Page 22 | Invitation for one child

ThatRubyMoose · 2024-12-19T14:18:59+00:00

When I first met my in-laws I bought Christmas presents. My elder sister-in-law who has always been friendly as have they all, thanked me profusely said that she gave up buying presents and writing cards. Fair enough. Her choice. The following year I asked her if she minded me buying for her children. She didn’t but reiterated that she didn’t. Totally transparent not an issue. What she did do though was take MiL and SiL and the kids to The Palladium every year and a meal in a chain like Spaghetti House, Pizza etc. Fair enough again. A few weeks ago she asked DH if our daughter who has just gone 4 is now old enough to join them. He said she was. But I have a daughter who is 9 who lives with us all the time and only sees her father around her birthday and if she’s lucky at Christmas for a ‘tea’ with the rest of his family. I said no to pantomime, I texted SiL saying it would be unfair to eldest, a child the same age as two of the kids going. Her reply was ‘that was a shame.’ MiL said to DH that it was none of her business how he raised his child but she thought that not being allowed to go on this t outing with them was a slippery slope. DH would have let her go but won’t challenge me. What would you do?

InterIgnis · 27/12/2024 21:56

Tandora · 27/12/2024 21:50

My point was it’s hardly a widespread problem .
It must be a tiny minority of especially wealthy families who would be facing any such sort of dilemma, plus as you say, completely far fetched to think that inviting SGD to the panto would result in an obligation to pay her private school fees. Whole thing is ridiculous.

But it just exposes what people really think- the true character of this debate. This isn’t about forcing relationships, it’s about how people view step children.
This child is perceived as a drain, a waste of resources - diverted off down the wrong gene pool , baggage, in the way of other potential wanted biological grandchildren.
Whole thing is disgusting.

If these are the attitudes the OP has unwittingly married into, she really does need to get out for the sake of her child,

Edited

Show quote history

It’s probably been mentioned because OP mentioned it.

“Oh and trust me private secondary has already been discussed for youngest if she doesn’t pass 11+.“

Tandora · 27/12/2024 22:02

InterIgnis · 27/12/2024 21:56

It’s probably been mentioned because OP mentioned it.

“Oh and trust me private secondary has already been discussed for youngest if she doesn’t pass 11+.“

Show quote history

Ah I see. Well I have no idea what OP means by that 🤷🏼‍♀️

Onlyonekenobe · 27/12/2024 22:07

Tandora · 27/12/2024 21:50

My point was it’s hardly a widespread problem .
It must be a tiny minority of especially wealthy families who would be facing any such sort of dilemma, plus as you say, completely far fetched to think that inviting SGD to the panto would result in an obligation to pay her private school fees. Whole thing is ridiculous.

But it just exposes what people really think- the true character of this debate. This isn’t about forcing relationships, it’s about how people view step children.
This child is perceived as a drain, a waste of resources - diverted off down the wrong gene pool , baggage, in the way of other potential wanted biological grandchildren.
Whole thing is disgusting.

If these are the attitudes the OP has unwittingly married into, she really does need to get out for the sake of her child,

Edited

Show quote history

There is a whole layer of society in this country where your view would be considered naive. Ime, the MIL and SIL sound like they are in that world. Yes, many many grandparents pay school fees. They don’t need to be multimillionaires to do so (although many may well be, at least on an assets basis).

And I would wager that only a tiny minority would ever consider any child - stepchild or not - a “drain”, a “waste” of resources, “baggage”. If they do they know where they belong, and it’s nowhere nice. But they do have a serious and weighty problem of what to do with finite resources. These are real problems for many people. You can be as Cinderella as you like about it, use as much emotive and sentimental language as you like. But none of that helps the real situation of two people in their 70s, with three adult children and 6 grandchildren and 1 or more step-grandchildren…and not enough to treat all those children equally. Nobody wants to be in that situation. They’re not easy decisions to make. You can guarantee that MIL has already discussed this with the DH or that he already knows where she stands on this by other conversations. SIL clearly knows.

