Just told DH I will Divorce him over a fucking wedding Part two

[KeenHiker]

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5018658-just-told-dh-i-will-divorce-him-over-a-fucking-wedding

I can’t believe the responses that I had.

Essentially I am going to that wedding so it won’t backfire on me and then as people have suggested reassess when everything has calmed down after Easter.

I am never going to look at MiL in the same light as she clearly thinks my daughter is an impediment to her own granddaughter.

I have no need to fight with myself over it. Yes, I did bring up my grand realisation because it really was a lightbulb moment for me. Before that, I just couldn't comprehend why anyone would think excluding this little girl was the right thing to do. Realising that people think that way because they have money to protect was a revelation to me.

I didn't say that having the money automatically makes them mean, but there certainly does seem to be correlation between the people who think their behaviour isn't mean and the people who have money / think that not going to a private school is deprivation. As a PP quite rightly pointed out, having money or coming from a wealthy background does not make people arseholes - people choose to behave like that or not.

I'm late to the party but would people REALLY cherry pick between child siblings, according to bloodlines, regarding who to invite to a bloody wedding?

Absolutely extraordinary.

Welp! You and she are welcome to stay mad about it I guess.

🥂 chin chin!

I have NEVER EVER heard of that.

"Can the 10 yr old not come, please?"

Absolutely Incredible.

One of the more dubious benefits of wealth is that there is always someone out there who feels they are more deserving of your wealth than you are.

Welp! You and she are welcome to stay mad about it I guess.

Of course we are champ.

One of the more dubious benefits of wealth is that there is always someone out there who feels they are more deserving of your wealth than you are.

Dear god. Let's roll out the cliches.

My issue with the in-laws really is not in them "protecting their assets". It's the attitude and behaviour displayed towards the 10-year old girl who has been in their family (whether they like it or not, she lives full-time with their son, who is married to her mother, and he's supposedly "stepped up") from a very young age. If they view being welcoming towards and embracing this child as a threat to their assets, that's on them. OP hasn't said she expects any inheritance for her daughter from them.

Having said that, and as I've said before, I don't think the in-laws are the ones who need to be held accountable. I assume they had no say in who their son married or what he did or did not promise OP about how he would treat her daughter. I am guilty of putting words into his mouth by making an assumption that he had promised to treat OP's daughter as his own, which I have admitted the OP never actually said.

I firmly believe that a man who marries a woman with a very young child knowing that the child's father has no part in her life, claims to love them both and expects praise for "stepping up" should treat that child exactly the same way as he would treat his own. I would expect that from him and would accept nothing less. I think he should have been just as outraged as OP at the lack of wedding invitation for the older girl. I also do not believe for a second that he'd suggest sending one of them to private school but not the other if they were both his biological children - either they'd both go or neither would go in that case. It's the different treatment of the two girls that I have a problem with - not how much money he does or does not spend on either of their education.

Of course, my opinion on all this is by the by and OP's husband very clearly does not see things that way. Whether it's down to naivety or scheming on her part, OP only just seems to be becoming aware of this fact. She now has some decisions to make in light of that.

Who the fuck said that? 🤔

It's the different treatment of the two girls that I have a problem with - not how much money he does or does not spend on either of their education.

This

Feck knows the details on that was covered about 40 pages ago. Something like another step niece, maybe a child who's mum had died, older step something's (can't remember whose aunt/brother/cousin/by marriage etc) I'm sure a baby was in the mix somewhere too. If you look back you'll see.

It's kind of irrelevant. The point was, they were all like the equivalent step relation as the DD and so they had all not received an invite, on the basis, if you invite one you have to invite the other six.

It's kind of irrelevant. The point was, they were all like the equivalent step relation as the DD and so they had all not received an invite, on the basis, if you invite one you have to invite the other six.m

You were wrong . They weren't children.

But not like receiving and invitation on the basis that everyone else in your family ( DSis, DM, DF ) had. 😄

That is you invite one from a family group, you invite all.

Oh no. " Bloodlines"

What. A . Joke.

Feck knows the details on that was covered about 40 pages ago.

Tbh you've those "details" repeatedly as justification.

Sister-in-Law has a sister with three stepkids. Two lads virtually same age as her, both have partners and one has baby, as well as fourteen year old who lives with them.

Those are the details from the OP on the first post. So, that's two adult stepbrothers virtually the same age as the bride, their partners and one those couples' baby = 4 adults and a baby who have no need to be invited, though depending on the family relationship may have liked to have been. But a completely different scenario because they are adults who are not part of the bride's sister's household.

The 14-year old who does live with the bride's sister, I personally would have invited in the first place, and arguably might have been miffed at being excluded if OP's eldest daughter was invited - but according to a later update from OP couldn't care less and just rolled her eyes at it all.

So not 7 children excluded - just OP's daughter and a teenager who doesn't care.

