What do you think of this situation? unreasonable or normal?

[inapickle99]

Sarah and John have a young child together (3) and John has two older children (7&9) who stay with them 40% of the week. They have been together for 5 years.

John is self employed and was working at the weekend, Sarah was at home with all children. Sarah invited to go on a day out with her sister and niece and agrees. She drops off two step children with their dad to spend the day at his work with him and goes with their joint child on the day out (to an aquarium).

Do you think this is reasonable? No option given to the other children to go along.

Poor kids.

I think, for a lot of stepparents, there’s a huge change when you have your own. You realise that a) these kids would be happier with their parents than you and b) you’d rather be with your own kid than them.

Sounds like Sarah has realised this. Doesn’t mean she doesn’t care about them. It’s just facing reality.

This. I think OP is expecting far too much of her kids' stepmother.

It depends on whether Sarah agreed to babysit the kids in advance or had them dumped on her. If she agreed to babysit them (unlikely, given she had a day out planned), then SIBU. If she had them dumped on her, then no, not unreasonable to return them to their parent so she can go on her pre-arranged day out. She shouldn't have to add in (and pay for!) two extra children on her outing if she didn't agree to take them.

I'm sorry for your kids, OP. Unfortunately, they're going to suffer for having one shit parent who dumps them on other people, but at least they have you.

I think you need to arrange contact time with their father when he's actually available to be with them.

Yes, it sounds rubbish for the children. OP, can they stay home with you if their dad won't be there?

This is heartbreaking. Dad is the issue here. Why does “he” have the kids when he is working. So sad. You need to have a conversation.

if there was a risk of this happening again (them being stuck at dads work all day) then they should be home with you instead. It’s really not fair on them and cannot happen again.

I think that’s really mean and so sad for the children. I’m a mum and a step mum and yes I want to do things just me and my children sometimes and as they’re younger, they enjoy different things to the older ones. But I wouldn’t dream of doing this. I’d arrange things with them if their time with us and without them if they’re with their mum. Do you have a good enough relationship with your ex to be able to raise it with him without it being taken badly and causing conflict? If you do, I’d definitely let him know how it made them feel

He won't because if this is a regular occurrence (which it sounds like it is) it would shift the balance of the contact arrangement and he would be liable for more maintenance. Like most divorced fathers he thinks he should neither have to look after his kids or pay for them, and thinks it is for the women in his life to plug the gaps so he doesn't have to. Tale as old as time.

Yes, you absolutely can say the same thing. Perhaps if we all said the same thing a bit more often, maybe people would start to understand that you can’t put step children in a cupboard whenever it’s inconvenient and they need to bear that in mind when they start dating new partners.

Sarah didn’t put them in a cupboard, she brought them to their parent, on his contact time.

Yes, the niece is only 3. She can’t possibly always be doing the same as the older two (step)children. Also these children have their own families, not just the new one they are given. The other two will have activities just for them no doubt too.

There are a couple of things I would want to know, as whether SM is being unreasonable.
Do the kids go every weekend or every other?
Does their dad work every weekend?
Does the SM work full time in the week?

I missed this point. Yes he should not be working or they should be with their mum if he is.

Well, you can of course say that, just as you can say that the moon is made of cheese. You would be wrong on both counts as a matter of fact.

As I said, parent is a legal relationship that comes with clearly defined legal responsibilities. The same is not true for stepparent. You may think that they should be considered the same, but that is hardly something you’re in the position to enforce when it comes to anyone that isn’t you.

Sarah is extremely unreasonable. I would never dream of not allowing my stepchild to come on a day out with me and my children if their dad was working. In fact I actively plan them into our trips if this is the case. Children will breed this resentment over time and once they act out against Sarah we will be seeing a post on here that Sarah’s stepchildren are awful to her and wonders why?!

So you’ve never had a day out with just your child, during your husband’s contact time? What if SC wanted a day with just dad, would that be extremely unreasonable too? What if you had your SC for every single weekend and holiday? What if your SC were very hard work? What if your sister had a child the same age and gender as yours, but SC was in a different stage and the opposite gender? What if your sister was terminally ill or getting a divorce and wanted to talk openly with you, but didn’t feel comfortable doing so with two nosy SC in tow?

What works for your family may not work for other families. We have no idea of Sarah’s side of the tale.

But, according to MNers, it would be fine if the DP's brother was getting married and didn't invite the woman's child, but did invite the 2 children of the DPs.
Since it seems most of MN thinks the above would be fine as it isn't "blood family", the OPs situation is just as "okay" by MNers standards.

None of this would have happened if John hadn't (conveniently for him) been at his self-employed job when he was supposed to be having contact time with his children.

OP, if John and Sarah split up because he demands that she parents your shared children, then they won't see her at all. Of course she doesn't 'love' them and you would do well to make her life as easy as possible so she doesn't just completely call it a day. Make it clear you are on her side and don't expect her to be responsible for your shared children with John. Your OP really kind of reads as if you blame her, or at least blame them equally, and that's where you are going wrong.

Can you imagine the howls of outrage if Sarah tried to get involved in those decisions?

Yes she should have taken them - they are aquarium age and why leave them out.

I wonder if Sarah had anything to do with the end of OP's relationship with John. Considering that the younger child was 2 when Sarah and John got together, that is highly possible, and would also explain the OP resenting Sarah.

Which makes Sarah a cruel arsehole.

I don’t have an issue but that’s maybe why I would never be a step-parent.

But ultimately it’s their dad’s contact time - not hers. They aren’t her children.