Younger children turning on me.

[SlothsRUs]

I feel my whole world fell apart at the weekend my middle daughter turned on me followed by youngest and totally supported by husband.

They accused me of sabotaging their relationship with husband’s family, something I absolutely refute.

I do admit that I stopped ‘facilitating’ the relationship because the behaviour of the in-laws had a negative impact on my eldest daughter from a previous relationship.

All this came about when middle daughter started spending time with DH’s niece who teaches at adjoining uni to the one Middle daughter started at last year. She told MD that I stopped them having a relationship.

In-laws were always nice to my eldest one but there was different treatment to the other grandchildren so it was difficult to go round there. There was an occasion when we declined wedding invitations for younger kids from DH’s cousin when they could have been flower girls as it seemed unfair to eldest. We didn’t go on Christmas Day as eldest one wouldn’t have been so generously treated.

SiL always asked to have younger ones but not eldest in spite of having kids same age as eldest.

It was easier to leave all three with my mother but husband suggested we split them and I always refused. He was lovely to my eldest though.

When BiL car back to England his eldest handed camera to my eldest to take photos of the ‘real’ cousins.

Eldest is now single parent and has had unsuccessful attempts to form relationships with her father.

My husband could always have ensured they saw that side but he tended to go alone after work.

Youngest daughter said my eldest was an embarrassment. Don’t know how to move forward. Middle one gone back to uni after reading week.

Exactly this

It's absolutely not nonsense.

There's a huge difference between being a step-parent (which has absolutely no legal status) and being an adoptive parent (which means you are, y'know, the parent). To say otherwise is just silly.

The child wasn't "left out" either. They received presents, they got invited to events - they were just treated differently to the biological grandchildren. And that's okay.

Why should children suffer because adults in your extended family cannot behave fairly towards all children in your immediate family.

But children DID suffer - the younger two who were denied a lot of opportunities by the OP's insistence that they couldn't have anything her eldest daughter couldn't also have.

Wheher or not step children should be treated equally by the wider family is a debate which has clear views on both sides. The role of the DH, the father of the younger two, is also up for debate. But in the situation this thread is about, yes children suffered. The two younger ones. And it's asking a lot to suggest that the way forward is to ask them to put themselves in the older one's shoes.

The OP says that the eldest was described as an embarrassment, and that the younger two talk about her as if she were the devil incarnate. I have the very strongest suspicion that we're only getting a tiny fragment of the times OP has prioritised her eldest to the detriment of the others.

I'm not surprised you're devastated. Your younger children are behaving really immaturely and not very sisterly. I actually think family counselling would be useful for you.

Well there are a fair few posters excusing and backing the shameful treatment of sisters as being different, which cannot be justified in anyway - you can bin your ‘legal’ status as a very lame excuse! These are children in the same family, under the same roof, it is pretty horrible to treat any of them differently - whoever you are.

But as in-laws - that is even more horrible as it is saying the sister that does not have their families blood in her, or a legal certificate, gets treated worse. Good on the OP for actually calling this out and I hope that all the sisters when they mature and grow will realise this and not turn out like them!

Agree with @Gymnopedie according to op, her eldest and some posters here, it doesn't matter how upset or affected the younger girls were, as long as oldest wasn't upset?

Well there are a fair few posters excusing and backing the shameful treatment of sisters as being different

But they are different. They're not full biological siblings. You can't pretend that step and half siblings are the same as full siblings. That's not how it works.

But an adopted child whether adopted son/daughter/grandchild whatever is just that; a son/daughter/grandchild. The relationship is of a completely different nature and, as crap as it is, its viewed different socially to step-kids.

With an adoption you take a child on as your own. Step kids will never be yours.

They didn’t ‘suffer’ – not going to some cousin’s wedding isn’t ‘suffering’.

And if the in laws really wanted to see the younger two that much, they could have made the effort, likewise their Dad could have made it happen.

No one involved has pushed for this to happen.

The in-laws preferred not to see the younger two than to make the effort to not exclude one of the siblings.

Plenty of people are not particularly close to one or another branch of their families, and while a bit of a shame, it is not a Shakespearian tragedy. Now they are adults they can cultivate those relationships themselves if they want to.

@margotrose the point is that they ARE siblings to each other - fully and completely. And as an in-law they don’t get to rub in their faces that ‘some’ are special as they are blood related and the other is not - it’s mean and horrible to those sisters. Those sister’s themselves can feel how they feel about each other, the family themselves will be having their own identity about how they are with each other. And the LAST thing they need is a divisive in law saying very publicly and clearly ‘you are not equal in our eyes and never will be’.

They lost out on forming those family relationships as children. That is indeed suffering.

