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 should buy all 6 children gifts too since it is such an awful idea!

I am not saying he shouldn't put up photos. It is his choice. Some people don't. Some people do. Do what works for you.

Exactly. But you don’t seem open to ever treating your SGC as part of the family. Of course you don’t “have” to. But it’s sad that just because they aren’t your blood relatives you’d never even consider it. By that token I wouldn’t have this lovely relationship with my step grandad because he would have just closed off right from the beginning. And I’m not saying he should have paid my school fees (I don’t think you should either). But you just seem very emotionally closed off and it’s sad. In my opinion, having been that stepchild.

Can’t guarantee it’ll be an Apple Watch or a pony but sure, I’ve got nothing against giving the kids presents.

My mum has never actually met my stepson in the 4 years I’ve been with my partner, and still grants him birthday and Christmas gifts.

Well yes, it is the apparent emotional closing off in the way the OP discusses the situation that really jars, particularly considering how long these step-children appear to have been part of the OP’s dd’s life. I still think that is more a feature of the example set by the dd - if she had a loving relationship with the step-children, the OP might sound more mellow towards them, too.

As I’ve said before, if I didn’t feel I could get emotionally close to a partner’s pre-existing, dependent children and see them as part of my family, I would not consider him partnership material for me, and if I felt emotionally close to those children, I could not talk about them the way the OP talks about them.

I also think there is a cultural problem in this family - it’s clearly not a situation of similar families with similar attitudes agreeing on what their children actually need.

I do also think the OP forgets that it was her DD’s choice to get together with a man that already had 4 children. All OP seems to care about is money when that’s the least important bit. The important bit is making the children not feel like outcasts and not just closing off to the kids because they’re not “blood” 🤷‍♀️

People should take ownership of their choices when marrying someone that isn’t the parent of their existing children, and not assume that person and their family are going to believe themselves obliged to consider those children grandchildren/nieces/nephews.

Presumably you are actually capable of understanding there is a difference between choosing to do something, and being expected to do something. As there is also a difference between accepting something offered, and demanding it. OP hasn’t said her DD expects her mother to provide what she is choosing to give, or considers herself entitled to it.

How am I not treating the SGC as part of my family? Do you know what I have done for them?

I don't have to pay for everything for them for them to be part of the family.

You think I am emotionally closed off from what I have posted here? You are making hugely inaccurate assumptions about myself and step GC based on a few posts on a forum.

I agree that people should take ownership of their choices.

That includes their choice to marry a father of existing children.

Nobody forced these 4 children into anyone’s life - they were allegedly welcomed (or not, as the case may be).

I just think it’s remarkable we’re referring to children receiving presents as “grabby,” but not daughters receiving horses.

Why would I forget that? Of course it was her choice like it was the SIL's choice also. They are adults who make their own choices.

Because I have mentioned money, that does not mean that is all I care about. What a bizarre inaccurate assumption to make. I have mentioned many other things also.

How lovely of her buying for one more child.

My sister’s partner had 3, and she also buys for them.

Think that makes us even.

Happy to keep trying if you are? 😂

I think for me there are two deciding factors

1. What age a child comes into the grandparents life.
2. How often they see them

Would you expect a grandparent to treat a blood grandchild the same as a step that they met for the first time when the "child" was 21?

If a grandparent meets a SGC at a young age then I would expect they treat them the same as any blood GC.

If they see their blood GC every week but only see SGC once every 2 months then no they wont be treated the same. But I would argue that isnt down to the fact they are step vs blood.

My inlaws have recently moved to be 5 minutes away from us and see my children multiple times a week. Their other child lives the other end of the country and they see the GC on that side 4-5 times a year when they visit plus a week over the summer when they come down to stay. Are they treated totally equally, no probably not. There is never anything obvious but its hard not to think my kids get that little more because of how often they see their grandparents.

So in short there is no black and white answer, it depends on multiple factors but the most important thing is making sure a SGC is never made to feel left out, unwelcome or unwanted.

