Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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:
Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 14:39

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 " 🤣

Science based on studying Coronation Street, by the sounds of it!

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 14:41

InterIgnis · 06/03/2024 14:38

Mmmhmm

I don't know what that means, but I'm guessing it means you don't believe me. Believe whatever you want!

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 14:45

I don't know what that means, but I'm guessing it means you don't believe me. Believe whatever you want!

I think it was " this is how to do the bitching I speak of".

Justkeeepswimming · 06/03/2024 14:51

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 " 🤣

@sunglassesonthetable

I’ll leave you to read some books on social theory…

InterIgnis · 06/03/2024 14:55

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.

Well no, like I said, you’ve got twenty more pages to stomp your feet on. We get it - you don’t like the way this family, and others, operate. Oh well 🤷🏻‍♀️

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 14:56

I’ll leave you to read some books on social theory…

Warm,loving poor people...

Reserved, guarded wealthy people....

Not the same books as yours I hope. 😄

Or was it The Radio Times?

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 14:58

Well no, like I said, you’ve got twenty more pages to stomp your feet on. We get it - you don’t like the way this family, and others, operate. Oh well 🤷🏻‍♀️

Def don't like how this family operate. 🤷‍♀️ And? You do.

State the bleeding obvious.

And lots of pages to for you to post cute gifs.

HollyKnight · 06/03/2024 15:03

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 15:07

oh hi Holly❤️

Pamelapamela2024 · 06/03/2024 15:30

Wow the replies on this thread.

the emphasis on birthrights, bloodlines and inheritance and money-grabbing women looking to enrich their offspring.

some of the posters on this thread are like villains straight out of a Catherine Cookson novel.

no one is entitled to an inheritance. Why are you all obsessed with passing on your wealth to your bloodline. It’s utterly bizarre.

no on is entitled or deserves an inheritance. Children are however entitled and deserve to be treated fairly and equally and not to made to feel less then or second class because their mother can’t compete with the in-laws and her husband suddenly choosing to favour their bloodline. Why on earth does DD2 need to be singled out and favoured like this. And who wants grandparents like that. Best off without any of them and even the husband of he feels like this.

even the emphasis on adoption versus step parenting as some big symbolism. I don’t think anyone I know even realised you could adopt as a step parent but treats their step children like their own.

thankfully everyone I know in real life sees how awful the treatment of this 10 year old is. I really hope the majority of posters on this thread are a small fraction of people who think like this in this country but I’m not so sure. How depressing.

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 15:53

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.

We have step children and step-grandchildren. Under no circumstances would any child be excluded from a wedding.

See, this description of your family sounds much more akin to how I personally think things should be. Which, as we've discussed many times, counts for absolutely nothing and I'm aware of that!

I think it's appalling that the girl was not invited to the wedding initially and that OP has been ridiculed for her response to her being excluded. And that her husband did not stick up for her and her daughter, but left it all to OP so she ended up looking hysterical and unreasonable in the eyes of all the in-laws. I think the photo thing is much less of a concern as long she's not excluded from all photos - that would be hideous behaviour, but I don't think anyone ever suggested that. I also do not think it's wrong of the in-laws not to include her in their will, but I do think it's very wrong of MIL to bitch about her always being around and not being able to see the younger girl without her. If she phrased it differently and offered to take the younger girl out for the day somewhere that the 10-year old would have no interest in, then I don't think that would be wrong. Again, as long as the older girl wasn't always left at home.

So, as you, and another PP, and I myself have already said, being rich does not automatically make you an arsehole - people make choices about how to behave. However, there is a very strong theme on this thread of money being the reason that this girl cannot ever be made to feel fully welcome in the family, because she must know her rightful place and mustn't get any ideas above her station. I haven't just plucked that from nowhere, have I? Multiple people have said it in various different ways.

WillYouPutYourCoatOn · 06/03/2024 16:38

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 13:53

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

FML.

A bowl of trifle could have gathered this concept by now.

It does not matter what MN thinks about their choices. It does not matter what you think about their choices. It does not matter what I think about their choices.

They have made their choice. Six years ago, and maintaining that choice now. That's not up for debate. The issue is OP's reaction to them maintaining their choice and threats of divorce over it. How she is up in arms if anyone else treat the DDs differently, despite doing exactly that herself by saving for only one of her children.