They are indeed old enough to decide for themselves now, as they are old enough to hold OP accountable for the actions she decided to take. OP eas entitled to make the decisions she did, she isn’t entitled to have her daughters agree with them, or think kindly of her because of them.

the point is that they ARE siblings to each other - fully and completely.

Half-siblings, yes, not full siblings. There's a difference - whether you want to believe it or not is up to you.

The in-laws haven't rubbed anything in anyone's face. They treated their grandchildren and were also kind enough to buy their half-sibling a gift, even though they're not related to her and could have left her with nothing.

I have step-grandparents and they didn't buy me gifts, nor did I expect them to. They weren't my grandparents - why on earth would they?!

Of course she isn’t the same. They’re all OP’s daughters, but they’re not all the in-laws granddaughters. That’s just a fact, and a reality when it comes to blended families. While some will consider steps to be the same as their biological children/grandchildren, you can’t demand that everyone does.

I don’t really understand this. I have a full and a half sibling. In what way are we meant to treat each other differently exactly? 🤔 What sorts of things would be doing to ‘pretend’ we’re full siblings? 😄

Where did I say you had to treat each other differently?

You're free to think of your half-siblings as no different to your full-siblings, but that has no bearing on how your biological grandparents should view a child who isn't related to them.

As presented, none of the family made the effort to cultivate those relationships. The DH didn’t, the OP didn’t, the in laws didn’t.

And no, not having a particularly close relationship with some members of your extended family does not qualify as ‘suffering’. They might wish things had unfolded differently but they were not subjected to ‘suffering’.

You can't pretend that step and half siblings are the same as full siblings. That's not how it works.

I just don’t get what you mean – what would pretending full and half siblings are the same involve?

Yet being treated kindly by your stepfather’s family is ‘suffering’? On the basis that you’re not treated like a grandchild by people who aren’t your grandparents?

The two youngest clearly felt they suffered, whether you agree or not. They’re allowed feeling that don’t align with yours, or their those of their mother. They hold their mother responsible for the decisions she made, and now she’s feeling the consequences of that. They had to suck it up as children, now it’s OP turn.

I mean that legally, step-siblings, half siblings and full-siblings are all different things.

As a result, you can't expect people to treat your half-siblings or your step-siblings in the same way as they treat your full siblings, because they're different relationships.

I have step-grandparents (on both sides) and none of them treated me in the same way as they treated their own biological grandchildren, because it's a completely different relationship.

They were still kind and good to me. They still bought me gifts. But I wasn't their biological grandchild and so they didn't treat me as one. I wouldn't have expected them to - I had my own grandparents.

You’ve never met these people, these are your words, not theirs 🤔😆

They didn’t ‘suffer’ – not going to some cousin’s wedding isn’t ‘suffering’.
But they must have 'suffered' that's the whole reason why the op refused a relationship for the younger girls and parental family? The 'suffering' of eldest for not being asked to be a flower girl or going to social things? To say they didn't suffer not going to a wedding removes all of the ops reason?

I’m going by OP’s words. The youngest daughters clearly aren’t happy about the decision she made, and feel unhappy about missing out on having a relationship with their family members. They feel strongly enough about it that it’s blown up over the weekend, and is something OP recognises as serious.

As minor as you may like to believe this is, and that the feelings of teenagers are invalid, these things can have long term repercussions throughout peoples lives. I’ve seen it firsthand.

Being aware of being excluded or treated less favourably than a sibling for reasons you don’t understand I’d say is probably an actively unpleasant experience.

Not going to some relative’s wedding as a 3 or 5 year old, which I very much doubt you’d have any awareness of, let alone care about – that is not being subjected to suffering.

Why do you think she was incapable of understanding? If she had a relationship with her paternal family, would you expect her grandparents to consider the other two grandchildren and invite them along on visits as well? Or would you expect the two younger children to understand that they have different family relationships?

There are stepchildren on this thread that understood perfectly well that their siblings grandparents weren’t theirs, and had no problem with that. Or do those experiences not count?

These are just the things op has mentioned as the big things but since she wanted no relationship with them your really talking more of missing every family gathering, wedding, birthday party, summer bbq’s any meet ups over Christmas, general play dates between cousins, maybe the odd family trip or holiday spending on the family.

then on the rare occasion you maybe are there because mummy allows it you don’t know the in joke in the family because Darryl threw peas at uncle Charlie over the Christmas dinner and then Mary was snoring like a little piggy so hard she farted… Maggie used to have a habit of climbing into small spaces and getting stuck. Gramma joe makes a mean whatever but you’ve never gotten to try it only hear about it.

All because the older sister was more important.