Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

716 replies

KeenHiker · 04/03/2024 09:52

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.

Just told DH I will divorce him over a fucking wedding | Mumsnet

This is my first post. I think my head’s going to explode. BiL has shown no interest whatsoever in my daughters, not my eldest who isn’t my husband’...

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

OP posts:
sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 13:50

THEY ARE NOT HER FAMILY.

As you can see from this thread not everyone thinks that.

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 13:50

InterIgnis · 06/03/2024 07:34

She knows he doesn’t though? There’s been no talk of adoption, she knows how their wills have been set up, and she knows he’s got zero expectations of his parents taking on the role of grandparents. He has done what OP has asked - she says herself that he treats her well, which is precisely what OP asked for. ‘Well and fair’ is not ‘taking on as your own’, and fair doesn’t always mean ‘exactly the same’, especially when ‘exactly the same’ would mean disadvantaging his own child and putting undue financial burden on him.

You’re presenting this as OP somehow being tricked, when it reads more like she knew what the situation was but thought that with time and marriage she could change it. Well, now she’s realised she can’t and that’s why she’s mad. SHE knew what she was getting herself, and her child, into, the responsibility for the consequences of that are hers.

Edited

@InterIgnis

it reads more like she knew what the situation was but thought that with time and marriage she could change it. Well, now she’s realised she can’t and that’s why she’s mad.

This 100% like OP knew the family set up, but felt comfortable that by the time DH’s parents died and he inherited all that lovely money she could then either filter off some of it for her and DD1 or look to getting DH’s will changed. There’s also deed of variation where she could influence DD2 to agree to varying DH’s will in favour of her sister….

However, the family have decided to cut out the middle man to prevent any of this happening - with DH’s agreement - to protect the younger daughter’s inheritance.

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 13:53

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 13:45

@Surprisedbuthappy

i don’t know how I can make it any clearer to you.

THEY ARE NOT HER FAMILY.

I guess not if your definition of family is strictly based on genetics.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 13:59

*This 100% like OP knew the family set up, but felt comfortable that by the time DH’s parents died and he inherited all that lovely money she could then either filter off some of it for her and DD1 or look to getting DH’s will changed. There’s also deed of variation where she could influence DD2 to agree to varying DH’s will in favour of her sister….

However, the family have decided to cut out the middle man to prevent any of this happening - with DH’s agreement - to protect the younger daughter’s inheritance.*

"" all that lovely money " 😂

Excellent script writing.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 13:59

" protect the inheritance "

🤺

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 14:01

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 13:59

*This 100% like OP knew the family set up, but felt comfortable that by the time DH’s parents died and he inherited all that lovely money she could then either filter off some of it for her and DD1 or look to getting DH’s will changed. There’s also deed of variation where she could influence DD2 to agree to varying DH’s will in favour of her sister….

However, the family have decided to cut out the middle man to prevent any of this happening - with DH’s agreement - to protect the younger daughter’s inheritance.*

"" all that lovely money " 😂

Excellent script writing.

But I'm the one spinning a narrative! 😂

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 14:02

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 09:13

*I’d say she miscalculated in thinking she would, through the passage of time and by marrying and having child with him, wield more power than she does. Now she’s tried to flex that power and realized it’s an illusion, and he and they haven’t and won’t give her what she feels entitled to demand. That’s why she’s mad.

These aren’t stupid people, and I’m sure that through being in the position they’re in that they’re very well versed in having to protect their interests, as well as how to.*

This is like an episode of Dallas! 😂

" miscalculated "

" weird more power"

Jeez she's just really upset for her 10 year old.

@sunglassesonthetable

It’s funny how quickly her outrage regarding a wedding invitation was resolved… and her attention turned to the issue of inheritance and private school costs.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 14:03

It’s funny how quickly her outrage regarding a wedding invitation was resolved… and her attention turned to the issue of inheritance and private school costs.

Not really. I think it's clearly a catalyst.

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 14:03

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 13:59

" protect the inheritance "

🤺

100% @sunglassesonthetable

From grabby, manipulative, entitled people who would rather leech off others they aren’t related to, than get their finger out to work and pay for their own child.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 14:05

From grabby, manipulative, entitled people who would rather leech off others they aren’t related to, than get their finger out to work and pay for their own child.m

well that's escalated!😁

Don't ever remarry peeps. See above.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 14:06

I'm guessing that's your summation of this situation and OP @Justkeeepswimming

You sound very bitter.

