Sister-in-law’s ultimatum to parents

[ChorltonCreamery]

My parents but especially my mother are incredibly upset.

My sister-in-law has told them they will not be able to see her three and a half year old daughter unless her older children from her first marriage are included in stuff that they do with our children.

So Essentially if my dad takes my son and nephew out without brother’s stepson they won’t see my niece.

I posted before about the impact my brother’s stepchildren have had on my family.

They see their own father rarely.

In all honesty the stepson’s behaviour has improved in the last few months but I think this is the most terrible blackmail.

My brother won’t say anything.

I get that the grandad took two grandsons who are not part of SIL’s family unit. However, if there are 3 grandsons of similar age then it would be wrong to exclude 1 and only take 2.

It’s ok for family members to spend time with 1 or 2 or small group of children. Or to do different stuff with older kids and different stuff with the younger kids. But to just leave 1 (in a similar age group) out is not ok.

And it doesn’t matter if they are blood related or not. The Op has emphasised the distinction of being step grandchildren and being blood related grandchildren. It is clearly an issue for this family. Which is sad.

My siblings were much older than me — I got left out all the time.
That’s a far cry from being purposefully excluded, though, and that must hurt.
I don’t see why you all can’t sit down and have a mature and productive and rational discussion and come to a solution that pleases everyone and hurts no one — especially little feelings.

Your case is not the same. According to you your daughter in law is not facilitating a relationship between you and her son.
In OP’s case , her SIL does want her children to spend time with OP’s parents.
SIl obviously feels that her dc are being left out and not treated equally and therefore has issues with this
The ultimatum seem unfair but the sil most probably has had issues with the fact that her children are being treated differently. I don’t necessarily think it is about one occasion
She is simply protecting her children. I would do exactly the same thing.
Op, I don’t think that either you or your parents come across well. The thought of any child being treated differently is very upsetting to decent people.
Do better ffs

I’m sure when I’ve read on here that step mums are told they don’t need to take responsibility for their step children and that’s down to the dad, I’ve also read constantly that a step mum should be able to spend alone time with child without always having to include older step children as they have their own children. But now we’re expecting an older man to take two older children that have challenging behaviour out any time he would like to do anything with his granddaughter or a couple of them? You can’t expect him to take all children at the same time.

My sister married a man with 2 kids, they then had 2 kids. Guess what, all kids are part of the family. I have 4 nieces/nephews, my parents have 4 grandkids and they all get treated the same. If there's a day out they all go, they all get the same amount for Xmas and birthdays, they call me auntie and my parents are gran and granda. My mum has saved money for the 2 bio grandkids since they were born and then done the same for the bonus 2, they all got the same amount.

I can't imagine doing things with 1 and leaving others out. You it seems have decided these other kids and mum are a problem by the sound of your comments, your comment about the kids not seeing their other family members and then saying she's doing the same with her youngest is nasty.

Not everyone is naturally paternal and I’d be annoyed if my children weren’t invited to my sisters wedding because of the behaviour of my brothers step children, that’s likely to cause animosity and wouldn’t help people bonding

But even when you are all blood you don't do everything and go everywhere together! My DGF would always take us out individually. They took us on holiday individually. Even as an adult with my own DS he went places just the 3 of us. I went shopping with just my DGM.

My other cousins went places with just them. I didn't feel left out.

I know it's more tricky with DSGC but do they have time with their DGP?

If I'm ever lucky enough to have more than one DGC I would want to spend time with them alone.

I don’t think she is saying the GP have to travel to pick up all grandchildren. Just travel to one house to pick up the grandchildren who live together as one family.

As opposed to picking up only one of the children and leaving the other behind.

But surely the Grandad alternates between the triplets and doesn’t just take the same child every time and leave the others behind? That’s the difference here.

My children’s GP also have one on one time with my children. But each get their turn and they also do things together.

So if your parents had 5 or 6 grandkids, they would only take any of them out of they could take all 6? What if they physically couldn’t cope with all 5 or 6 at once. No days out for any of them?

What if a couple of them have quite serious issues where they have been violent before and the grandad can’t cope on his own with them? (Op referenced another thread where she described the wider issues)

In this situation they have taken a the Ops child and the child from ops other brother. The haven’t taken the ‘bonus childrens’ Siblings. He has taken 2 grandkids (out of 5 or 6) out for the day.

Why do they have to also take the 2 ‘bonus children’ from a different brother, every time they go anywhere? Why do these ‘Bonus children’ have to be invited to everything? When all the other grandkids aren’t invited to everything?

and is being blackmailed that if he doesn’t include them, he won’t be able to see the children.

