10 year old snubbed at wedding

[ProvoPrincess]

DH has raised my eldest since she was 3. She does not see her biological family,

DH’s cousin got married at the weekend. It was a perfect day up until the early evening.

All the kids were playing together outside when all of a sudden my ten year old appeared next to me inside. I asked where her sister was and she replied that she had been taken off by one of DH’s cousins and told her to come in.

I went to investigate, not that I thought she was in danger or anything but I just wanted to know.

Mother-in-Law and her sisters were having official photographs with their proper grandchildren.

Something came over me and I called out to my youngest daughter to come to me. As I was approaching group a cousin’s partner said to wait a bit as they wanted a group photo of all the sisters with grandchildren. I just grabbed my daughter.

I tried to find my husband but he was in another outside space and it turned out he had been in a photo immediately before I had come out. I went back to the room and just cried in front of both kids. I pretended I was ill.

DH couldn’t understand why they didn’t include my eldest but MiL’s eldest sister just said I had ruined something special.

I am angry, upset and also full of shame and embarrassment.

Because they’re not the same. Stepchildren are in-laws. Taking a family photo without in-laws is completely fine.

I remember it. There was also a post where the OP took their oldest to a medical appointment leaving the youngest with grandparents. OP and older daughter returned early to the grandparents and found them having a party with other cousins and a similar scene unfolded.

They sound like toxic weirdos I'd look to limit future contact.

I’m afraid I’m split on this one. THEY didn’t upset your daughter, YOU did with your reaction. They appear to have been considerate of her feelings, by not telling her about the photograph, and simply sending her to find you. IMHO the only way they would have been unreasonable, would be if they intended rubbing your daughters nose in the fact that she was left out of a family photo. You don’t mention if she was included in other photographs. You also don’t mention whether your partner has adopted her, and it would make a difference to my opinion if he had, but assuming that he has not, then you need to remember that if you split up, then his family would have no future relationship with your daughter - harsh but true.

Now that you realise you made a mistake, you need to quickly figure out how to fix everything. Your daughters weren’t bothered about the photos, but you crying and making a scene has drawn your daughters’ attention to family dynamics. You need to stop making this into a big deal. Ultimately, your eldest daughter isn’t your in laws’ grandchild. Is your husband considering adopting her?

But do your parents/siblings/etc still see them as often as any other family member?

I don't think anyone is arguing that a step-parent shouldn't see their step-child as part of their family. It's the implications for extended family that is under debate.

A mother or father (biological or adopted) is a different relationship than step-mother or step-father.

A child will only have one set of parents.

A child could quite easily have 3 different step-parents over the course of their lives. Is each set of extended family supposed to see them as their grandchild for ever more?

Wow! If I had been part of a step-child's life, especially for 7 years, I would still want to see them, and have outings with them etc, even if I had split up with their father! Do you not love your step-children? If I had spent years having my step-children come frequently to the home that I shared with my DPartner, then I couldn't not love my step-children.

I don't have any step-children myself, as my 2nd, and hopefully my forever, husband, hadn't had any children by the time he met me. My first husband left me for someone else, who he then went on to marry, and have children with. When I met his babies from his 2nd marriage - which was during 'handover' time of our joint children - I became very fond of them!

They were so small, and very cute, and very similar in appearance to the the children we shared. They turned into gorgeous toddlers, and then grew up to be the lovely adults they are now. I have always thought of them as my step-children, even now that they are adults. So of course it was wonderful to see all the children together, and to take photos of them all.

What I can't stomach is that they included one sister but not the other. YANBU

My step-niece, although I’ve never thought of her as that, she’s my niece to me, was my bridesmaid. I could never have had my other niece, her sister, without asking her because it would have really upset and hurt her. It didn’t cross my mind for one minute that if my sister’s relationship broke down that we’d not see her again. As it happens, the relationship didn’t last, but my niece stayed living with my sister due to other circumstances so no one knows what the future holds.

It’s really cruel and unnecessary to exclude children, and all this bollocks of “in years to come someone might be in the photos who isn’t in the family anymore…” is just ridiculous. If that’s the case, wedding photos should just be blood family only, no partners and no friends.

I don't think the poster you quoted meant she would refuse to see a step-child if she divorced their father.

I think what she meant was that she would have no legal right to see an ex step-child. In an acrimonious divorce (which is often the case), the parent can easily refuse access.