People pointing out, she was well aware of this from day one, so has no right to tantrum now, are seemingly met with irrelevant hallmark card shite about how anyone can be a dad but it takes a man to be a father...which is a) lovely and b) makes no bloody difference to the fact OP knew they didn't see her child as family from day one. And that's what is relevant. Not what Sue from accounts would do now. That OP knew the position, put her child in it regardless, and wants to make things somehow their fault for maintaining what they always said they would do. And let's not forget OP ignoring the actual paternal family and all the day to day stuff, food, housing, clothes, parenting that DH is providing in their place. No acknowledgement of that, at all.

And as for "well you could say the DH didn't know what he signed up for" is just utter stupidity. Because it's beyond obvious he's doing exactly what he "signed up" for. OP however, agreed to marriage and another child knowing her existing DD was not accepted as their own, but did it anyway and thought she'd talk them round. She's attempted that over this wedding issue, with threats of divorce. And that threat has resulted in her getting one wedding invite, and it categorically spelt out to her, that they never promised to take her on as her own, and will not be via school fees, savings or inheritance, but they will be doing so for their DD/granddaughter/niece, with or without her approval. I think she's realising that she either accepts this, or she is welcome to leave and divorce because their priority is and will always be their own family, DH and his DD. She wasn't expecting that, and her "trump" divorce card that she thought would shock everyone into her court, appears to have had zero effect now she's played it.

Banging on about "well, I'd never distinguish between them" is lovely. And completely irrelevant. They do. The thread is about that being the fact of the matter, so where does OP go from here.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 16:52

*FML.

A bowl of trifle could have gathered this concept by now.

It does not matter what MN thinks about their choices. It does not matter what you think about their choices. It does not matter what I think about their choices.

They have made their choice. Six years ago, and maintaining that choice now. That's not up for debate. The issue is OP's reaction to them maintaining their choice and threats of divorce over it. How she is up in arms if anyone else treat the DDs differently, despite doing exactly that herself by saving for only one of her children.

People pointing out, she was well aware of this from day one, so has no right to tantrum now, are seemingly met with irrelevant hallmark card shite about how anyone can be a dad but it takes a man to be a father...which is a) lovely and b) makes no bloody difference to the fact OP knew they didn't see her child as family from day one. And that's what is relevant. Not what Sue from accounts would do now. That OP knew the position, put her child in it regardless, and wants to make things somehow their fault for maintaining what they always said they would do. And let's not forget OP ignoring the actual paternal family and all the day to day stuff, food, housing, clothes, parenting that DH is providing in their place. No acknowledgement of that, at all.

And as for "well you could say the DH didn't know what he signed up for" is just utter stupidity. Because it's beyond obvious he's doing exactly what he "signed up" for. OP however, agreed to marriage and another child knowing her existing DD was not accepted as their own, but did it anyway and thought she'd talk them round. She's attempted that over this wedding issue, with threats of divorce. And that threat has resulted in her getting one wedding invite, and it categorically spelt out to her, that they never promised to take her on as her own, and will not be via school fees, savings or inheritance, but they will be doing so for their DD/granddaughter/niece, with or without her approval. I think she's realising that she either accepts this, or she is welcome to leave and divorce because their priority is and will always be their own family, DH and his DD. She wasn't expecting that, and her "trump" divorce card that she thought would shock everyone into her court, appears to have had zero effect now she's played it.

Banging on about "well, I'd never distinguish between them" is lovely. And completely irrelevant. They do. The thread is about that being the fact of the matter, so where does OP go from here.*

Where does OP say she knew her DH would not accept DD as his own?

And that the OP knew the family would not?

Seriously I can't see it. @WillYouPutYourCoatOn

I can only see OP saying that she only expected her DD to be treated well and on a par to any other children.

Signed

A trifle

WillYouPutYourCoatOn · 06/03/2024 17:03

Where does OP say she knew her DH would not accept DD as his own?

Jesus wept.

You can not this see this being answered. Repeatedly? You genuinely can't?

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 17:13

You can not this see this being answered. Repeatedly? You genuinely can't?

Just read through all of OP's answers again. I can't no.

Huff and puff all you like.

I think it's become an assumption that it was said.

Or maybe show me and I'll stand corrected.