I think they should call her bluff. Because they can’t possibly always take the ‘bonus’ kids to everything. That would be unfair. The SIL and Dbro actually want her children to be treated preferentially. But aren’t putting in an effort themselves or talking about how her children’s behaviour can be managed, whether a parent should go. Just that the grandparents have to take them and that’s that.

Non of the children from that household went.

I won't go into who I think is right or not but I will not entertain being blackmailed. The mum has her boundaries, the GPs have theirs. It's the grandchild in the middle that suffers.

The reality is sometimes children cannot do everything. They can't all be treated exactly the same.

This notion is one of the issues we have so many entitled kids today who can't take no for an answer. Sometimes there will be differences, that's life.

You have added a whole lot of assumptions to your post based on nothing. There is nothing to say OP's parents don't do things with the other sets of grandchildren. In fact previous posts indicate GF has spent a lot of time with the step grandkids as the boy had clearly become really attached to the GF!

So I don't think it does sound like he is being treated different, sounds like he is being treated like every other grandchild. Why should he get to do everything with the grandfather when the others don't?

From a different point of view, when you marry/long term relationship you generally welcome the in-laws into your life. They become your new family (in addition to your actual family). You have a relationship with them, you buy them birthday / Christmas presents, you care for them especially when they get older.

They become part of your family and you treat them as such.

Imagine a wife/husband refusing to spend time with her/his MIL / FIL because they are not blood relations.

But plenty of people do. Plenty of people leave and relationship with fil or mil to their partner. The Fil/Mils adult child.

2 bonus children from a DIFFERENT brother, I thought the 1 brother had a child and 2 bonus kids, unless I've picked it up wrong?

I don't know about any other previous thread 🤷‍♀️ what I said was, myself and my parents treated all kids the same. We wouldn't take 1 kid from 1 family and leave another out, stepkids or not. I guess the mum just wants her kids to be accepted as family and be treated the same. We see so many comments on mn about blended families and all kids being treated the same, why should these step kids be any different?

I mean no one marries and then has to pretend that their in laws are the same as their own parents. It's a different relationship. There's still the potential for it to be a very positive one.

They become your in laws, part of your family but hardly the same as your blood family. You aren’t required to pretend your MIL is your mother, your FIL your father and so on and so forth.

No. The children who went on this day out were ops child and a child who belongs to another brother.

No children from the household with the ‘bonus children’ went. Not even the one they are related to.

These children aren’t different though. Because they have behavioural issues and have been violent to the other kids. If the grand parents always have to take 2 extra kids with behavioural issues places, no one will go.

I would happily take my nieces and nephews out in 2s. If it was the. Dictated that I must take 4 at once I just wouldn’t do it. Because I couldn’t handle all 4 at once. And I don’t need to watch for any of my nieces or nephews being violent to each other.

If the sil really wanted one or both or her bonus children to go on these trips she could have had a discussion about compromise. Either her or her husband could have gone so the grandfather and an extra pair of hands and then theres a parent in case the kids behaviour gets out of hand. But the SIL has gone straight for ‘always include my older children or else’.

Ah, right, I think I misread the post. I can see the pov that the stepson is violent etc. My mum has 5 grandkids, 1 from me and 4 from my sister. I'd be annoyed if my mum had a big day out with the other 4 and left my son out but then I only have 1 kid and he's a good kid. My mum wouldn't leave any kids out but then it comes back to the behaviour of the kids and if violent that makes a big difference.

Thing is sils not even asking for fair treatment. She’s asking for favouritism of her children.

As pointed out. The grandad took two children. None of them where the sils children. The two children where not siblings either and this is out of many grandchildren.

Sil is demanding that her children must also be invited to all these things or else.

So sil wants her children in every trip, day out, sleepover any of the other grandchildren get at all. Even if it’s just meant to be one of the many grandchildren.

She’s not asking for fair or equal. She wants hers to be top dogs.

or rather she wants free childcare always for the misbehaved child 🤷🏻‍♀️ leaving her with her easier children.

No they don't. Because they have not spent their formative years around their in-laws.

But we are talking about kids here and their experiences of grandparents who they see occasionally during their formative years. That's the fundamental and crucial difference.

If you have a son whose family is blended and he is treating them as a unit (particularly if there is no contact with the other side of the kids family) then you should take the lead on that. If he always treats them as blood, then the grandparents need to respect and support that as a parenting decision and act accordingly. Otherwise they are being petty minded and putting their beliefs and wants ahead of the needs and best interests of the kids.

The fact the son is effectively supporting his wife in how she feels on this, says he feels this way.

In other blended families where the set up is different the situation may be different. Particularly if the other side of the family are actively involved. Step families where this is the case and care of the step child isn't the responsibility of the new partner but the two biological parents have a different set up.

This matters.

