to think grandparents do not have to ttoreat their step grandchildren exactly the same way as their blood grandchildren? Part 2

[betnet]

Previous thread

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/amibeingunreasonable/5308130-to-think-grandparents-do-not-have-to-treat-their-step-grandchildren-exactly-the-same-way-as-their-blood-grandchildren?page=40&reply=143511587

No one is advocating that people be cruel or unkind to step children.

You don't have to understand.

Just like @InterIgnis said wisely:

Not everyone is going to find your set up appealing, any more than you do theirs. That’s fine, the only one that needs to work for you is yours.

Do you need to understand?

Where it ends, and begins, is entirely up to the individual concerned. For some, paying for smaller items is fine, for others the stepchildren will have to be funded entirely by the parent, and some will choose to be ‘all in’. Differently strokes for different folks and all that.

No one said they aren’t in the family - of course they are, they’re in laws. Not accepting financial responsibility for a relative, blood or in law, does not mean they’re not ‘in the family’.

Thank you for repeating the PP that I have already responded to.

If my mother was spending thousands on educating my family, I’d be positively mortified at my own lack of independence.

My partner also, quite rightly, wouldn’t be with me if I was so dismissive of his child.

Okay 🤷🏻‍♀️

You don’t have to understand.

You are welcome. You keep repeating how you don't understand.

Same thing again. Yes you can be mortified at your own lack of independence and your partner would not be with you if you were dismissive of his child.

Here you go again:

Not everyone is going to find your set up appealing, any more than you do theirs. That’s fine, the only one that needs to work for you is yours.

Exactly!!

@SleeplessInWherever I don’t think it’s as black and white as in the family or not - especially with step families.

OP’s daughter doesn’t have Parental Rights. She hasn’t legally adopted these children. They have a mother and father. They are the parents.

thier mother and father have a legal and moral obligation to support them financially. They have a step mother and a step father who have no such obligation. They have a moral obligation to be kind and welcoming. But their income is not taken into account for child maintenance because they are not the parents.

clearly their step father feels no such obligation given he isn’t working so must not be able to support his own biological children never mind his step children.

SIL allowed a situation where his wife funded private education for two of his six children and therefore i assume was content with any issues of fairness. If he wants his children to now have a private education then that is for him to fund. If their mother also wants this she needs to find employment and contribute. It isn’t for OP, her daughter, the children’s step father or indeed his parents to find this money.

I’ll just reply generally, saves the bulk replying.

Imagine moving in with someone’s father and then not feeling morally obliged to support them. No wonder step parents get a bad rep if this is what we’re normalising.

You're welcome to individually reply or just pat each other on the back but like a PP said, I’m very grateful that my family don’t treat each other that way. I’d far rather be part of a family that welcomes and supports everyone in it, than one that separates them into categories of who birthed them.

I don’t need to imagine believing something when I already fully believe it. Also, it is normalized.

If you’re happy with your set up then I’m pleased for you, as I’m pleased for those happy in totally different ones. No one expects you to want to be in family that does it differently, but it may be wise to recognize that your set up isn’t going to appeal to everyone, and some will find it just as off-putting as you find theirs.

Sorry. Do you genuinely believe that it’s normal, and/or right, to marry a child’s father and then not support that child?

Yes, ime it is normal. In my own personal life I don’t know any stepfamilies that follow the ‘all in’ model where a stepparent assumes financial responsibility for their stepchild, and they were a minority of the ones I encountered in my professional life. Clearly we have moved, and move, in different circles.

"Fair". != "the same".

As I said in my post - the DD should treat her step children well when they are in her/SiL's home and in their care. I think that covers your bizarre loo roll problem.

It is not the DD's job to provide education and support for the SC when they are not in her care - they have two parents of their own for that. Those two parents have produced at least eight children between them and maybe ought to focus a bit harder on what they can do to address their DC needs. Or perhaps the DD's should call them each night to check they have done their homework?

Good grief - you are a step mother - have you really never seen the repeated stepmother/SC threads on here where the step mother can't win? Where she is accused of over reach/boundary breaching having the temerity to buy X or say Y to their step children but a hard faced cow if she doesn't buy X or say Y? Usually including a reminder that if she divorces she will probably never see them again.

