AIBU? Would this conversation upset you?

[GroundFogDay]

DH is currently not talking to me and I think he's being a bit ridiculous.

We were talking last night about hypothetical situations, wasn't a serious conversation at first but then he brought one up and asked what I'd do in a situation where both he and DSCs mum had died, he assumed I'd say they'd stay living with me but I answered honestly that they wouldn't and I'd assume would go to some family or another (H doesn't have much family but their mum has some).

It got pretty serious then, the conversation, with DH asking me why I wouldn't want them to live with my and our children and again I answered honestly that I wouldn't want to become full time parent to two more children and I didn't think it was my responsibility.

He was upset by it, we argued and now he's still not talking to me. AIBU to think he's being silly over a situation that is very very unlikely to ever actually happen?! And I guess AIBU to have said what I said when he asked? I'm surprised in that situation he'd expect me to be the one to take on DSC full time rather than their families (DH and exs).

I feel ridiculous having an argument over a situation that's not even going to occur. But he says it shows how I really feel i.e. about them not being responsibility. Would you be hurt if your spouse said what I said?

YABU you'd be hurt if your spouse said the same.

YANBU he shouldn't be expecting it anyway and it's silly to argue over a hypothetical.

Errr, yes? The alternative being care does not change the fact that OP is not responsible for them.

Right.

But given that situations do actually happen where neither the parents nor any other relatives are able to look after the children, whether through death or other circumstances, are you actually saying that in that situation, where the only alternative is the care system, a stepfather or stepmother still has absolutely no responsibility or moral duty to look after them?

You think that allowing your children's siblings to go into the care system purely because 'it's not your job to care for them' is a decision that is no better or worse than taking them in?

Would you do that?

So you'd do that and you think it's fine?

Do you have much experience of the care system?

YANBU OP, and I think you handled it perfectly delicately enough given this was a huge expectation on his part and not something he should reasonably be upset you didn't want to take on. I would be concerned about his reaction if he doesn't get over it soon.

I don’t see how you can regard a conversation about fundamental family values, relationships and roles as “pointless , superficial twaddle”, but each to their own!

Nobody is saying fine. Just necessary.
As I said, my friend would not be able to cope with her stepchildren and would slip in to a really bad place. How is that good for her little ones?

@Tandora I thought it was a "hypothetical , light hearted chat " ?

Yes. I’m not, and wouldn’t be, willing to raise children.

It's obviously different in your friend's situation. She literally couldn't manage so there's no choice.

There are a small number of posters on here who are adamant that it's absolutely fine to let your children's siblings go into care because it's 'not your job'. I don't think many people feel or act that way in real life ( thank god).

I think yanbu. They'd be better with a relative.

We actually haven't reached an agreement about where our kids would go if we die. I think option 1 would be MIL and FIL if they're still young enough to cope. They have a lovely relationship with them. Option 2 is what isn't agreed. I have 3 siblings and any of them would be happy to take them on and care for them. DH wants his brother to do it though, purely because he's rich and middle class where as my sibs are working class and a bit rough around the edges. They're all good people though and have done a great job with their own kids. My sister would give them a lovely home.

You don't have children of your own?

I don't agree with this and it's not consistent with the majority of Mumsnet telling step parents to keep out of their SC's lives.

There are lots of step parents who never parented their partner's children alone full time.

Step-parents have no legal or moral responsibility to care for their step-children.

If they feel they are able to do so (emotionally, financially and practically), then of course that's fantastic - but they absolutely should not be forced to do so - nor should they be made to feel bad for saying "no".

It's up to the parents to make sure their children are cared for in the event of their death - that could mean that the step-parent is responsible, but it could be a relative, or a friend, or a god-parent. And if none of those people are able or willing to take on the responsibility - then yes, sadly the children would have to go into care.

I would never be in this situation as I would never get into a relationship with someone who already has children.

