Who is being unreasonable?

[User2392]

I know you all hate these types of threads but I wanted to keep it as unbiased as I could so apologies!

Olivia has a child with Paul, they are not together and Paul has another younger child with his wife Lizzy.

Olivia and Lizzy have always gotten on well enough, not the best of friends but amicable and as the years have gone on, friendly.

Olivia's child has recently told her that he feels since his sister was born that Lizzy and her family don't care about him as much and are always doing things with his sister and not him. This upset Olivia.

Olivia and Paul don't really get on so she decided to send a message to Lizzy directly just asking if they could talk about it. The message was polite but to the point.

Lizzy replied saying that she is sorry he feels that way but her daughter will always be number one to both her and her family (her parents, grandparents, siblings etc..) and that if there are any issues with their child, Olivia should take it up with Paul. She also added that it was none of Olivia's business how much or what Lizzy does with her own daughter and she won't be made to feel like she has to justify it. The message was also polite but obviously Lizzy wasn't happy.

Who's unreasonable?

(Flipped a coin for the vote so don't read anything into that)

YABU - Olivia shouldn't have sent the message in the first place.

YANBU - Lizzy's reply was cruel.

Does Olivia and her parents take Lizzie's child out too? If not, then it's the same on both sides.

It’s none of Olivia’s business what Lizzy and her family do with her child/their grandchild. It’s annoying when women like Olivia try to make things like this their business when their plans don’t even involve the children’s father! Lizzy and Paul are two separate people, and only one of them shares a child with Olivia. Lizzy isn’t an extension of Paul and Olivia isn’t her boss.

This is fair:
-Olivia does things with her child. Olivia’s family does things with her child.
-Lizzy and her family do things with her child. Sometimes Olivia’s child too.
-Paul does things with both children equally.

You had a baby with Paul not Lizzy.

Exactly. Both mums and their families doing things with their own separate children/grandchildren.
And then the dad does things with both of his children because they’re both his.

I can’t see how that is unfair.

Agree with PP - Olivia is out of order taking Lizzy to task. However, clearly there is some kind of problem if her child is upset.

Paul is the problem here. He needs to step up and make his child feel special/speak to him about what is upsetting him He can't expect to participate in activities that relate solely to Lizzys parents though.

Is it really THAT awful that they avoid doing that on the days the older child is there for a while?

Well as you say we don't really know all of the circumstances.

Ages, activity, who knew that the child wanted to go & when?

Maybe the Gps work & are limited to weekends though & it can't be totally avoided?

But surely Olivia's child gets a fuss from their dad and then from Olivia/her family too?

Do Olivia's family include Lizzy's child on days out?

But children get upset all of the time, it doesn’t mean someone is to blame.

just because Olivia and Paul’s child feels left out doesn’t mean something needs to change, or anyone is to blame. As people have said it is fine for the grandparents to treat their grandchild, and I’m sure he is treated by his grandparents and Lizzie’s child isn’t. It just means the child needs emotional support to realise this is okay, they won’t be doing everything the same as their half siblings, because they have different parents and grandparents, sometimes they will miss out, sometimes they will get more, but the important point is they loved and important in the family. Both Paul and Olivia are responsible for this.

This is a ridiculous comparison to make, and I never understand why people do it.

Lizzie’s child presumably does not spend regular weekends in Olivia’s home. Lizzies child benefits from the privilege of living with both her parents already.

I don’t think Lizzy has done anything wrong here, but it is really not the same on both sides.

I think that perhaps Lizzie's parents are being occasionally slightly unfair, bearing in mind that Paul is married to their daughter and therefore part of the family, which makes his son part of the family too. He is their step-grandson.

Spoil the younger grandchild all they like when the other child is not present, but to do it when he's there and sees it happen, or gets left out? That is unkind of them.

The examples you've given don't seem unreasonable, sorry.

I do feel for your DC though and understand why they'd be upset, but it's not Lizzy's (or her parent's) fault.

People say it to illustrate the both women give their own respective children opportunities, and neither woman owes the other anything. Neither child is missing out.

You could flip this and say that Olivia would probs have got arsey if Lizzie had arranged a birthday party for the step child, in the vein of ‘it’s not your child’.

She may also have said similar if Lizzie’s parents had taken the step child out for the day. Personally I don’t think it’s up to Lizzie’s parents to take Olivia’s child out for the day.