The parent could also remarry, giving their child a new step-mother who would probably not be that keen on the previous step-mother hanging around.

Well yes, the photo the OP was talking about was just blood family only, no partner and no friends. That's why she herself wasn't invited either.

It's normal to take a range of photos. One with everyone, one with the groom's family, one with the bride's, one with just friends, one with just the couple, one with both sets of parents etc etc.

I mean, we don’t know the full story. PP saying the family should have been more discreet but it sounds like they were? It seems like eldest was sent to find OP, youngest was taken away elsewhere, eldest wasn’t upset (maybe she’d already been included in other photos? OP doesn’t mention this). OP went to see what was going on with youngest, saw what was happening, then decided to start walking towards it all and summoning her eldest? Then making a huge scene and crying in front of her children. OP handled this so badly.

Why is it vile - it is different, you can’t make the in-laws see their dil’s child from a former relationship as their grandchild. It very simply isn’t the same.

I have a family wedding (of my step parent) coming up. They have been my step parent since I was younger than this girl.

I wouldn’t expect to be in any of the family photos, and won’t be asked to be. I take no offence at this and never have - I am not the same to my step-parents relatives as their own children. And - we all get on very well and always have done, so it’s not like there’s some simmering resentment.

I can totally see why you were so upset by it OP. I wouldn’t dream of treating a step grandchild like this of course she should have been included in the family photo. If I had been in your shoes, I would have kept quiet and made my feeling known after the wedding. But easier said than done when you’re upset I know. It’s happened you can’t go back in time, just move forward.

Sounds weird and toxic to me. A little precious.

Yes if they have grown up with them for nearly a decade. Especially when she doesn't see her Dad. So in essence does not have a set of parents.

At my wedding I had (amongst many other configurations) a photo with just me and my sisters.

You apparently think it's "weird and toxic" that my brothers-in-law weren't in the photo too. In your eyes it seems I should consider them my actual brothers, equal in all ways to the sisters I grew up with.

I disagree. As would most people outside of mumsnet I'm certain.

Being a parent is a societal and legal role.

A step-parent has very few legal rights. They also often have very little practical say. Just read a couple of other threads where step-parents are being told to mind their own business and not get involved in parenting decisions etc.

It is not the same as being a parent.

If OP wants her partner to be her daughter's parent, then she should ask him to adopt. This btw would involve the biological dad signing away his legal rights, which just reinforces the fact that being a parent and being a step-parent are two different things.

A grandparent isn't a legal role though.

Excluding someone because not blood even though they are actually bringing them up is toxic.

Point about the sister vs the inlaws yes thats fair. A child no.

I agree, nasty.

Perhaps if they had the courtesy to speak to the OP beforehand she might have been prepared.

I never understand the MN need to defend othering children.

Biological parents walk away from their own children without a backwards glance what makes people think step parents will be any different in a separation.

Sure some still stay in contact but most don’t.

But again this wasn’t a whole family bar the step daughter. This was two sisters and their biological lines. No partners married in or not. No step children. It wasn’t a slight on the ops daughter any more than it was not inviting the husbands/wives of any of their children.

Also the dh agreed with the pictures since he was in them too.

Agree and in that thread the op was encouraged to go NC with her DPs family and to refuse her younger child to see her fathers family unless her older child got identical gifts, money, treatment etc.

A grandparent is a legal role in that if the parents die, grandparents are some of the first considered to raise the children. They can also, in rare cases, get court mandated visitation rights to their grandchildren. Step-grandparents would not be seen on the same level.

Someone who is your family through marriage (or partnership) is an in-law. My husband's parents are not my parents. My husband's sisters are not my sisters. My husband's children wouldn't be my children.

They would be my step-children and by choosing to marry their dad I would owe them love and kindness. That doesn't change that they are my step-children.

Posters are acting like it's traumatising for a child to be a step-child and it should be hidden as much as possible, with everyone pretending that the child is actually their blood/legal grandchild or niece etc.

I would argue that being a step-child is completely ok and doesn't have to be traumatising in the slightest. It's a statement of fact, not a value judgement on anyone.

Their mother crying and causing a scene at someone's wedding is much more likely to traumatise a child than not being in every single photo.

If you are bringing them up and doing the role of Dad. You are a Dad that's it. Which this man has.

It may be slightly different if the biological Dad was heavily involved.

Op had a reaction and should not be sorry for that. The kids witnessing it was probably more damaging in the short term. As she gets older she may remember the photo though.