To be absolutely furious with my father?

[PortaSix]

My father and is wife are both in their 50’s and are having another baby. None of my business, it’s not what I would want to do but it’s up to them.

We were at a family gathering and the subject of death came up and what would happen with our children. My dad then announced “oh I just assumed Porta would take them in”

Like, wtf?! Did he not think this was a conversation to have BEFORE having babies in old age? They have a 10 year old, a 3 year old and now another one on the way.

I’ve had my babies. I had mine in my early 20’s so that my 40 my kids will be grown. I do not want to take on any ther children. I am so mad that he just thought I would take on his children like this without any sort of discussion. Aibu?

“Not sure”? The OP says I am so mad that he just thought I would take on his children like this without any sort of discussion.

from whence comes your uncertainty @AnnaFrith ?

You are not being unreasonable saying this should have been thought about already. Surely every responsible parent in minor children has life insurance, a will and people named as legal guardians that have BEEN ASKED? Aren't those just the very basic parent things?

The employment is actually a good idea.

It’s old to become a parent to a newborn though.

@PortaSix I thought that was why people pick godparents!

One's fifties are not 'old age' in absolute terms, but in reproductive terms, they definitely are.

I've got half siblings with an even bigger age gap. They're not really my siblings because the ages gap is too big. I don't have anything in common with a kid that's 7. I mean they're nice enough but they are like nieces and nephews not siblings.
I don't think it's unreasonable at all to say you wouldn't want to take them in event of death. It's a big commitment to take care of another child and your father should absolutely be thinking this through. My dad has asked me several times to help with childcare and I've refused every time. He never helped me once when my kids were small and so I don't feel the need to help him, he's got a good pension and he can afford to get babysitters.

OP, your father is a selfish CF.

In your place, not a chance would I entertain this and I absolutely would clarify that whatever his formal plans are, not to include you.

3 children is an enormous responsibility and absolutely not something that you allow someone to foist on you.

How unbelievably presumptuous of him.

50 is very old to be having children.
I had my last at 42 and feel guilt over that being too old.

I would not do it for gold stars. Your answer is just nasty and patronising. I may have feelings of disgust, but I would absolutely keep any child I care about out of the care system. Have you ever spoken to anyone who has been in care? I have. I might not want extra children, but I will never turn my back on a child who I could protect.

This is what I thought too

“Be arsed”? Bloody hell - I’m childfree, but I have enough common sense to work out that having you own children is a massive commitment, never mind taking on someone else’s. “Can’t be arsed” is for when you don’t want to go out on a cold evening, or stick a ready meal in the microwave instead of cooking. To dismiss someone being reluctant to raise someone else’s child as mere laziness is ridiculous - and frankly offensive.

But would your whole plan be "well X will have them" and then not give it another thought? Because that is apparently the fathers plan.

As I said above, this isnt actually about what will happen to the kids because its very unlikely (although yes, possible) that these kids will lose both parents while still under 18. Its about the fact that the OP's father decided to have a second family when age related illness and death is a risk, and his only plan is "Oh well the first kid I had, that I never really bothered that much about and I havent actually asked, will take them in". That is not a plan!

Interestingly 50s were old age for the vast majority of human existence, since on average people didn't start making it to 60 until the 1930s.

My guess is that the OP has actually put some thought into what would happen to her children in a catastrophe and has asked trusted people who’ve agreed to the responsibility to be their legal guardians.

Most people wouldn’t want children taken into care, but you have to be realistic and not just assume that someone can look after them.

With all due respect, you made a 'theoretical' decision. You based your decision on whether or not to become a mum on the basis of what you thought it might involve, your perceived expectations, the experiences of others. And that's fine. None of us know what we're doing when we decide to be a mum or not to be a mum, because obviously we've never done it.

I could see a situation where a childfree person might be guilted into taking care of a relative's children, because they didn't feel they could say no, because they felt they would be judged, because of the potential experiences of a child in care or because they were pushed into it. They would genuinely have no clue about the enormity of what they were taking on, because they've never done it.

However, someone who is already a parent, no matter the ages of their own child or children, does have some concept of the huge responsibility that is childrearing.

It's a weighty decision for everyone. However, I would argue that a parent is more likely to fully understand the sacrifices involved, because of their own experience. That's not to say it's not also a weighty decision for someone who has decided that this is not a path they want to take in life for their own reasons, yet having decided they don't want children to then find themselves 'forced' to rear someone else's.

Why is it sad? Shared experiences are a huge part of a sibling relationship.

I don’t spend much time with my sister independently of my parents. But there are things I can say to her and no one else, and vice versa, because I know she will instantly get it. She’ll send me a Facebook post or meme that she knows will remind me of our parents when we were growing up, or of something that happened in 1987 - things that would be meaningless to her friends or even her husband.

That’s what counts in a relationship. Otherwise we’re just two people with similar DNA - in the same way I think of my aunt’s children almost like older siblings, yet my uncle’s children are little more than acquaintances, even though the degree of familial connection is identical.

I'm having difficulty comprehending this post - it is making zero sense to me for a number of reasons.

Can I just say, yes, it's the dad and stepmum's decision over what they do in regards to their own fertility/childbearing. I don't think the OP has questioned that, fucking insane as it may be.

You "absolutely NEVER have a say" over whether or not you get saddled with the outcome of that fertility. To suggest anything else is batshit. Nobody wants a say over their fucking fertility - and in actual fact, they aren't "fertile" anyway if they have had to have IVF!!!

And I have now read your post several times, and it is still not making any sense!

I can't make head nor tail of your use of "there"!

Are you able to comprehend that different families have different sibling relationships, and that it's not all about you?

TF all my relationships are uncomplicated in terms of parenting. Anything else is a different matter!

"Tak[ing] them on without a second thought" is not likely to end well!!

Most sensible people would make a considered decision taking into account all the pros and cons, and how they would deal with them.

Who's to say even your own biological children "will give a shit about you when you get old"?!!

It's not a transaction. You don't assume guardianship on the basis of what that relationship might offer you in the future!! Or you shouldn't!

TF I will never be in that position!! I never made provision for my children because I knew that one of my two sisters would definitely have stepped up. DH's sister, no. Wouldn't have wanted her to either.

My problem was that I didn't see eye-to-eye on childrearing with either of them. One was a teacher who thought she knew all about children because she had taught them but not reared them and had some very unrealistic notions. The other was way too lax but would probably have been more loving and that was my leaning. There was no-one else.

When the eldest turned 18 I was reassured that it was no longer a worry. Eldest was very mature, the second less than 2 years younger, and I knew between them they would look out for the youngest.

Shit happens though! Of my two oldest friends, one was an orphan by the age of 19 with a younger sibling just 14. The other was an orphan by the age of 21.

The thing is, you can very much be there for your so much younger siblings when they need a mother figure and their own isn't around any more. But you can do that without bringing them up!

That's easy to say when you aren't being asked to!

Sorry but if you're child free you have no.idea of what's involved in raising a child. Particularly a bereaved child who doesn't want to live with you. It will be a massive undertaking.

The 1930s was nearly 100 years ago!

I think a few posters think they’re in that
film with Kate Hudson! Real life isn’t quite that simple.

You wouldn't know because you would be dead!