You’re clearly seeing only the pantomime and the eldest DD here. There’s more to it than her, no matter how loudly you shout that she SHOULD be included. What if she actually can’t be? What if they actually cannot afford to pay for private education for her and the younger DD, their son’s one and only child? What do you suggest then? What would you do?

Tandora · 27/12/2024 22:14

Onlyonekenobe · 27/12/2024 22:07

There is a whole layer of society in this country where your view would be considered naive. Ime, the MIL and SIL sound like they are in that world. Yes, many many grandparents pay school fees. They don’t need to be multimillionaires to do so (although many may well be, at least on an assets basis).

And I would wager that only a tiny minority would ever consider any child - stepchild or not - a “drain”, a “waste” of resources, “baggage”. If they do they know where they belong, and it’s nowhere nice. But they do have a serious and weighty problem of what to do with finite resources. These are real problems for many people. You can be as Cinderella as you like about it, use as much emotive and sentimental language as you like. But none of that helps the real situation of two people in their 70s, with three adult children and 6 grandchildren and 1 or more step-grandchildren…and not enough to treat all those children equally. Nobody wants to be in that situation. They’re not easy decisions to make. You can guarantee that MIL has already discussed this with the DH or that he already knows where she stands on this by other conversations. SIL clearly knows.

You’re clearly seeing only the pantomime and the eldest DD here. There’s more to it than her, no matter how loudly you shout that she SHOULD be included. What if she actually can’t be? What if they actually cannot afford to pay for private education for her and the younger DD, their son’s one and only child? What do you suggest then? What would you do?

Show quote history

What do you suggest then? What would you do?

I would suggest they…. Invite her to the pantomime? Which they can easily afford to do..

ScribblingPixie · 27/12/2024 22:16

And don't buy her a measly bath bomb for Christmas.

Onlyonekenobe · 27/12/2024 22:23

If pantomime tickets and bath bombs are the limit of your engagement with the issue (they’re not for the OP) your posts should be read as meaningfully.

CosyLemur · 27/12/2024 22:59

Tandora · 27/12/2024 22:14

What do you suggest then? What would you do?

I would suggest they…. Invite her to the pantomime? Which they can easily afford to do..

Show quote history

How do you know they can clearly afford an extra £100?
But then if they invite DD do they also then have to invite all the female cousins and female in-laws? Which then could be an extra £1000+

Lassofnorth · 27/12/2024 23:35

Onlyonekenobe · 27/12/2024 22:07

There is a whole layer of society in this country where your view would be considered naive. Ime, the MIL and SIL sound like they are in that world. Yes, many many grandparents pay school fees. They don’t need to be multimillionaires to do so (although many may well be, at least on an assets basis).

And I would wager that only a tiny minority would ever consider any child - stepchild or not - a “drain”, a “waste” of resources, “baggage”. If they do they know where they belong, and it’s nowhere nice. But they do have a serious and weighty problem of what to do with finite resources. These are real problems for many people. You can be as Cinderella as you like about it, use as much emotive and sentimental language as you like. But none of that helps the real situation of two people in their 70s, with three adult children and 6 grandchildren and 1 or more step-grandchildren…and not enough to treat all those children equally. Nobody wants to be in that situation. They’re not easy decisions to make. You can guarantee that MIL has already discussed this with the DH or that he already knows where she stands on this by other conversations. SIL clearly knows.

You’re clearly seeing only the pantomime and the eldest DD here. There’s more to it than her, no matter how loudly you shout that she SHOULD be included. What if she actually can’t be? What if they actually cannot afford to pay for private education for her and the younger DD, their son’s one and only child? What do you suggest then? What would you do?

Show quote history

The little one is four. By the time she goes to secondary school her sister will be 16 and nearing the end of school. It won’t really matter by then. This is about Xmas presents not leaving her out of cheap holiday keepsakes and a panto ticket. It’s not that hard to include her and be decent.

Lassofnorth · 27/12/2024 23:44

CosyLemur · 27/12/2024 22:59

How do you know they can clearly afford an extra £100?
But then if they invite DD do they also then have to invite all the female cousins and female in-laws? Which then could be an extra £1000+

Show quote history

Why would they do that? It’s just the sisters and their children and children of siblings.