The joke that OP knew exactly how it was but still decided to marry into the family and knowingly put her own DD in this position.

That joke.

You are beyond predictable. I nearly didn't bother posting because you would falsely claim how it's all about the details, when it's not. It's about them all being the same (non) relation as the DD.

If you cannot see why a 10-year old being the only one out of her family of her four not invited is completely different from the adults who have their own partners (and own child in one case), then I really don't know what to say!

It's just all about "blood" or "not blood" for some people. It's absolutely wild to me.

I spent 9 years with 60 14 year olds on a daily basis. They eye roll at everything.

So...the little DD is 5. The elder 10.

But the eldest has been in his life for (we don't know do we? It's minimum of 6 years going on little DD's age)

Making her 4 at the oldest when OP met DH.

So what we do know, is within 4yrs OP had a child with one paternal family. That ended. Dad is absent. Gran, OP has written off because of "crying". Very angry because absent dad's sister who has her own children, isn't pursuing OP for a relationship with DD, while OP doesn't pursue the relationship from her side. Met a new partner, aware that existing DD is not treated as a blood relative of his family, absolutely their prerogative to feel this way, but that he will provide for DD in the manner her father isn't/she won't allow gran too. Has another child with new partner and marries him.

Roll forward a few years and OP is outraged that her existing DD might be disadvantaged because little DD's grandparents are saving for her. Says they need to tell her the amount so she can give the same to elder DD. It's fine in OP's eyes to save nothing for one of her biological children, because she can treat her own biological children differently because of their paternal family differences. Youngest DD can just suck it up that mum didn't provide the same for her. That's all perfect to OP. Yet DH can't treat his only biological child differently by paying for private school because you can't treat a non biological child differently because of their paternal family differences....oh....

I think there's an underlying tone that because she is the sole authority on DD, it's been made that way through the actions of both OP and the paternal family, that she thinks she's got the same power over little DD. She hasn't. She's a 50% authority, as is DH.

There's a lot of she won't allow, and she'll divorce if they do this (like hell she will, she tried to call his bluff and that went well for her, but I can see the DH actually divorcing her down the line as this issue grows) with little concept that she's only got an equal say over little DD whilst in the marriage, and virtually zero say over how DH parents his sole daughter once that marriage ends. She's not going to prevent him providing for his daughter. She's not going to force him or his family to provide even more than they have been for her daughter. And she'll lose what they already do, as the only people who do anything for the DD overnight on divorce. Hence she's not divorcing him anytime soon.

She can't make this new family become the one she wishes her eldest DD had, not by tantrums, divorce threats, or refusing to engage with the actual paternal family to make it seem like "you're all she's got." She can make them another ex family if she carries on. And she can't stop them supporting little DD either way.

This has all been a massive reality check, I imagine. And she needs to accept the information she was told from the start, and make a decision whether she wants to actually accept they are doing nothing wrong by not treating an unrelated child the same as their own child and teach her daughters that you have different lives because I had you with different dads, or she can leave, return to just her parenting eldest DD, with little DD going between OP and DH. Those are her options.

It’s great to know there are still good people who don’t think dna is above anything else .
My step kids have a mum so I could never be a mum to them , but I love them dearly and while they are here I treat them exactly as my own and I’m proud to say we have a brilliant relationship, which also mean the children have a great relationships and get along amazingly well . There is no feeling of “ mine , yours and ours “ we are a family .

You're not wrong - OP obviously cannot make anyone do anything. What she can do is remove her eldest daughter from an environment that is not good for her emotional well-being. The inequality between the two sisters would still exist, but it would be a lot easier to teach the two girls "you have different lives because I had you with different dads" if they're not all living under one roof.

It's the husband treating the two girls so vastly differently while also pretending to be a family, saying he loves her while also allowing her to be excluded and the overall attitude of "I took her in and should be praised for that" that I couldn't excuse.

divorce - and then？Find another step-dad who will treat your 2 daughters 100% as his own?

Because of the "equality" goal, both girls may worse off:

1. Eldest may be worse off because she will lose a (let's say) ok step-dad who is better than her biological dad (treated her well, although not as well as he did to another one). No gain in return

1. Youngest will be worse off for obvious reasons

It’s great to know there are still good people who don’t think dna is above anything else .
My step kids have a mum so I could never be a mum to them , but I love them dearly and while they are here I treat them exactly as my own and I’m proud to say we have a brilliant relationship, which also mean the children have a great relationships and get along amazingly well . There is no feeling of “ mine , yours and ours “ we are a family .

Yes 👏🏼

She's not going to prevent him providing for his daughter. She's not going to force him or his family to provide even more than they have been for her daughter. And she'll lose what they already do, as the only people who do anything for the DD overnight on divorce. Hence she's not divorcing him anytime soon.

Does she want to prevent him providing for his daughter? Don't think so.

Perhaps it's newsflash, an emotional thing?
That, she can't comprehend the emotional coldness?