The point should be considering what the best interests of the kids are. Grandparents don't get to pick and choose how many grandchildren they have. This includes whether they are adopted, biological or step.

Problems start with favouritism by grandparents. And that happens within biological families too.

If you start treating any grandkids differently you need to be mindful of it and carefully balance that. There may be reasons for treating kids differently - distance being one or the need for one family to have more support. The issue is when you have favouritism which differs from treating differently.

Remember this is about the perceptions of a child who doesn't have full comprehension of adult ideas. You have to be mindful of them possibly feeling rejected, particularly if the split in the family potentially has already had this effect with a parent or grandparent. They need the reassurance of a stable family that they are part of and feel loved by.

So there is no right way to grandparent in a blended family - because the situations differ. But grandparents should support the way in which their child has set up their family and family unit. Otherwise you undermine the security and stability that the parents have tried to establish. If they are doing certain things it may well be because there has been a problem in the past which they have recognised. They are acting in a way they see as being in the best interests of their children and family unit.

I don't think it's wrong for the SIL to have taken child care when she needed it. It was in the best interests of all her children. She didn't need it for the other child. He wasn't being treated noticeably differently. It was supporting the family as a whole.

I don't think it compels grandparents to take all the kids at the same time. The SIL is wrong on this front. It would be fine to have time with the granddaughter without siblings. But in that scenario the grandparents should also try and facilitate time with the step grandkids too. Because it's about formative years, feeling loved and wanted and not rejected as 'lesser'. It's about being a role model for that child. It's about supporting your child's key parenting decisions. It's about giving security and stability. None of that requires you to be bloody relatives.

It's about understanding what matters and doesn't matter in each situation.

And that's why the grandparents are wrong in this on. I don't think it's blackmail on the part of the SIL. She's making a judgement call about the best interests of both children - not just the step son. She doesn't want either child to develop ideas of lesser or better than the other. She wants both to feel secure. If one feels rejected that potentially has implications about the relationship between the siblings by driving a wedge. She's not depriving her daughter of her grandparents. Grandparents are a bonus not a necessity. Grandparents have to compliment and add to the security and well being of children or they are problematic regardless of the family step up. That's why many blood relationships between grandchildren and grandparents break down because of an unhealthy and damaging dynamic which parents feel is not in the best interests of their family unit. It's not selfish it's self protective. A lot of posters are passing judgement without drawing this parallel with blood families which I think is the only relevant parallel.

So yes while I agree there no right way to grandparent, I do think there's a wrong way to grandparent. And that applies whether they are bloody or not or whether they are blended or not.

These grandparents have got it wrong. They are focused on themselves and not on the kids. And that's usually where it goes wrong in any grandparenting situation.

Speaking as a step-grandchild (my 'real' grandma died before I was born and grandad remarried a widow with a 7 year old, also before I was born; her son went on to have 2 children), my grandma treated my two siblings and me as her own grandchildren.

I think SiL is right to expect the step grandchildren to be treated the same. Those children will know and always remember.

On Tuesday, my younger brother and I are attending the funeral of our step-uncle, whom we have always regarded as 'real' family and who has - frankly - been in our lives more than the blood-relative uncles we had.

You sound like a lovely person, I have the same thoughts as you.

I appreciate that blended families are all formed from very different circumstances. That perhaps some children come into a family when they are older so there is little chance or desire to form a bond from the children and/or the adults or when they also have their own very involved grandparents and that the outcome of that can and should differ from family to family. There isn't always a right or wrong or one size fits all when it comes to this stuff.

I was 2, I grew up with my step father as my 'dad'. It's easy to read what I said and (as someone already has) assume it was just jealousy, it wasn't. It felt spiteful and purposeful, like they were telling me something. I got the message, a very real and confusing realisation that I had 'family' around me that didn't want me and I would always be the outsider and I was right, because I was.

On my mum's side. I have a step grandmother. She has always been my grandmother to me because I have never known differently. My grandfather divorced before I was born and had a second child who is a couple of years older than me. My grandmother died when I was three and I don't remember her.

It can't have been an easy situation for my dad. But I've never felt it. I don't call my step grandmother 'grandma'. I use her first name. She is my grandmother though as she has always had that role in my life.

On my mum's side her parents divorced. She was astranged from her mother. I didn't know her growing up. Her dad remarried a lady who didn't speak English. Again she was my grandmother even though she wasn't and we couldn't speak the same language. I met my actual grandmother when I was in my 30s. I found that harder despite biology because I didn't grow up with her in my life. She was still my grandmother though.

I didn't have 4 grandparents. I had 6.

Childhood matters. Formative relationships matter. Biology doesn't necessarily matter. But how the relationships work to support children do.