who is being unreasonable? new job and children

[interestingly8]

Would like to keep this unbiased if possible.

Sarah and Ben have two children together and are separated. Ben is now married to Claire (B&C also now have young children of their own).

S&Bs children stay with B&C 2 nights one week and 3 the next currently. The week with 3 nights is over the weekend and the week with 2 is during the week.

Ben works, Claire is a SAHM and Sarah has been studying for the past number of years around her part time job.

Sarah has now qualified and is beginning a new job which will involve shift work meaning the her and Ben's children's normal contact schedule will need to change and follow Sarah's shift patterns rather than set days that they now have. This will inc upping contact to 3 nights every week whilst Sarah works. Ben is saying this is not possible as he's already arranged his work around the schedule they have had for years and cannot change this dependant on Sarah's shifts for that week. He has agreed to up contact to 3 nights per week but has said these must be set days.

Sarah has suggested Claire help if Ben is not around on one of the days, Claire has said no and agrees with Ben the contact schedule should remain the same as its what everyone has worked around for years Inc the children.

Who is being unreasonable?

Sarah for saying contact needs to follow her shifts instead of being set from now on and if Ben can't do that maybe Claire could help out. YANBU

Ben and Claire for insisting contact should follow the same schedule as normal and be set, not change week by week (although they do agree to up to 3 nights per week). YABU

I assume there isn’t any wrap around care or it’s not suitable, which is why OP wants Claire to do it.

I know with my DDs you had to also book it a month in advance as there was a waiting list.

Sahara got a new job and hopes that her ex (whose working patterns she has facilitated for 7 years at least) would at this point be flexible.

whoever said above that it’s a 50/50 split and up to hen whether he does it with time or money is probably the most sensible approach

@interestingly8 I’m assuming you’ve qualified as a nurse or other NHS worker. Can you do agency work on set days? Have you asked your employer if set days are possible? Could you do bank work once you have managed to get 6 months experience in a non hospital role?

I think the OP is Sarah

What gave it away was it her update saying “I am Sarah”

Sarah is BU. She should have discussed this with Ben before accepting the job to work out all the practicalities.

Are their other family members who could help here?

For the record, I was a shift worker when the kids were little and DH, although we were together, couldn't take over when I was on nights as he also worked long hours. I would swap my shifts for evenings he was in, or we paid for childcare - though admittedly overnight babysitting is rare and expensive.

I'm in two minds as Sarah looks after the children more nights in total so Ben should really step up, but I also think it's unreasonable to expect a non parent to take up the slack. Ben should be doing more for his kids though,

Sarah has the option of getting a job with no night shifts (I'm thinking nursing/healthcare related jobs here) or have a serious discussion with her line manager to see if the night shifts could be fixed to particular days temporarily.

The person who takes a job with different hours needs to source appropriate childcare, it isn’t the job of the other parent to change days etc. Just like if someone moves away, the mover should be responsible for travel arrangements and costs.

This. Its not claire's problem.

Sarah should have considered if a shift work job was suitable if she's a single parent and her children are already in a clear routine with contact with other parent.

It will be damn near impossible for Ben to agree a constantly changing pattern with his employer and Sarah knows it. She was clearly simply assuming Claire would provide free, flexible childcare her.

After school wraparoundcare usually runs til around 6pm.

No it doesn't always, and if you are the typical london worker finishing at 5.30 or 6 with an hour long commute, you might only get home at 7 unless you've got a flexible working arrangement to finish earlier.

From the OP:

Ben is saying this is not possible as he's already arranged his work around the schedule they have had for years

It doesn't sound like she's facilitated his working hours.

Sarah is being U
Contact is sorted, you can't expect the ex to change his working pattern to suit hers, and it is definitely not Clare's responsibility to have her step-dc.
If Sarah's job cannot fit around her children, she should find other work, because, that's life

A hard one. Ben and Claire have been able to make decisions based on him parenting substantially less than half the time for his first two children. I think it is reasonable for Sarah to expect to be able to live life with the same flexibility that they do. But I get that things are set and that it can be hard to change arrangements.

This

It's nothing to do with Claire - either to have an opinion on how things are done - or to step in to cover.

Ben needs to be more flexible and co-operative, Sarah needs to not expect Ben to be able to just respond to her shifts and find other back up.

Sarah's being very unreasonable in her assumption that her co-parent and his wife should work around her. Shift work is hugely disruptive and she should have discussed all of this before taking the job.

Only one poster in four pages has focused on what’s best for the children, rather than what’s fair to Claire.

But what if what's best for the children is actually really unfair to Claire? Why should the buck stop with her?

It's nothing to do with Claire, Ben could possibly try to be more flexible and helpful, but Sarah is mostly being unreasonable.

If you were to look for a new job now you'd only accept it if the conditions fit your family life/childcare arrangement. Why should it be different for Sarah?

Everyone should be a bit flexible. Sarah has just started a work she needs to try and negotiate with her employer, Ben needs the same and Claire - she knew she’s getting involved with a man who has children so this is a price to pay. Don’t want responsibilities don’t get involved with a man with children. To summarise they all should negotiate and adjust.

Sarah is a cheeky cow and needs to realise that 2 other peoples lives don’t evolve around her shifts/life.

Oh Sarah leave Claire alone

No it’s not the price Claire has to pay. What a load of shit. She doesn’t have to pick up any slack for Sarah because she’s got a new job. That’s not her problem and it’s cheeky the OP even mentioned it.

@MeetMyCat - I’m talking about the focus being on the kids, not on Claire. The focus being on the kids absolutely doesn’t need to put the burden onto Claire. It’s been who adjusts. And yes the op says he’s arranged his working pattern for 7 years based on when he has the kids which is all of ONE working day a fortnight. So yeah - he can do some more arranging.
rearranging of work patterns moves over time even when parents are together. He’s agreeing to an additional day but he may need to also agree to help with some of the childcare costs for the other times.

sarah is being very cagey about the nature of the shifts and how far in advance the shift patterns are provided, plus whether shift working will be permanent or if eg she’s now a jr doctor but will qualify into a more stable pattern ultimately

So Sarah has studied part time for years around work whilst also doing 5 nights a week of childcare, to provide a better quality of life for children.

Ben has had an easy ride for years only looking after his children 2 days per week, time for him to man up and do his fair share.

Not Claire’s problem. Just because she is a SAHM doesn’t mean that she is the automatic childminder for 4 kids.

This x 100. There seems to be the feeling that Claire should just suck it up because the others can’t!