To ask what you think of this situation and who's being unreasonable?

[HillProp]

John is married to Lisa who he shares DC with. He also shares DC with Kate (so Lisa's DSC). Lisa works part time (although not massively part time to be fair!) due to young DC so tends to take on more childcare for all of the children than John.

Whenever there is an argument between John and Lisa, one of Lisa's responses is that John do X Y or Z for his own kids from now on. For example: 'You can cook for your own kid from now on' meaning her DSC. She will say this even if DSC are there.

Lisa's DSC have told their Mum, Kate, about this who has now told John she's annoyed about this and thinks it's cruel of Lisa. DSC generally like Lisa and they get on well typically.

Lisa feels like John leaves a lot of his children's care to her and this is her retaliation when things blow up between them although it isn't always actually anything to do with the DC but this is her way of 'getting to him', by refusing to do anything for his older DC.

Who's unreasonable?

Lisa for using DSCs care as a means to punish John?

Or Kate for having a go at John about this comment?

Or options 3.. John for putting too much onto Lisa in relation to his older DC?

From worst to best:

John - waste of space. (Worst by some distance)
Lisa - with the caveat that I totally get her frustration.
Kate - calling Lisa cruel was a bit much.

I would say that the right sort of response in those circumstance is "I'll talk to you about this later"

If he is ranting in front of the DC/DSC then the first course of action is to limit the damage to them. Which means responding later and in private.

Yes we all misspeak when provoked. But that does not make it right

Lisa is a dick for using the step children as a weapon in their war. Saying it in front of them IS cruel.

It is cruel. I have a DH with a stepmom who made it clear he wasn't part of HER family. 30 years on and he's still carrying resentment about it.

John.

Why was he only option 3? Should have been first.

Lisa is frustrated probadly because she has tried to get John to step up. If Lisa is that unreasonable that dsc are harmed by the comments then John should have stepped up earlier or left...so it's 100% John as he's causing all the drama.

Actually I disagree. If a man is ranting at you in front of the children on the basis that your household labour isn’t good enough (in that scenario, it’s about you cooking specifically for them) then it’s much better for the children to model assertive behaviour by saying something like ‘you should cook then’.

Otherwise you are modelling that it’s ok for him to have a go at you like that. And showing the child that it’s fine for men to do nothing and criticise the person who did.

Also, why is it Lisa’s responsibility to ‘limit the damage’ done by the children’s father’s dreadful attitude and behaviour?

Lisa is being used as a scapegoat for John’ shit parenting.

And I agree perhaps Lisa shouldn’t have responded like that, but we don’t know the circumstances.

It’s really wearing to parent largely alone, then when the weekend rolls around your DH’s presence doesn’t alleviate the pressure, his kids come and add to your load.

I don’t blame Lisa at all. John can cook for all his kids and Kate should stay out of it. Attacking Lisa isn’t going to help. If she alienates her and Lisa gets pissed off and leaves that will mess Kate and John’s co-parenting relationship right up. It’s not in Kate’s interests to be unkind to Lisa. Kate should also consider whether she would appreciate feedback in her relationship from Lisa and John.

I think this a very good response.

I do t think Lisa should be saying these things in front of the children (especially making her DSC feel unloved) but I also think she needs to remind John they are all his children and he needs to do more for them all - not make the step child feel his but his other children feel hers.

Kate presumably also knows what John is like.

If my DS told me that his stepmum has said that his dad should cook, I’d have agreed with her. Yes. His dad should cook for him.

John.
Kate is right to be angry/concerned but should hold John responsible for the care & welfare of his children.
Lisa is right to complain that John takes advantage of her for childcare etc, but should not facilitate it in the first place & should definitely not challenge it in children's earshot.

All morons and need to grow up, but worst is Lisa. She got married to a man that had kids already and then has more, doesn't work much because of them but still expects John to somehow work full time and care for his kids? If she doesn't do it, they'll have to pay for childcare so less money coming in and considering she isn't working anyway, that's just stupid. She has picked the wrong battle there stupidly. There are better ones I imagine.

John clearly doesn't help out a lot though and I guess doesn't do much help around the house or with kids even when not working. He needs to pull his finger out and help out. And probably have a vasectomy since he doesn't need more kids when he can't cope with what he has.

Kate should have spoken more calmly but can understand her annoyance.

Hello Kate. You need a calm but firm conversation with your useless ex. And maybe a sympathetic conversation with Lisa who sounds like a generally good egg who does a lot for your child and is struggling to cope with all because of her useless husband.

This!

40 years ago I was Lisa’s children in this situation. It stinks using them as leverage in front of them.
John is a dickhead for not taking proper responsibility for any of his children.
Kate is only trying to ensure her children are well looked after.

This situation will never resolve until all the adults talk calmly. In our situation, it took a major traumatic event and illness, which resulted in “Kate’s” children living with Lisa” and “John” full time. Less than ideal.

Well as usual:

The dad is the root cause of all the problems. Shit parent, shit partner. Dragging the whole family down. Everyone is miserable because of him.

SM is frustrated and wants to take a step back from doing things for him relating to dsc.

Ex wife completely misses the point and becomes offended that the stepmum is taking a step back from the children. No thought about what her children’s father has potentially done to cause this and is all riled up at the wrong person.

Repeat repeat.

It literally says Lisa works a little less than FT.

john needs to pull his weight
lisa should not threaten like this

I blame John's parents for raising a weak and useless man.

Ex wife completely misses the point and becomes offended that the stepmum is taking a step back from the children. No thought about what her children’s father has potentially done to cause this and is all riled up at the wrong person.

Absolutely, this

And this. 👏🏻

@PurassicJark you've misread the OP. Working 'PT but barely' means PT but only just so, so close to FT. It doesn't mean that she barely works.

And in what world is pulling your weight domestically called 'helping'? In an entrenchedly sexist one that expects women to act as everyone else's servants, taking primary responsibility for all domestic work and childcare, all the time, while also holding down paid work. You've really revealed your prejudice there.

dear God. the lengths some women will go to in their attempts to absolve all parenting from lazy men.

john is an adult who holds down a job he learnt to do as an adult. Because it benefitted him to do so. His parents did not teach him how to do his job. John does not equally parent and take responsibility for his children when they are in his care because it does not benefit john to do so.

this is all john.

John is primarily at fault here.

If that's what it means I take that bit back. I thought it was the other way.

But she has still picked the wrong battle there, and punishing the kids doesn't help anyone at all, it just tells the kids they are worth less to her than her own.

Definitely not prejudice, maybe 'help out' was the wrong phrasing, but I'm guessing John just comes home, sits down, has a beer and waits for dinner to be presented to him. Probably doesn't clean much, if ever, and does fun stuff only with the kids. He needs to contribute more, maybe he can't be there to actually feed his kids, we don't know his work schedule or their home life, but he can do other stuff. I think Lisa has picked the wrong stick to beat him with really.

I read that comment as finding yet another party to blame rather than just laying it all at the feet of the man himself.

After all, the thread is a choice about which of the women are unreasonable (with an afterthought that possibly the problem might be John). So let’s blame the parents - after all it can’t be John who is responsible.

It is depressing how this is framed as a Lisa or Kate problem. Because it’s somehow unreasonable to expect ‘John to somehow work full time and care for his kids’ (an actual comment made on this thread). John is a man so he couldn’t possible be expected to care for his own children.