DowntonCrabbie · 28/12/2024 00:17

Mamasperspective · 27/12/2024 19:55

Set a boundary that if both children are not treated the same then the youngest will not be attending any invites. If they took youngest to this and then older DD got her turn and invited to something else then fair enough but otherwise no. There's no wonder there are young kids with mental health issues when adults are purposely excluding a child. If it was a group of girls in the playground purposely excluding one, it would be construed as bullying. Next time maybe say that you would be happy to pay for eldest daughter's ticket if she could come along too (although it's still crap on their part). MIL is right, it is a slippery slope ... a slippery slope into a toxic family dynamic. Personally I would create distance and not bother making an effort with SIL's family or MIL any-mote. DH is as much the AH for not advocating for your daughter against his family.

It's not bullying and it's not toxic.

It's the simple fact that one child is their niece/grandchild, and one us not. "Setting a boundary" which means cutting off your child from half their family if the family doesn't take another child every single time IS toxic though.

Tandora · 28/12/2024 06:32

DowntonCrabbie · 28/12/2024 00:17

It's not bullying and it's not toxic.

It's the simple fact that one child is their niece/grandchild, and one us not. "Setting a boundary" which means cutting off your child from half their family if the family doesn't take another child every single time IS toxic though.

Show quote history

It's not bullying and it's not toxic

Again, If it hurts the child , then that is the only measure that matters in this instance.

Setting a boundary" which means cutting off your child from half their family if the family doesn't take another child every single time IS toxic though

It’s not “another child” - it’s her sibling.

So I have two girls the same age as my sister’s two girls. If my parents decided to take three of the cousins/ siblings out for a treat , but leave out my eldest , and I said, either both my girls go or neither, would you call that “toxic”? And “cutting youngest off from her family”? doubt it.

You just think it’s fine to leave out this child because of her biology; she’s a step and therefore she’s disposable. It’s got nothing to do with it being unreasonable for a mum to hold a boundary that both her kids come as a package deal.

CosyLemur · 28/12/2024 07:37

Lassofnorth · 27/12/2024 23:44

Why would they do that? It’s just the sisters and their children and children of siblings.

Show quote history

Because currently it's only direct relatives that go second cousins and in-laws don't go. There are second cousins that are the same age as DD1 why is it then fair to leave those out?
She isn't a relative as much as everyone would love to think she is she isn't.
When you have a child from a previous relationship you can expect your new partner to take on the role as parent. But you can't expect your child to just slot into the extended family as if they've known them forever - it doesn't work like that.
It's not their fault that OP hasn't held her daughter's real paternal family to account!

DowntonCrabbie · 28/12/2024 08:24

Tandora · 28/12/2024 06:32

It's not bullying and it's not toxic

Again, If it hurts the child , then that is the only measure that matters in this instance.

Setting a boundary" which means cutting off your child from half their family if the family doesn't take another child every single time IS toxic though

It’s not “another child” - it’s her sibling.

So I have two girls the same age as my sister’s two girls. If my parents decided to take three of the cousins/ siblings out for a treat , but leave out my eldest , and I said, either both my girls go or neither, would you call that “toxic”? And “cutting youngest off from her family”? doubt it.

You just think it’s fine to leave out this child because of her biology; she’s a step and therefore she’s disposable. It’s got nothing to do with it being unreasonable for a mum to hold a boundary that both her kids come as a package deal.

Show quote history

This is utter nonsense. Lots of things upset children, it doesn't mean you do everything possible to stop that. Your child doesn't get invited to a friend's party, they're upset, it doesn't make it bullying or toxic. It just means your kid doesn't get invited to every party. That's life.
Kids DON'T come as a package deal, they are individuals. You're saying a child isbt allowed to spend any time with their grandparents ever unless those grandparents always include a child who is not their grandchild. That's blackmail. That's cutting off a child from their family. That's toxic.

Two adults decide to marry, that doesn't mean every person in their life has to pretend relationships exist that don't. There's a natural difference between your own grandchild and your sons wife's child who is no relation to you.

