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?

If Lisa were Keith, and Kate’s new partner, no one would be expecting her to do all the childcare. Not Kate. Not John. Not Keith.

He’d be unlikely to be telling Kate to feed her own kids because it’s statistically highly likely that she would have been doing it anyway.

I doubt John would be phoning Keith up to ask for childcare either.

Same. I’m not siding with Lisa just because she’s a woman.
I’m also not against John just because he’s a man. If the sexes were reversed I’d be saying exactly the same.

But there is absolutely no denying that the overwhelming majority of these bad situations are caused by men/fathers, so usually this is where a woman is suffering.

I do have empathy for Kate too. Dealing with an ex like John to co parent with is hard work. And with that in mind surely she knows what he is like with Lisa too.

I really don't think that is a big deal. Co parenting is tough and she took on a man with children (and before anyone jumps down my neck , I'd say the same sexes reversed).

The fact Kate doesn't have a partner isn't here or there. Perhaps a discussion needs to be had but I'm not sure why we are ignoring Lisa's dreadful comment.

If Lisa were Keith, and Kate’s new partner, no one would be expecting her to do all the childcare. Not Kate. Not John. Not Keith.

This. Both John & Kate assume Lisa will do the childcare. Because they assumer her time isn't so important as theirs.

On reflection: I think that if Lisa set out at the beginning what she is and isn't prepared to do, then she is not U to stick to it. On the other hand, if she withdraws previously agreed help to the children in order to punish John, then it is U; the children shouldn't be used as pawns. And John is of course U not to do more for his children,