It’s a very tricky situation. As a stepmother you can not do right for doing wrong.

I think in this case Olivia is being unreasonable and a bit entitled.

It is Olivia’s responsibility to make sure her child is fussed over on his birthday, not Lizzie or Lizzie’s parents!

If Lizzie’ parents want to take their GD out for the day, Olivia cannot be annoyed by this - I assume her son has his own grandparents. Yes he might of quite liked to be invited, as all children would, the issue is that Paul should have made plans to do something with his son so that he didn’t feel left out.

You can imagine the thread:

My DS goes for contact with his dad x times a month. Last weekend he went there and his step mum had arranged for her parents to take DS and his half sibling out for the day. She’s not his mum, it’s not her job to make plans when he’s there to see his dad. His dad didn’t even go! Poor DS went to spend time with his dad which already isn’t enough and he was out for the day with people I’ve never even met. I’m livid.

It's definitely Olivia.

People say it to illustrate the both women give their own respective children opportunities, and neither woman owes the other anything. Neither child is missing out.

I agree neither child is missing out materially, but you can see how easy it would be for a young child to gain the perception that they are in this situation. It’s up to his parents to rectify that. Although neither woman owes the other anything, only one woman owes the others child some consideration.

And, to make it worse, I’d arranged a party for DS but his step mum and her family insisted on organising a party which was bigger and inviting all of his friends and so some of them didn’t make it to the party I organised.

only one woman owes the others child some consideration.

I know what you mean. But only she should be able to decide how much consideration she gives. If it’s only occasional then that’s her call. Olivia doesn’t get a say.

@User39498 perfectly logically to me and to you. But not to a young child. I young child thinks 'why does my sister go out for the day and I don't?, do they not like me anymore? Am I not a good boy? ' Being a step child is a hard gig. I agree it's dad's responsibility to make sure his ds is included and feels a part of the family. But it also requires his wife to include and support her dss. Two easy solutions would be 1, dd goes out with family when ds isn't there or 2, dad does something with ds. It's possible they didn't realise how ds is feeling but Lizzie attitude is wrong. She can meet her daughters needs and have some empathy for a little boy who's had to deal with his dad not living with him, a step mum and a new sister.

@autienotnaughty

As you said, perfectly logical for an adult. And that is the point. Children need guidance and love and care, and boundaries. They don’t need the world to be changed, they need adults (Lizzie) and parents (Paula and Olivia) to explain why it is logical, and show them they are loved and cared for.

And if you look at the posts, there is nothing to say Paul didn’t do something with DS, in fact, DS had both Paul and Lizzie the whole day, without the younger child. There hasn’t been any information on how the day was spent. Perhaps it was nice for DS to have both his father and step mother to himself for the day?

She can meet her daughters needs and have some empathy for a little boy who's had to deal with his dad not living with him, a step mum and a new sister.

I think she is. She is sending her daughter for the day with her parents so DSS can get his dad and his step mum to himself all day without a younger sibling there to have to share his dad with. Sounds pretty empathetic to me?

Yabu-Olivia is batshit for not talking to the other parent. Not getting on is understandable but you still need to co-parent. Maybe have some counselling together to be able to communicate better, (assuming no other factors to his previous behaviours which may alter things)

@User39498 except the boy is upset so they are obviously getting something wrong. And it says that ds stayed home with his dad and step mum while his sis went on an outing he wished he could attend.
My issue with Lizzie is based on her response of her daughter comes first. Obviously her daughters needs are as important but shouldn't come at the price of dss needs. There's room for both.

So if someone Is upset that's down to someone else getting it wrong? When my dc5 was upset because I wouldn't say yes to cake before dinner, did I get it wrong?

@autienotnaughty
but children get upset for all sorts of reasons, because they aren’t allowed chocolate for breakfast, because they have to go to school or nursery, because they don’t want to do homework or don’t want a bath. In all of these examples children are upset but no one has got it wrong. The child just needs love and guidance and boundaries and parents to parent and make them feel secure and loved.

My issue with Lizzie is based on her response of her daughter comes first.

so Lizzie should not put her daughter’s needs first?

Obviously her daughters needs are as important but shouldn't come at the price of dss needs.

which if DSS’s needs weren’t met?