OP yanbu and your husband isn't being unreasonable either to be upset. This will hopefully never happen but it is important to have these discussions as we don't know what the future holds. Your DH may have thought you'd agree to this but you obviously get to have a say in the matter.

I am a SM and I thought about what would happen if their mother died (they would live with us) but it didn't occur to me that their mother and father would die. I suppose it's unlikely when they're separated that an accident would wipe them both out I suppose.

Nor would I (unless I were prepared to treat them as my own).

Do you think also that grandparents, siblings, aunts and uncles, etc equally have no responsibility, I.e. that no one in the children's lives, other than their parents, should feel bad or mind if they end up in care?

The conversation started as a light hearted chat about what would happen in a very remote , hypothetical situation. During that chat , what was communicated was that the two of them have a fundamentally different vision of their blended family, and fundamentally different family values.

This cannot be resolved by a return to the specifics of a nonsense hypothetical , and a negotiation over the practicalities should that very unlikely scenario occur.

I don't think anyone has said it's fine.

But the alternative being the care system doesn't make it the step-parents responsibility to step-in where the biological parents have failed to make provisions.

If you don't want your children to end up in the care system if you die, you need to put solid plans (and back-up plans, and back-up, back-up plans) in place to ensure that doesn't happen.

Yes - that could be their step-parent - if that step-parent agrees and has the financial, emotional and physical ability to do so. But it shouldn't be automatically expected of them. That's not fair on anyone, least of all the children.

But maybe they’re saying that because they wouldn’t be able to cope too? Which is why I think you’re coming down too hard on people. It might not be as simple as “not my responsibility” - there’s normally a list of reasons to add to that statement why it wouldn’t work for them and why they would struggle.

And even if it is just “not my job”, well as a non parent… they’re right.

Of course they don't have a responsibility! They're not the parents.

I don't know any parents of minor children who don't have solid plans (and back up plans) in place should they die. I know what my parents plans for me would have been - and those plans were in place from when I was born.

As a parent, it's your responsibility to make sure your children are cared for in the event that you're not longer able to do so. And unfortunately if none of your support network is able or willing, that does mean your children may end up in care.

You can't force anyone else to take responsibility for the children you chose to have. That's your job - and it's your job to find an alternative too.

No, pretty sure my statement covered that.

I was just clarifying. I think that makes a very significant difference. In the op's situation she is raising the siblings of these children whose care is being discussed. That is a really important blood tie, especially in cases where the parents are no longer alive.

The sibling tie is irrelevant tbh. OP has said she’d be willing to maintain a sibling relationship between them. -and she doesn’t need to house them in order to do that.

The only people responsible for children are the parents. Not stepparents, grandparents, aunts, uncles or cousins.

But she has no blood tie to the stepchildren and it's her you are expecting to take on the burden of care and worry. And her DH hasn't even arranged life insurance. He's working on the basis that she'll just pick everything up and carry on. He's the one with the responsibility issues.

Do you think also that grandparents, siblings, aunts and uncles, etc equally have no responsibility, I.e. that no one in the children's lives, other than their parents, should feel bad or mind if they end up in care?

I would feel bad for him but I wouldn't feel it was my responsibility, no. I wouldn't be a good adoptive mother to him because I wouldn't want to be his mother. Not sure if I could cope financially but I couldn't emotionally.

I presume that the whole argument came about because up to now their father did automatically presume that was the case, but wanted to make sure. Op blew that assumption out of the water.

I completely agree parents have to try to get plans in place. It can be really difficult. It was difficult for us to find anyone at all who would be willing nd able to have our kids if we died and who we would trust to do it. We don't have back ups and back ups and back ups. We have my husband's brother and his boyfriend. Grandparents, and my siblings, are not options for us. And none of our friends would have space or capacity.

If something happened to my brother in law too, we'd be screwed.

If i were married to a different man who was the father of my other children and who lived with them 50% of the time then yes, I would absolutely expect him to be the first choice and the obvious person to take on our kids if their father was also not able to.