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

You don’t get why someone might not want to be responsible to sorting out free ever-changing childcare for their husbands ex wife because she chose to accept shift work without even discussing how this would all work with them! Oh dear!

She can't include them if she doesn't know if they will be there or not. I've juggled the schedules and family life of 4+ kids. Planning is everything. That's why a fixed schedule is needed.

@Tinklyheadtilt

I wouldn't marry or have a family with a guy unwell I was prepared to take on his children.
Every loves a man who takes on a single mums kids but when a women does it she's a mug??

The only reason you wouldn't is if you didn't like them.

Oh yes that's obviously the only reason. 🙄 Let's just ignore all the other posters who have provided reasons, it's because she's an evil stepmother who hates the children.

don't be daft. She hasn't even said "no" - her husband, the children's father has requested fixed times. The husband and SM have both agreed to have the DCs for more time.

There is no way she should be judged or criticised for putting herself and her child first. Just as OP is. Is OP saying "oh that would mean an uncertain schedule for my DCs half siblings, i'd better get a 9-5"? nope. Because, again, why would she?

That's reasonable. They're a package deal. But that doesn't mean their mother gets to subject you to impractical schedules or that you can't have your own life.

@CoffeeIsTheAnswer1

I used to look after my sisters 3 children on an ad hoc Basis, and I already had 3 of my own. I Managed. It's not rocket science. What she going to be doing with a very young children anyway, going to the park, soft play? Just bring them with you.
The truth is Claire doesn't like the ex or the kids and won't accept them.
However I think Ben should step up and try and sort something of course.

but she DOES take on the children and is prepared to have them for more time.

What is it you people want from SMs? (yes, i know they should devote their time to your kids but never ever dare to use the word "no" anywhere near their precious shell-likes, right?)

There is a solution here, which starts with the person who has upended the schedule (not unreasonably) asking work if there is any possiblity of some stable shifts. Then it goes on to the others who work, together with the mum, on a plan that causes the least disruption to the schedule that the DCs are all used to.

And of course, I say this a lot but many people really don't get it, as your DCs grow older you need to re-evaluate many things (their chores, what they're allowed to do, how much pocket money and freedom they can have etc etc) every year or so anyway. So this is a good chance for mum & dad to do that with input from the step-mum if it suits. They can all do a bit of compromising probably without too much effort from any single one of them.

@CoffeeIsTheAnswer1

She chose to have his 4th child therefor she chose to have 4 kids. Yes 4 kids is impractical sometimes. Sarah should not be forced out of work because their father won't help out.

Have you not even read the thread? The kids stay at OPs almost half the week. What do you mean "take on his children"? A step-mum (or father) does not need to plan their entire lives round step-children.

well, pretty soon Claire will be going back to work. is Sarah going to adjust her shifts for that? (the answer is no, and that it's not even a serious question)

Choosing to marry a man with children is one thing, being default childcare when one party unilaterally changes their lifestyle? meh.

So because you were a mug and landed yourself with 6 kids in your care, everyone should just do what's demanded of them? No thanks.

This thread sure has brought out the first wives/partners.

I think Sarah is being unreasonable.

she can't expect everything to work around her new schedule and it is not Claire's responsibility.

so often on Mumsnet stepmums are told to mind their own business and if Claire wants to help occasionally she can but it's not her job to provide childcare for Claire.

I can't speak for your schedule but I know my schedule with activities for 4+ children was a fine art of weaving everything together and multi-tasking. Adding a school pick up or anything else would have not worked for anyone. Now, if I knew they would be there that day, I could work that thread in as well. As a SM in this case, I would just have to say no if it didn't fit.

It isn't an ad hoc basis though is it. It is going to be every week. And she is perfectly willing to help out and their father is perfectly willing to have them, but on settled days. Which is not unreasonable at all. Should Dad not see them one week because his work days are when their mother is working so he has to organise childcare but when they are both off mum gets them and he doesn't. Not everyone has the option of flexible working.

Okay, and? That’s you, other people get to decide for themselves.

What you think Claire should or should be willing to do is irrelevant. The fact is she doesn’t have to provide childcare or take on responsibility for children that aren’t her own. It isn’t necessary for you to like it.

Sarah is being unreasonable to expect her ex to accomodate her shifts, but it truly sucks being the primary carer single mother. Separated dads who work shifts just say I can’t have child except tues and wed next week. Oh that doesn’t work? No I can’t do our agreed times, I WORK and it’s shifts with the new job. If you don’t let me do tues and wed I just won’t see them.
then tells all of their friends at the pub that his bitch ex blocks him from seeing his children.

So why does Claire have to pick up his slack? Because she's a woman?

@Olive19741205

I don't see myself as a mug for helping my sister to go to work during a hard time in her life when she desperately needed it. She's returned the favour so win win.
Maybe if they all co parented and helped eachother sarah might agree to babysit Claire's 2 children now again and the siblings can enjoy their lives together as siblings should.

She’s got two children. Sarah chose to have children and it’s up to her and her ex to organize themselves around the responsibility they have to their children. If that means Sarah or Ben can’t take certain jobs then they can’t take those jobs. That’s life. Nothing to do with Claire.

@CoffeeIsTheAnswer1 because she's a sahm which helps out her family allowing her husband to work full time, sarah is a single mum who has to work. They should all work together for the childrens sakes.

Haha yeah right. I wish people who are not step-mothers would stop preaching on here about how we should all be doing it.

Maybe if they all co parented and helped each other sarah might agree to babysit Claire's 2 children now again

Or maybe Claire actually has childcare in place and thinks it's the height of CF to expect Sarah to look after her children. Co parenting is between 2 adults, and the step mother isn't one of them.

Irrelevant. SAHM's are often very busy too.

@notlucreziaborgia

Let's hope Ben doesn't leave Claire and then refuse to have the children when she has to work.