Choosing to marry the father of existing children does not make her responsible for those children. ‘Stepparent’ is a title, that’s it. It’s neither a biological nor legal relationship, and as such it’s entirely up to the individual to decide whether they ‘signed up’ for accepting responsibility for those children or not. You chose to, but you didn’t have to. You choosing to does not mean that anyone else has to do the same, any more than you have to do the same as OP’s DD.

Receiving something freely given, without expectation, does not make someone grabby. Expecting to be given something from someone because you believe they are obliged to provide it, when you are neither their dependent nor debtor, is grabby.

DH’s father doesn’t bother with any of his grandchildren, so I guess he treats my children (DH’s stepchildren) the same. DH’s siblings treat them the same as they do other nieces and nephews.

Ecstatic 😂

This could not be any clearer thank you @InterIgnis

Nobody is actually saying that the OP, or her dd, or even the sil have to do anything, though. Nobody is breaking the law. The sil can be a really lacklustre, distant parent and not be doing anything legally wrong. They can all be selfish as anything and they’re perfectly entitled to lead their lives that way.

And really, everyone has a degree of selfishness. Nobody is selfless. Not admitting to your own selfishness is a bit peculiar, imho.

Not financially supporting a stepchild is not some abandonment of responsibility, a wrongdoing, when there is no responsibility to do so in the first place.

And really, everyone has a degree of selfishness. Nobody is selfless. Not admitting to your own selfishness is a bit peculiar, imho.

Sure. For example, it’s selfish to expect someone that isn’t you and/or your child’s other parent to provide what is your responsibility to provide.

I have no issue stating that I’m selfish - I am, but I consider ‘selfish’ a neutral descriptor. I don’t think it’s peculiar that others don’t when you take into account the context. It’s quite apparent that ‘selfish’ in this case is being presented as negative, that the selfish action is a wrongdoing, when it isn’t. As such, it’s unsurprising that people aren’t inclined to accept that particular charge as presented.

Then you agree the sil is selfish. And I’m afraid I disagree that there is no negative selfishness involved in thinking that it is unfair to the biological children to time their riding lessons and present openings in ways that make the step-children feel less left out and that it is reasonable to expect the step-children to suck it up even if it does give the impression they are an intrusion on another family’s daily lives.

That’s fine, we don’t need to agree.

On a related note, I’m not of the belief that it automatically follows that someone feeling badly about something, means that someone else has done something wrong.

Is it always possible though.

for example, my dc do a lot of hobbies. My dad pays for a lot- the trips away, fees, equipment etc.

so a) should he also pay for step gc hobbies. If not, why not?

b) the stepdc have 4 grandparents who could afford to pay. Should my dad still pay in the name of equality?

c) stepdc mum actively discourages hobbies. Doesn’t want to take them, or spend money on it. Her choice. There are a couple of times the step dc have expressed an interest, dh has arranged and paid, for her to refuse to take them, and refuse to allow dh to take them. Once music lessons were arranged by mum in school as dc wanted to do it. Dh paid, only for her to change her mind and just keep the money.

how does a step grandparent pay for things they aren’t allowed to have?

as usual it’s the “even isn’t always fair” issue. Why should my dad write his stepdc into his will, which would mean effectively the step dc will inherit from 4 grandparents of their own, plus my dad. Whereas my child will only inherit from 3, so my child will lose 2/3 of their inheritance.

As mentioned previously - the responsibility to pay for the children’s hobbies doesn’t sit with any grandparents IMO. Step or otherwise.

Which kind of removes the discussion on whether your father should pay for SC hobbies, for me. Don’t pay for any of them would be my take on it!

In terms of inheritance, I’d be quite disappointed if my sister had worked out the % share or fraction her kids would get from my mother tbh.

We all know my mum has a will, and that her 3 children are in it (no step or bio GC), but beyond that - I am completely uninterested in what specifically will come my way when she died.

I think I must come from a different kind of family to some here, money isn’t a discussion or a debate. We have it or we don’t, we spend it on our own families and don’t pass it amongst us, and nobody cares a single bit what happens with inheritance. I can’t imagine being bothered about who gets what.

Seems like you need another reminder from @InterIgnis 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.