'on the same page' about this appalling father.

Thank you, and I in turn apologise for being snippy.

Who should provide snacks?
Boris

@LoisLane66

Do t be ridiculous OP. They will be hungry after 2 hours? Good grief. What do they do at home, graze all the time? Breakfast lunch dinner are the only meals and maybe supper if weekend and staying up later. If they have a decent breakfast with you at say, 8am or whenever, then they don't need snacks at 10.30 or 11 o'clock. They can wait till dad does lunch fgs. Anything else is overeating and they'll end up snacking all their lives.

So good to see the Food Police out on the beat, rigidly asserting what the priorities ought to be here.

@LoisLane66 what are you like with this "anything else is overeating" stricture? You know different bodies have different 'engines' & different needs, right?

Some people eat 5 or 6 times a day. I used to, in my sporting youth. It suited my body type to have smaller, frequent meals. I was an athletic framed size 10. No way was I overeating.

Some people aren't hungry at breakfast, so snack at 10:30 or 11. Are you seriously dictating that only your strictly timed mealtime methods are acceptable, & everyone should jolly well do as you tell them?

Fascinating that you think lecturing & attempting to food-shame an OP who's escaped an abusive ex, & is now processing his latest attempt at control, is more important than giving her some friendly support.

I don't think YABU, but I would still give them snacks and drinks because he sounds exactly like the sort of waste of space to let them go without and tell them it was your fault.

@FrownedUpon

Poor kids. Hate seeing parent squabbles like this.

If you'd bothered to read OP's updates, you'd have seen for yourself how the OP is making every effort to avoid "squabbles" & has been the bigger person throughout this latest spat, @FrownedUpon.

I frown upon your sneery response, & hope you update yourself soon.

I would reply with something along the lines of "Just to confirm in writing that you are not prepared to provide the children with adequate food for the duration of your contact time. In order that the children receive adequate nutrition I will be sending them with snacks until such point as you are prepared to provide for them during your time with them."

Think you've done exactly the right thing in ranting on here and not engaging with him.

Thank you, and I in turn apologise for being snippy.

You are kind, @TheOrigRights - & the deadbeat dad on this thread is enough to make any of us feel snippy x

@ChargingBuck
I was not food-shaming you. You have no foundation for saying that and your ex and abusive past have nothing whatsoever to do with my comment. I referred to the habit of snacking not being a good idea, just as I think it's ridiculous to have a takeaway coffee in hand when you're walking around the shops or queuing at 7am outside Costa before driving to work. Only my view. If you, on the other hand, think it's ok to skip breakfast but eat something marginally less nutritious as a snack and for children to graze rather than allow time for food to be digested properly and eat with family at a table, then that's your prerogative. I wrote about the habit, not your personal life which is of no interest to me and was incidental to your post.

Clearly there are people on this post who have never been in an abusive relationship. He's clearly still trying to exert his control over you by making unreasonable requests and claiming he has back up from his flying monkeys friends.

Of course YANBU to expect him to supply the snacks when they are in his care especially with the court ordered arrangement. Could you grey rock him with 'the court has said you are responsible for costs when they are with you'?

I do think he is being petty as it is hardly difficult to bring some flasks of water and snacks for them. He could get them a bottle each from poundland, which would be useful for any trips out at the weekend. Then tap water is free! A multi pack of crisps or a bag of apples would also be about £1. If I were him, I that's what I'd do.

In your situation, dealing with the unreasonable man I'd probably send them each with a bottle of water (as he might not return a thermos ) and some fruit. It is a shame he doesn't want to bother sorting this for his children, though.

[quote LoisLane66]@ChargingBuck
I was not food-shaming you. You have no foundation for saying that and your ex and abusive past have nothing whatsoever to do with my comment. I referred to the habit of snacking not being a good idea, just as I think it's ridiculous to have a takeaway coffee in hand when you're walking around the shops or queuing at 7am outside Costa before driving to work. Only my view. If you, on the other hand, think it's ok to skip breakfast but eat something marginally less nutritious as a snack and for children to graze rather than allow time for food to be digested properly and eat with family at a table, then that's your prerogative. I wrote about the habit, not your personal life which is of no interest to me and was incidental to your post.[/quote]
I think you are getting confused.

I haven't posted anything about an ex and abusive past, so you know sod-all about my personal life which is no interest to you.

Also not sure where you are getting the idea that a snack or small meal is less nutritious than a breakfast. Or that I'm not allowing snacks & meals to be digested. Or encouraging grazing.
Did you imagine I was eating junk food? Are you not aware that portion sizes & frequency don't denote nutrient value?

Your imagination is running away with you @LoisLane66

OP & PP - Apologies for the derail.

@daimbarsatemydogsbone

Who should provide snacks? Boris

😂😂😂

I still haven't responded. I'm torn between just completely ignoring (he has renewed his demand today) or sending something like 'since you are saying that you will not provide the children with food during the journey with you to your house, then yes, I will do so'
Either way I will give them something to eat and some water because they will be travelling when they would normally be having tea, as well as coming from a sport club, so will likely be hungry.

@FinestChicken

I still haven't responded. I'm torn between just completely ignoring (he has renewed his demand today) or sending something like 'since you are saying that you will not provide the children with food during the journey with you to your house, then yes, I will do so' Either way I will give them something to eat and some water because they will be travelling when they would normally be having tea, as well as coming from a sport club, so will likely be hungry.

I would reply saying "I will provide the children with snacks". You don't need state your reasons, he knows them. Let the loser think he's won and he was right all along. Nothing you say will say will make him turn around and admit he's being a tosser.

I found any interaction with my ex so, so difficult and resented that he could still make me feel that way. Anything you can do to limit communication will be better for you.

Tbh, you know he won’t do anything so don’t bother replying at all.

Send the kids with snacks without acknowledging anything he says/does.

Let him work it out. Leave HIM hanging for an answer.

I wouldn't bother responding at all tbh. You've decided you'll provide their snacks, you know he's not going to. He's not even worth the effort of an email back imo.

Don't respond.

It's actually quite telling he keeps sending messages about this.

Give them a snack on the day. If he says anything just smile sweetly and reply "of course I wouldn't leave my children hungry. A good parent never would".

This is all about control, so control him.

He doesn’t need to know you’re providing snacks. Only the people who matter do, and who will actually be eating them.

Ignore him.

Give him a taste of his own ‘control’ medicine. And then dismiss his ‘worries’ when he asks why you didn’t reply with a wave of the hand, and a goodbye to your kids.

@FinestChicken

I won't. At one point he actually asked me to tell the children that he gave me money each month for them. I said I wouldn't because it wasn't fair on them, and pointed out that the older ones would certainly ask how much even if I had agreed. Strangely he never asked me again. Now he talks to them about it in such a way as to make them think he is paying out lavish amounts and I keep schtum while silently grinding my teeth. I will never drag the children into his stupid games.

Honestly, I'd tell them how little he provides the next time he pulls that stunt.

Urgh. Sounds like he is still eying to control you.
Having said that, snacks don't seem like a bad idea so I would just reply "OK". That way if he's doing it mostly to get a reaction he will be disappointed.