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.

And all the people that didn't take on that child are obviously awful people. That's the standard we all must live to.

😢

And you wouldn’t have been a bad person if you didn’t take on her children. That’s the point.

And if you have put yourself in hardship (not just financially) by taking them on then more fool you.
If you manage and you’re doing well, then great. But not everyone would find it as easy as you.

It is very sad your friend died so young.

But honestly - so what that you felt able to take on her children. You are not the paragon of virtue by which all others must compare themselves.

So because you had the headspace, capacity and money to do it, someone else in different circumstances should do the same?

Aka ‘How dare you refer to an actual authority instead of just accepting mine!’

There’s a difference between giving an opinion and issuing a diktat, as there’s also a (big) difference between what a stepparent is actually responsible for, versus what you think they should be.

Too many people on this thread have gotten caught up in an evil stepmom narrative for the OP and aren’t I great that I would take the children on.

Missing key points

1. Step parent have no legal rights at all. Unless a clear guardian was specified in the will SS would be involved and would look at all options.
2. the actual mums wishes would be taken into account as well and given there are involved young maternal grandparents they would be seen as a good option.
3. At no point does the OP say she wouldn’t want to facilitate contact between the siblings
4. the order on which they died would be 8mportant if the mum died first I would expect the grandparents to want to have some kind of continued contact
5. this is clearly a man who doesn’t want to sort out wills etc but even if the OP did want to he would need to discuss it with his ex and make a will

Everyone needs a will setting out exactly these things. Particularly blended families to ensure it is done properly

Given we know that it’s the woman who usually ends up doing the bulk of the work, whether she’s the mother or the step-mother, I think the number of step-fathers who would take on his orphaned step-children are vanishingly rare.

I think you are being unreasonable… you said that he is being upset over something that is very unlikely to happen, so why didn’t you just say you’d look after the children if it’s very unlikely to happen ! It would obviously upset him if he loves his kids.

Because he needs to make alternative arrangements for his children. Lying would be cruel.

Great, that really is admirable.

You don’t get to make that massive life decision for anyone else.

The OP states in the original post she assumed the kids would go to "some family or other", h doesn't have much, their mum has some. I just presumed from the "some family or other" remark that there's no obvious close relative, I'm not intentionally changing the narrative but you're detracting from the hypothetical scenario still. Regardless of who anyone else thinks is the best choice to take care of them, it doesn't change the fact that he's upset because he presumed his marriage to the OP meant they were a family by choice and in the unlikely event she was asked to be there for them if he couldn't she's told him the only kids of his she will do that for is her own. He clearly has his kids as much as he can, having 50/50 custody and he sees his home as theirs and the penny has dropped that the op is not on the same page.

Also, their half-siblings aren't old enough to take on responsibility for them, so that's a moot point to make anyway.

This is why I don’t understand why there is so much importance placed on the siblings. I mean yes of course it’s important, but living together full time not so much. Realistically and practically, the dsc’s main priority would be to be with an adult fully able to take them on. Op is not that person. The siblings staying together full time comes secondary to that.

This happened to a friend. His wife died after a long illness. His two stepsons were already living with them but became difficult to handle and when, two years later, he remarried, they became totally unmanageable and delinquent. They went into the care system. It was, actually, better for all of them as they never took to him and hated that he remarried.
What would you do if your husband's ex died? Would you be happy to take your step children full time with him? If your problem is practicalities, he should take out a sufficiently large life insurance to cover all eventualities for them, and so should she. If you just don't like them, and have no bond, you need to think about whether you love him enough to make the sacrifice that gives him reassurance for the future of his children. I worry about what would happen to my two cats if I died - it must be much worse over children...

“he's upset because he presumed”

Whose fault is that then? You’d think that so very important an issue to him would have merited a conversation, not an assumption.

Oh yeah, the "actual" authority 😂. Forgot about that. All this time I have been living my life all wrong - cheating? Sure, not illegal. Bullying? Also A-OK! Lying, ghosting, manipulating. Illegal? No, crack on no matter who it hurts because it's not illegal afterall. All this time I have assumed that there is some element of morality underpining society to avoid (1) people acting like absolutely assholes and (2) requiring the state to legislate absolutely everything. Eyeopening revalation by @whumpthereitis this morning.

I am not dictating anything. I am giving my opinion on this, as asked by the OP.

This happened to a friend. His wife died after a long illness. His two stepsons were already living with them but became difficult to handle and when, two years later, he remarried, they became totally unmanageable and delinquent. They went into the care system. It was, actually, better for all of them as they never took to him and hated that he remarried.

This is an example of where they should have gone in to care from the start. They never took to him and he wanted to find happiness again with someone else. Their behaviour sounds like it was unmanageable and that will be down to their feelings towards him. I think no matter what he did and how hard he tried, and if he stayed single for them, they still would have been difficult for him.

I just think I’m his shoes that’s a really miserable life to resign yourself to. Miserable for the kids too, as they clearly didn’t want to be with him.

I would strongly disagree with this. For
most relationships it’s “these things are ours” what affects my partner affects me, and our household as a whole. And vice versa.

So it’s not as hypothetical as you said in the first post then… he has to make arrangement for his kids…. All the more reason why he would be upset. He’s not a single entity, he comes as a package with his children, just like you do now .

Should have gone into care from the start.

Oh.

So heartbreaking.

Should have been loved and cared for by the adult in their lives, despite their severe adverse childhood experiences.

Agreed. He shouldn't be making such enormous presumptions and then taking it out on his wife with silent treatment when she fell short of them.

All the talk of "he thought you were a family and on the same page" - I think it's a silly leap for any parent to presume that a spouse bonding with their children wouldn't be doing it mainly for their sake, rather than because they themselves desperately wanted responsibility for some older kids. You have to be able to accept that. So many strangely oversensitive parents taking their weird assumptions out on other people. It's not hurtful that your spouse doesn't want to raise your kids as much as you do, it's common sense.

Should have been loved and cared for by the adult in their lives, despite their severe adverse childhood experiences.

What do you suggest, then? They hated the adults in their lives.

I think it's really silly how many people are acting like he's somehow bereft because he doesn't have OP available as an option if both of his kids' parents died. Most parents just have each other available, and any options after that would be other relatives, friends, or the care system. He's not going through anything unique, his children are not in an unusually precarious position. All children just have two parents.

Should have been loved and cared for by the adult in their lives

But they hated him. And their behaviour towards him reflected that. As I said, why should someone resign themselves to that? I wouldn’t want to bring two kids up who were angry towards me all the time, either.

Nuance escapes you, doesn’t it? The point is that within the law we absolutely do have the freedom to conduct ourselves according to our own morality and preferences. Just as you clearly dislike the normal practices of other on this thread, there are others who clearly dislike yours. I imagine you appreciate the freedom to practice what you believe to be right, so feel free to extend the same courtesy to others who are as adverse to your mindset as you are to theirs.

When you’re telling OP that she signed up for things she didn’t sign up for and that she needs to suck up her ‘duties’, you absolutely are attempting to dictate. That’s also why checking the law is helpful, in case she wants to clarify what she did in fact sign up for.