SometimesCalmPerson · 28/12/2024 09:06

Tandora · 27/12/2024 21:50

My point was it’s hardly a widespread problem .
It must be a tiny minority of especially wealthy families who would be facing any such sort of dilemma, plus as you say, completely far fetched to think that inviting SGD to the panto would result in an obligation to pay her private school fees. Whole thing is ridiculous.

But it just exposes what people really think- the true character of this debate. This isn’t about forcing relationships, it’s about how people view step children.
This child is perceived as a drain, a waste of resources - diverted off down the wrong gene pool , baggage, in the way of other potential wanted biological grandchildren.
Whole thing is disgusting.

If these are the attitudes the OP has unwittingly married into, she really does need to get out for the sake of her child,

Edited

Show quote history

Problem with getting out of the marriage is firstly, she probably doesn’t want to, but even if she did it would only create a different problem. OP would still have two daughters that are treated completely differently by their paternal families and there would still be just as much potential for resentment.

Parents need to consider these issues when they choose to have children with different partners. The parents are the ones creating the problem here and it’s them (OP in this case) that needs to accept that they don’t have the right to insist that other people treat their child as family when they’re not. OP had the opportunity to protect her daughter from this when she chose to get married and she had the opportunity again before she chose to have another baby. She took the option of having another child and if that causes upset for her older child then that’s her fault and it’s not her in laws responsibility to make up for the disadvantage she inflicted.

It’s not that a step child is a drain or baggage or anything else, it’s simply that she has a different paternal family to her sister.

It seems very unfair to me to judge the in laws harshly. I would never be so presumptuous to think that my parents or sisters should start babysitting and paying for expensive treats for my partners children just because I’d decided I’d like them to. OP doesn’t even think she should have to offer to pay for a panto ticket for her own child to have a day out with the in laws, which is just plain entitled.

SometimesCalmPerson · 28/12/2024 09:14

You just think it’s fine to leave out this child because of her biology; she’s a step and therefore she’s disposable. It’s got nothing to do with it being unreasonable for a mum to hold a boundary that both her kids come as a package deal.

It is an unreasonable boundary though. The OPs younger child has a father who has as much right as the OP does to come up with ‘boundaries’ and he wants his child to have a relationship with his family. The younger child has as much right to a relationship with her extended family as the her older sister has to be protected from being made to feel left out. It’s an impossible situation where two children’s needs are in direct conflict with each other so the parents have to manage that the best they can. They don’t get to decide that extended step family has a responsibility to fix the mess they created.

UndermyShoeJoe · 28/12/2024 09:27

I don’t buy the come as a package.

So if you have 2/3/4/5 children they are never allowed to have one to one or be taken for a special to just then trip because they are a package? The type of family where everyone must go do the family shopping I guess too.

All of my children have at one time or another done things without their siblings with a grandparent because they are individuals with different wants likes and needs. In fact one of mine is sitting out panto this year hilariously what the thread was started about.

They are not a package they are not identical little humans hell I don’t even like it when identical twins are raised as if they can’t ever be their own person and their whole persona has to be we are the twins, where one cannot do something without the other.

1HappyTraveller · 28/12/2024 09:44

It’s really sad reading through all these posts from some truly selfish adults when at the heart of it all is an 8 year old child who has done nothing wrong but though no fault of her own ended up being part of a family who has deliberately set out to cause her upset. The cruelty displayed in some of these comments is beyond belief. I feel really sorry for step-children, and adopted children. The world is a really sad place when kindness can’t be extended to those purely on the basis that they aren’t related by blood. It’s just basically human decency to include this child as you would her younger sister in a pantomime. Especially when we understand from the OP that money isn’t even the issue here. The fact that some on this thread don’t get that speaks volumes. Imagine being that heartless to anyone let alone a child?!? You are literally leaving out one person. It’s bully behaviour and sets a poor example to the other young children about how to treat others. What hope have the next generation got if we teach them that treating children in this way is okay? It’s really selfish and sad 😔

1HappyTraveller · 28/12/2024 09:46

UndermyShoeJoe · 28/12/2024 09:27

I don’t buy the come as a package.