Caerulea · 06/03/2024 14:11

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 13:28

I mean short of a diagram in Crayola, she couldn't fail to understand that her daughter was not a biological relative and viewed as not a biological relative. Yet now all the surprise at exactly what she signed her and her child up for.

As lots of PP have pointed out not everyone views relationships through simple biology.

Many families include any family as family.
Takes more than sperm. So biological just doesn't cut it as a criteria in many many people's books.

Clearly you're all about the 'bloodline'.

And no I don't think you automatically "sign up" as you call it, to that.

Can't help but point out that the majority of the time it's going to be the woman, not the man caught in situations like this. There is something innately sexist about it all so your reference to sperm gave me a wry little smile cos I've been thinking it all along.

Caerulea · 06/03/2024 14:12

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 13:59

" protect the inheritance "

🤺

I legit snort laughed 👏👏

(and I've got a cold so it wasn't pretty)

AllThePotatoesAreSinging · 06/03/2024 14:21

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 13:35

@AllThePotatoesAreSinging

Yes plenty!!!

They are pre teens

FYI
0-12m: baby
1-3yrs: toddler
3-4: pre-schooler
5-8: early childhood (small child)
9-12yrs: pre-teenager
13-18yrs: teenager

For goodness sake many girls get their period and begin to wear training bras at 10 - they are not ‘small children’.

and some still believe in Father Christmas.

Puberty does not = emotional maturity.

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 14:26

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 13:08

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

I'm kind of imagining this big chart.

""Right, if we invite this 10 yr old child , along with the rest of her immediate family, who are coming <points big stick > Technically we have to invite these 2 x 30 year old couples and their baby....
So let's remove the kid, and voila... "

What. A. Joke.

Who thinks like this?

@sunglassesonthetable

Naive likely 20-something people who have no experience of children and parenting…. And who haven’t spent a lot of time with OP’s family so aren’t fully aware of the set up…. Taking it as a normal step family you’d expect the child to have contact with her paternal family and not be so dependent on step parent and relations.

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 14:27

AllThePotatoesAreSinging · 06/03/2024 14:21

and some still believe in Father Christmas.

Puberty does not = emotional maturity.

Edited

@AllThePotatoesAreSinging

I didn’t say she would be emotionally mature.

I said she is clearly not a small child so shouldn’t be treated as one.

shenandoahvalley · 06/03/2024 14:30

Gosh, this has all got a bit personal and besides-the-point.

It's clear to see that some people take on stepchildren as their own, and some don't. Neither is morally superior, in my opinion. You can't force feelings of parenthood - and this really goes to the heart of dark, murky thoughts we all have or might have about how things are with your children versus other people children. The sort of thoughts that make some people do everything possible (legitimate or not) to avoid their own sons going to war knowing full well that means someone else's son will, while other parents would be prepared to go to jail as conscientious objectors to try to protect the lives of all sons (an actual example from my wider family).

If you come from a family that has little to share (eg my maternal side) it's very easy to welcome all and sundry to the bosom of your family. Nobody loses anything (there's nothing to lose), everybody wins something (love, companionship, another loving relationship).

If you come from a family that has a lot to share (eg my paternal side), you have to be very deliberate about how and who you welcome. NOT because you're rich and you want to hoard all your gold coins for your bloodline. Because with privileges come responsibilities, and you have responsibilities and duties to the people you chose to foist the consequences of your actions on. IE your children and their children. If there's millions to go around, 2 DC, 4 GDC, nobody really would notice another child (step GDC) getting the same or similar amount to the other GDC. If there isn't quite that much money; if there are more DC and GDC; basically if adding one more step-GDC means taking away meaningfully from your own GDC - well, what would you do?

This DH and these DGPs haven't completed their families. There's literally a wedding on the cards, this family is in its growth phase. How on earth can the DH say now that he's going to pay for private schooling for his step-child, when he doesn't know how many more children he's going to go on to have?

And whichever poster it was above who implied or even said that being rich automatically means you're an asshole: all that that attitude displays is your own limited life experience. We have wealth in our family. We have step children and step-grandchildren. Under no circumstances would any child be excluded from a wedding. Absolutely would step-children and step-grandchildren be excluded from a photo my grandmother wants of her kids/grandkids....but then we would make sure there are other photos of everyone together. No the step-kids and step-grandkids aren't inheriting anything. Yes the bio kid who has those step-kids has been left whatever amount they would have been left anyway and their prioblem now that their DC are or aren't going to get as much as their cousins (in reality they see the smaller pot for education and housing a quid pro quo for having more step- and half-siblings). I don't think this makes the elders assholes. It makes them people making choices as best as they can, seeking to do the least harm to everyone, bio descendents or not.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 14:32

I said she is clearly not a small child so shouldn’t be treated as one.