I don’t believe a step parents income should be part of child support calculations.

i don’t believe step parents, and definitely not their parents, should be expected to fund big things like private education or university.

if I married someone with children I would expect my husband to continue to fund their expenses. To pay the child support. I would of course ensure they were well cared for when in my home. I would buy them nice presents, take them out for treats, spoil them like a kind aunt. But I wouldn’t presume to take on a parental role - assuming they have two involved parents. I wouldn’t expect Mother’s Day cards for example - I would just want to be a kind adult in their life who over a period of time they build a good relationship with if that is what they want.

I would expect their mum and dad to fund things like university.

I have watched friends become step mothers and this has always been the formula that works.

That’s truly awful. I have no further questions.

That great for you and your bubble. However legally you have no parental rights or responsibilities unless you adopt - that partner and child could disappear entirely from your life and you have no rights or obligations. Obviously that is something we all hope will never happen, nonetheless about half of all long term relationships do break down.

Personally I wouldn't want to be with a partner who would leave me if I wasn't financing his DC by previous relationships. I might well choose to fund things for a SC and sharing bills makes a bit of that inevitable but the expectation and responsiblity belongs with the child actual parents.

Works fine for me, but like I said earlier: each to their own.

We differ.

Our household funds are fully joint, and so I would expect that joint income to apply to any child support calculations. My partner doesn’t actually pay any, because it’s not owed/due to his ex due to the custody share we have, but if it was - the money is ours so the check on it would be too.

I would have no issue those joint funds going into my stepsons future car, university, house etc. If that was something we would fund, which it isn’t!

A lot of this doesn’t apply to me due to his needs, but I have no issue with our funds being wholly joint and them going towards him in whatever way necessary.

It’s becoming increasingly evident how fortunate I am that my stepson has a group of adults around him who work together to meet his needs without all of this faff of who does and pays for what.

His mother, my partners ex, refers to us as a team around him. A team that I am privileged to be part of.

That is evidently perhaps not the norm, but I find the alternative frankly cold and dismissive, and it’s not in my nature to treat a child that way.

And that’s fine. No one said you had to behave differently. You’re also of course free to find the alternative as great or as awful you like, it’s not like your approval is required.

No, but it would be better for your nephew to be given his gifts at a time when the other children aren’t there.

My nephew shouldn’t get presents from his granny on Christmas Day because his dad is a selfish arsehole?

TBH I don’t expect brilliant parenting from people who introduce their kids to New Daddy after 5 minutes of knowing him but anyone with half a brain could explain that this is X’s grandma and they get lots of presents from them because that’s they’re grandma, and you don’t because she doesn’t know you. I don’t get this new wave of “the children must never experience an adverse event, ever.” It’s part of life, and probably the reason why we have so many wet blanket young adults these days

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5308130-to-think-grandparents-do-not-have-to-treat-their-step-grandchildren-exactly-the-same-way-as-their-blood-grandchildren?reply=143468313&utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

I am reposting my previous post, as I am one of those Grandparents who would not buy bigger presents for some children and smaller ones for the step-grandchildren. I would also alternate horse riding lessons, so everybody got some but only once a fortnight, not once a week.
I do think the elderly uncle should be told to buy for the 6 children rather than just 2, even if that is a family board game or DVD and a nice box of biscuits.
I think the OP will never agree to that viewpoint though which is why they are ignoring the posts that says so and just repeating themselves over and over.

A lot depends on the age of the child, and their ability to understand the situation. A twelve-year-old would understand, but a two-year-old wouldn't. I don’t know where I’d draw the line.

If you don’t accept responsibility for funding your SC’s education and hobbies, then I’m unsure where that ends. Why would some things be your “problem” and others not.
I don’t understand why caring for the child physically would be joint funded, but paying for private school is a biological child and DD only deal? They’re either in the family, or they’re not. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I’m trying to apply this “logic” to my family. When DSS stayed with us, then of course we paid for his food, outings, treat etc. But private education? Seriously? That’s a very different kettle of fish and absolutely not my issue, nor that of my parents. I’m just trying to imagine my Dad’s reaction if I suggested he pay for DSS’s education!

There are a further two children from the ex wife which makes 8 children in total. All relatives should be told to buy for 8 children?

DD's friends should be told to stop buying for her two children and to buy for all 8 children or give them a box of biscuits to share and a board game?