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 17:16

FML

Of bloody course this family does not care what MN or anybody else thinks! We all know that. Why do you keep saying that?

You're making a lot of assumptions about what OP did or didn't know 6 years ago. She knew her eldest daughter wasn't going to be included in her in-laws' or husband's wills. OK.

I wouldn't have taken that knowledge and automatically thought that therefore meant that they would also exclude her from family events, ridicule her mum for wanting her to be included and whinge about her presence when they all go to visit the in-laws. These are the sort of behaviours I was referring to when I talked about how "family" can damage a young girl's self-esteem - to which a different poster replied in screaming CAPS that they are not her family. In the post you've quoted, I was replying to that person. They may not see themselves as her "family", but I'm sure the girl sees them as hers - and that is why their behaviour has the potential to be damaging to the girl. And, according to OP, she also saw them as "family" - whether you believe her or not is up to you.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 17:17

You're making a lot of assumptions about what OP did or didn't know 6 years ago. She knew her eldest daughter wasn't going to be included in her in-laws' or husband's wills. OK.

This.

WillYouPutYourCoatOn · 06/03/2024 17:19

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 17:13

You can not this see this being answered. Repeatedly? You genuinely can't?

Just read through all of OP's answers again. I can't no.

Huff and puff all you like.

I think it's become an assumption that it was said.

Or maybe show me and I'll stand corrected.

Does anyone else have the energy to go through the first threads 40 pages because it appears this is brand new information to some.

Caerulea · 06/03/2024 17:25

They may not see themselves as her "family", but I'm sure the girl sees them as hers

@Surprisedbuthappy pretty sure most ppl are forgetting this very minor detail. She sees him as her dad, her family.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 17:25

Does anyone else have the energy to go through the first threads 40 pages because it appears this is brand new information to some

You can look through just what the OP has said. ( that might be new to you )

I think you'll be a long time looking . Because she has never said anything like " she knew DH's family didn't see her child as family from Day one"

Nothing like it. I think you got your facts wrong before under the guise of " too many pages" didn't you.

She said

*All I have ever wanted was that my DH treated my eldest well and on a par with any children we had together and I would say that he has. We generally have a happy life.

I never expected him to leave her equal amounts in his will or for his family to leave her an inheritance, I think the fact that we have had wills for five years proves this.*

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 17:26

@WillYouPutYourCoatOn

shenandoahvalley · 06/03/2024 17:28

Caerulea · 06/03/2024 17:25

They may not see themselves as her "family", but I'm sure the girl sees them as hers

@Surprisedbuthappy pretty sure most ppl are forgetting this very minor detail. She sees him as her dad, her family.

Well then her mum would be doing her a huge favour correcting this, so that she's not disappointed down the line. After all, it was her mum who brought her into this family.

sunglassesonthetable · 06/03/2024 17:29

OP however, agreed to marriage and another child knowing her existing DD was not accepted as their own, but did it anyway and thought she'd talk them round.

Where you got this from @WillYouPutYourCoatOn I have no idea. Pure Catherine Cookson.

Surprisedbuthappy · 06/03/2024 17:33

shenandoahvalley · 06/03/2024 17:28

Well then her mum would be doing her a huge favour correcting this, so that she's not disappointed down the line. After all, it was her mum who brought her into this family.

I could not agree more!

I think OP should leave her husband and no longer expose her eldest daughter to the people who have no regard for her emotional well-being.

Again, for the umpteenth time before anyone comes at me, this is my opinion and I'm aware that no-one cares!

WillYouPutYourCoatOn · 06/03/2024 17:42

I think you got your facts wrong before under the guise of " too many pages" didn't you.

Again, because you can't comprehend what is written and people can't be arsed to scroll over hundreds of comments on your behalf to repeat the same thing, because you didn't grasp it the first time, doesn't mean someone else is wrong.

6 other step nieces/nephews step-somethings were also not invited. Being the equivalent of the (non) relation that the DD is, and that being the reason for the lack of invitation was the relevant point. You seemed to think you had a eureka moment because (two?) of these were adults and the others children. It makes no difference if they are 9, 19 or 9mths. They all had the same rule applied because they are not related.

Your lack of understanding, despite what is written, and subsequent non points are quite something. It's like the playing chess with pigeons adage.