So if you have 2/3/4/5 children they are never allowed to have one to one or be taken for a special to just then trip because they are a package? The type of family where everyone must go do the family shopping I guess too.

All of my children have at one time or another done things without their siblings with a grandparent because they are individuals with different wants likes and needs. In fact one of mine is sitting out panto this year hilariously what the thread was started about.

They are not a package they are not identical little humans hell I don’t even like it when identical twins are raised as if they can’t ever be their own person and their whole persona has to be we are the twins, where one cannot do something without the other.

Of course you can take the children out one at a time. But if you take out all of the children and leave out just one what does that say about the person doing the organising? This isn’t about taking one child along, it’s about leaving one child out. That’s the issue.

SometimesCalmPerson · 28/12/2024 09:50

The family have not deliberately set out to cause upset to a child at all. That is a ridiculous thing to say. All they have done is create a tradition where a mother and her adult daughters take their children/grandchildren to the panto at Christmas and then invited the youngest granddaughter when she was old enough to go.

OP and her DP choosing to create a step family doesn’t equate to the in laws being nasty just for continuing to do the nice thing they’ve always done.

Bellyblueboy · 28/12/2024 09:51

1HappyTraveller · 28/12/2024 09:44

It’s really sad reading through all these posts from some truly selfish adults when at the heart of it all is an 8 year old child who has done nothing wrong but though no fault of her own ended up being part of a family who has deliberately set out to cause her upset. The cruelty displayed in some of these comments is beyond belief. I feel really sorry for step-children, and adopted children. The world is a really sad place when kindness can’t be extended to those purely on the basis that they aren’t related by blood. It’s just basically human decency to include this child as you would her younger sister in a pantomime. Especially when we understand from the OP that money isn’t even the issue here. The fact that some on this thread don’t get that speaks volumes. Imagine being that heartless to anyone let alone a child?!? You are literally leaving out one person. It’s bully behaviour and sets a poor example to the other young children about how to treat others. What hope have the next generation got if we teach them that treating children in this way is okay? It’s really selfish and sad 😔

I don’t think this is an issue about adoption though?

adopted children become legally part of the family. Divorce and separation doesn’t change that.

I agree the little girl should have been invited to the pantomime - but I don’t agree the aunts and uncles should automatically consider her their neice. Because she isn’t.

i have friends who were part of blended family. They have never really considered them as cousins, aunts, grandparents. They see them at events for their siblings, like them etc. but they have their own families and these people are really just more distant relatives.

that is okay. I have step cousins when I think about it. They are okay - I see them occasionally. But they aren’t my cousins.

Tandora · 28/12/2024 10:20

DowntonCrabbie · 28/12/2024 08:24

This is utter nonsense. Lots of things upset children, it doesn't mean you do everything possible to stop that. Your child doesn't get invited to a friend's party, they're upset, it doesn't make it bullying or toxic. It just means your kid doesn't get invited to every party. That's life.
Kids DON'T come as a package deal, they are individuals. You're saying a child isbt allowed to spend any time with their grandparents ever unless those grandparents always include a child who is not their grandchild. That's blackmail. That's cutting off a child from their family. That's toxic.

Two adults decide to marry, that doesn't mean every person in their life has to pretend relationships exist that don't. There's a natural difference between your own grandchild and your sons wife's child who is no relation to you.

Show quote history

Some things that a child gets upset about are trivial. Some are not.

Growing up in a step family that treats you as second class belongs in the latter category.
It doesn’t matter if you say it’s fine to exclude the child because x, y, z.
if it doesn’t feel fine to the child in question - it’s not fine. These things have a lasting impact on mental health,

You're saying a child isn’t allowed to spend any time with their grandparents ever unless those grandparents always include a child who is not their grandchild. That's blackmail.

Again , So I have two girls the same age as my sister’s two girls. If my parents decided to take three of the cousins/ siblings out for a treat , but leave out my eldest , and I said, either both my girls go or neither, would you call that “toxic”? Blackmail and “cutting youngest off from her family”??
PleasE do answer the question .