Nah, she's a young child.

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 14:33

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 13:28

I mean short of a diagram in Crayola, she couldn't fail to understand that her daughter was not a biological relative and viewed as not a biological relative. Yet now all the surprise at exactly what she signed her and her child up for.

As lots of PP have pointed out not everyone views relationships through simple biology.

Many families include any family as family.
Takes more than sperm. So biological just doesn't cut it as a criteria in many many people's books.

Clearly you're all about the 'bloodline'.

And no I don't think you automatically "sign up" as you call it, to that.

@sunglassesonthetable

Generally families where all and sundry are welcomed into the fold don’t have much money to speak of. There are closer familial ties and more dependency between family members.

Where there is money, associations can be more distant - ie they live considerable distances apart rather than on the same street - and wealth building and retention is important.

InterIgnis · 06/03/2024 14:35

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 14:01

But I'm the one spinning a narrative! 😂

I didn’t expect you to get this butthurt over one comment.

The bottom line is that OP has been told very clearly where she stands. It doesn’t really matter if she, or mumsnet, likes it or not, that’s not going to change. Now, she can either stay with her husband or leave him, but whatever she chooses it doesn’t really matter. Her daughters are not on an equal footing when it comes to paternal family and finances, and they won’t be.

It’s all over but for the next 20 pages of bitching about it.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 14:35

Generally families where all and sundry are welcomed into the fold don’t have much money to speak of. There are closer familial ties and more dependency between family members.

What absolute arse. Is that a scientific survey you've done? 😄

Where there is money, associations can be more distant - ie they live considerable distances apart rather than on the same street - and wealth building and retention is important.

More " science " 🤣

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 14:37

InterIgnis · 06/03/2024 14:35

I didn’t expect you to get this butthurt over one comment.

The bottom line is that OP has been told very clearly where she stands. It doesn’t really matter if she, or mumsnet, likes it or not, that’s not going to change. Now, she can either stay with her husband or leave him, but whatever she chooses it doesn’t really matter. Her daughters are not on an equal footing when it comes to paternal family and finances, and they won’t be.

It’s all over but for the next 20 pages of bitching about it.

I'm not butthurt! I'm amused!

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 14:38

*I didn’t expect you to get this butthurt over one comment.

The bottom line is that OP has been told very clearly where she stands. It doesn’t really matter if she, or mumsnet, likes it or not, that’s not going to change. Now, she can either stay with her husband or leave him, but whatever she chooses it doesn’t really matter. Her daughters are not on an equal footing when it comes to paternal family and finances, and they won’t be.

It’s all over but for the next 20 pages of bitching about it.*

Is your point that we're on MN discussing something else?

And You're done, let's pack up and go home?

Cheers for that.

InterIgnis · 06/03/2024 14:38

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 14:37

I'm not butthurt! I'm amused!

Sure Jan GIF

Mmmhmm

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 14:39

WillYouPutYourCoatOn · 06/03/2024 13:30

Call it what you like. She doesn't want the father to pay for his own child's education unless he additionally gifts the same (thousands and thousands) to a child he is already covering the day to day expenses and parenting for because her own father can't be arsed.

Little DD can just miss out on everything unless eldest DD gets extra from mum or a huge financial gift from a stepdad who did not ever agree to finance OP's child's education.

Also, little DD can just suck it up that mummy saves nothing for her. All for eldest DD. Because if you have unrelated savings from your grandparents why would you care how differently your mother treats you eh. Again, fine by OP. As long as the bias is to eldest DD, it's all fine with OP.

@WillYouPutYourCoatOn

Also, little DD can just suck it up that mummy saves nothing for her. All for eldest DD. Because if you have unrelated savings from your grandparents why would you care how differently your mother treats you eh. Again, fine by OP. As long as the bias is to eldest DD, it's all fine with OP.

This is a good point, it will breed resentment.

I really don’t think OP is going to avoid one or other or both of her daughters resentment. There really isn’t an ideal solution regarding the inheritance issue.

Schooling can be solved by OP paying for her elder daughter, compromising her lifestyle for the seven years or even just 2 years of sixth form, and asking DH to help out with more day to day essential costs during this time period - I reckon he would be open to that.