To have attempted to toilet train without DP’s ‘permission”

[lwatts32]

DP has a 12 (nearly 13) year old son, he's had full custody of him since he was about a year old and I've been in his life since he was 5 and he calls me mum etc. He has ASD and is very delayed. He's still in pull ups, he refuses pads etc and will only wear dry nights which are expensive. I'm also 24 weeks pregnant and I've just got our youngest out of nappies and me and DP were talking about trying again with SS.

We last tried when he was 8 and it didn't go well, we made the mistake of taking them away and putting him in underwear which made him very distressed so we gave up after about 2 days and haven't tried again since.

SS seemed interested when DS was getting praised for using the toilet so after school on Friday (DP was away with work) I asked him if he wanted to do the same, he said yes but I was unsure as he usually says yes as an answer to most questions. However, on Saturday he went on the toilet a few times, he did have a few accidents but then yesterday he was dry all day.

DP is now home and I've told him and he isn't happy that I've done this without his ‘permission’ as all decisions about SS should be up to him, reminded me about last time - although I've not mentioned wearing underwear to SS or taken his pull ups away, accused me of pushing SS into this etc.

Just to add, DP does seem to ‘baby’ SS, I don't mean that in a horrible way as I know he does struggle, but for example when DP is away SS usually will change himself, he will ask me but I encourage him to try to himself first and he knows I'm around if he needs help, however DP agrees and doesn't encourage him to try himself first as he says it's easier if he just does it.

Was I BU?

She's not a Nanny. If he wants obedient hired help to follow his command he should pay for it. Not let this woman act as Mom and be called Mom when it suits him and be relegated to disobedient employee when it doesn't.

Look, she’s not hired help, I don’t understand why everyone is saying she is being treated as such.

Even if the boy were hers, she should not be going against what she and the boys father had discussed and agreed on without running it by him first. That is going behind your partners back, and isn’t good no matter which parent does it. It’s a bit worse as she is a step parent.

If the sexes were swapped and it were a step dad going behind the childs mother’s back to do x despite having agreed to wait and not do it yet, I’m sure the responses would be completely the opposite.

Even if the boy were hers, she should not be going against what she and the boys father had discussed and agreed on without running it by him first. That is going behind your partners back, and isn’t good no matter which parent does it. It’s a bit worse as she is a step parent.

His language clearly alluded to this being unacceptable because she was a step parent. Otherwise he'd have talked about "agreement" not "permission". That's where he's so unreasonable, because it's bloody cheeky given he goes away with work and leaves her to care for him.

Sometimes you have to grasp opportunities as they present himself.

The child was interested in what was going on with his little brother, he's not distressed, there's no pressure, it's the perfect time - no-one is doing any harm, no permission should need to be sought for this - it's a totally positive event.

If he was distressed, if OP was in anyway forcing it then of course that wouldn't be acceptable, but ignoring his interest in this would be neglectful - just because she didn't run it by his father who left him in her care for the weekend, and who happily has him calling her mother and treating her as a parent in every way.

So everyone’s going to lose their shit over a poor choice of words, even though he has a point? Petty

I don’t know if you are aware but there is this device you can use to communicate over long distances in real time. It is called a telephone. OP has no excuse for not contacting the boys father.

If DH was away all weekend and I saw an opportunity to do something we'd agreed to do at some point, I wouldn't call and ask his permission. It's toilet training, not a tattoo. It isn't contentious or questionable. It's a typically standard part of parenting at whatever age it happens.

Re a step dad getting a worse time, well so would a Dad but I don't think MNs inbuilt sexism is a justification for vilifying the woman expected to be Mom 99% of the time for doing what she did.

There's a huge difference in the two words, you don't get to decide "oh I'm sure he meant a totally different word"

And also "as all decisions about SS should be up to him" so no, he didn't mean what you've decided he meant. He meant permission.

Who are you quoting? I said no such thing.

So if she'd said "ill make the kids curry Saturday night" but on Saturday she fancied pizza, should she phone him up and ask his permission to feed his child pizza? If she'd said they'd go to the park but DS asked to go to the garden centre, should she call and ask his permission?

If he'd walked in to a sodden, sobbing child I'd understand the angst. Instead he's got a lad who's done really well, who probably feels really proud of himself who's now being told he isn't allowed to do that because Daddy doesn't want him to.

Except OP and the boys dad had already agreed to do the toilet training after the baby arrived. She is going against a prior agreement they had. She should not do that unilaterally.

The only person being villified on here is the dad who is naturally upset the OP has ignored their agreement and done her own way with his son.

You. I paraphrased So everyone’s going to lose their shit over a poor choice of. If you agree DP meant permission, how is it a poor choice or words?

Oh, yes the illogical extreme strawman argument. Nice try.

So if its HIS son and his PERMISSION needed for everything, he needs to stop leaving his son with her and get proper childcare. Seems he's ok with it being shared responsibility when it suits him.

So does DP think you should stop totally and make DS'S just use the pull ups?

You didn’t even paraphrase. “Poor choice of words” means he wanted to have a mutual agreement as they did before regarding the DSS and toilet training. If he’d meant only his decision/permission, then they would not have had a discussion and mutual agreement on it before.

Shared responsibility= mutual decisions and respecting those decisions and not going behind each others backs as the OP just did.

@Onnabugeisha she didn't go behind his back.

If he had a temperature and she gave him calpol without permission would that be wrong too?

She did what she believed was right (and actually was right).

If the father wants to hold back his sons development he can, but he can't force OP to do the same.

I've noticed you haven't replied to any of the posters regarding your partner and his cheeky fuckery. So you are good enough to care for his child but don't you dare think you have any say in HOW to care for him? The next time he says something so stupid, tell him that he can provide all the care for his son. Easy peasy.

Yes she went behind his back. They had discussed this and agreed to start toilet training after the baby arrived. She then started the boy by herself on a Friday and Saturday without even mentioning it to the boys father.

That is going behind his back. Yes it’s been going well, but OP still owes anc apology and should not think that going behind your partners back to do something completely different from what you agreed with your partner is ok.

Your calpol example is irrelevant.

@Onnabugeisha she started getting him to use the toilet because he was showing interest. You can put off a child who wants to learn until it's more convenient. She owes nobody an apology.

If she's good enough to provide childcare so he can swan off she's good enough to be trusted.

She could have contacted the boys father. After this, she cannot be trusted to keep to her word or agreements with her partner. I don’t understand how you cannot see how she has violated her partners trust in her to do as they agreed or come back and have a new agreement. That’s not shared parenting if she can just go against mutual agreements whenever he’s at work.

@Onnabugeisha parenting is fluid. You don't make an agreement on when your child hits milestones. You don't get to choose when they're ready.

He hadn't tried for five years.

So everyone’s going to lose their shit over a poor choice of words, even though he has a point? Petty

It's only a poor choice of words if he didn't mean it that way, but there's every sign he did. He specifically said all decisions to do with DSS should be his. So he meant permission, not agreement.

It seems like you're minimising the intent behind his words because you agree with him that she should care for his child like a mother, but he should be in charge of all decision making.