Tandora · 28/12/2024 10:21

1HappyTraveller · 28/12/2024 09:46

Of course you can take the children out one at a time. But if you take out all of the children and leave out just one what does that say about the person doing the organising? This isn’t about taking one child along, it’s about leaving one child out. That’s the issue.

Show quote history

Exactly. The pp’s on this thread all know and understand this .

SometimesCalmPerson · 28/12/2024 10:27

Again , So I have two girls the same age as my sister’s two girls. If my parents decided to take three of the cousins/ siblings out for a treat , but leave out my eldest , and I said, either both my girls go or neither, would you call that “toxic”? Blackmail and “cutting youngest off from her family”??
PleasE do answer the question .

That would be a completely different situation because then your parents would be excluding one of their own grandchildren who they have known and loved since birth. So yes, it would be strange for grandparents to exclude one of their own grandkids, but that’s not what these grandparents or their adult daughter are doing. You cannot expect people to have the same relationship with their sons wife’s child as they do with their own grandchild. Of course it’s lovely when all children can be treated the same, but it also needs to be recognised that expecting your inlaws to pay for and facilitate a day out for a child they aren’t related to is a huge ask, and they are not obligated to comply.

Tandora · 28/12/2024 10:27

SometimesCalmPerson · 28/12/2024 09:06

Problem with getting out of the marriage is firstly, she probably doesn’t want to, but even if she did it would only create a different problem. OP would still have two daughters that are treated completely differently by their paternal families and there would still be just as much potential for resentment.

Parents need to consider these issues when they choose to have children with different partners. The parents are the ones creating the problem here and it’s them (OP in this case) that needs to accept that they don’t have the right to insist that other people treat their child as family when they’re not. OP had the opportunity to protect her daughter from this when she chose to get married and she had the opportunity again before she chose to have another baby. She took the option of having another child and if that causes upset for her older child then that’s her fault and it’s not her in laws responsibility to make up for the disadvantage she inflicted.

It’s not that a step child is a drain or baggage or anything else, it’s simply that she has a different paternal family to her sister.

It seems very unfair to me to judge the in laws harshly. I would never be so presumptuous to think that my parents or sisters should start babysitting and paying for expensive treats for my partners children just because I’d decided I’d like them to. OP doesn’t even think she should have to offer to pay for a panto ticket for her own child to have a day out with the in laws, which is just plain entitled.

Show quote history

, but even if she did it would only create a different problem. OP would still have two daughters that are treated completely differently by their paternal families and there would still be just as much potential for resentment.

I wish people would stop saying this.

being forced to “blend” with a family that excludes you/ treats you second best/ where (eg) everyone is invited to the pantomime except you is the issue.

I don’t see why people don’t understand this.

If op and her child remove themselves from the family, they remove that issue. Youngest can still see her family, as the eldest occasionally sees hers. Is it fair and equal? No it never will be. But it is much much better than being forced to live with/ amongst / as if part of a “family”, that makes it clear they do not give a toss about you. Ask any child who has had to grow up like this and found it painful.

SometimesCalmPerson · 28/12/2024 10:32

Tandora · 28/12/2024 10:27

, but even if she did it would only create a different problem. OP would still have two daughters that are treated completely differently by their paternal families and there would still be just as much potential for resentment.

I wish people would stop saying this.

being forced to “blend” with a family that excludes you/ treats you second best/ where (eg) everyone is invited to the pantomime except you is the issue.

I don’t see why people don’t understand this.

If op and her child remove themselves from the family, they remove that issue. Youngest can still see her family, as the eldest occasionally sees hers. Is it fair and equal? No it never will be. But it is much much better than being forced to live with/ amongst / as if part of a “family”, that makes it clear they do not give a toss about you. Ask any child who has had to grow up like this and found it painful.

Show quote history

This is a complete contradiction. You acknowledge that it can never be completely fair and equal between the two girls because they have have different fathers, but at the same time you’re insisting that there’s no chance of either of them feeling resentful if OP leaves her husband for the sake of her older dds feelings.

It can’t be both.