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.

Family life isn't as easy as choosing not to work weekends 🙃.

Well, that's what he'll have to do when Sarah dumps him 🤷‍♀️

So what if she married a man with kids, why should she look after his kids? Why can't he look after his kids and their emotions?
Did she agree to look after them? Or does he see her as the correct person for the job? Women, the designated unpaid carers eh and women clapping all the way.
If the kids didn't have a mother, I could empathise, but no,
Apparently the kids need 3 parents 🙄

That’s his problem to figure out. That it’s difficult for him doesn’t mean he’s entitled to ignore being told no.

Self-employed work could mean anything. He might be doing admin that could be done at home with his children.

Taking 3 children out for the day is a different proposition to taking one, and the age gap would make it harder.
Entertaining a 9yr old, 7 yr old and a toddler would mean one or two would miss out.

Should be for them to figure out, as a married couple.
If she is not happy, leave.

Ask OP all those questions.

Being single and married are two different things in terms of support. Like I said, if she's not happy, she should leave.

I can't imagine being in a marriage where there's so much division and kids are caught in between.

Exactly, and why on earth should it be Sarah's child who should always miss out? And as OP have said, if Sarah dumps him, she will no longer be responsible for his children at all.

@Flowersforyourchocolateprettyplease The OP won't necessarily know.

@sunshinestar1986 , they don't need 3 parents, just a step-mum to do the childcare, but not discipline, a disney dad, and a mum the rest of the time.

His kids are not a ‘they’ issue. They’re his issue. He’s tried to force responsibility for them onto his wife, and she’s told him no. She didn’t sign up for that by virtue of marrying him, no matter how much you may like to believe that to be the case.

If that doesn’t suit him then nothing is stopping him from leaving.

They are a blended family.
The division in a family isn't healthy, and of course he can leave, just as much as she can too.

And? A stepparent doesn’t assume responsibility for a stepchild upon marrying a parent. They may choose to accept a level of it, but that is entirely their decision to make. Parental responsibility remains solely with the parent, and cannot forcibly be ‘shared’.

If a parent wants a partner to act as a parent or nanny, as the one actually responsible for their children, then it’s up to them to not date or marry someone who isn’t offering that. Which means communicating that from the beginning, not just assuming that it’s a service that will be provided.

Sarah doesn’t need to do anything more than what she has done. She’s told him no, so that’s that. He can whine, pout and stomp his foot as much as he likes, he’s got to accept that no regardless of whether they remain together or split up.

Well, we're all different, Sarah can leave if she's not interestedin the step kids.
Being any family is about helping each other out, but then we're all different.

No one knows what was agreed in this scenario, OP isn't Sarah and even she hasn't been back.

Being any family is about helping each other out...
With some (the step-mother) doing all the helping?

Sarah can leave if she's not interestedin the step kids

Nowhere does OP say Sarah is not interested in the step kids. She did say I do believe he leaves too much to his wife. This sounds like the source of their friction and that Sarah has had enough - possibly from being put in the position of having to take on the bulk of caring for all of the children.

Sarah may not want to leave him/them, but, from OP's comments, she does want John to just parent his own children and not slope them on to her all the time. I can understand how this would be frustrating for Sarah and OP.

There have been many past threads on MN where women are fed up that their OH's aren't providing much/any help with their joint children and having little family time.

Of course she can. She may not want to at this point though, and she doesn’t have to.

‘Being any family is about helping each other out’

So he can help his wife out, and stop dumping his responsibilities onto her.

There’s a vast difference between help and exploitation. As it so happens she did in fact help John by taking on sole responsibility for their joint child for the day. That she didn’t acquiesce to being his doormat does not negate any and every other form of help and support she provides in their relationship.

Being a good husband means respecting your wife and not riding roughshod over her because of your misplaced sense of entitlement. It’s also generally understood that being a good man means accepting no for an answer.

You don't say!

Sure.

?

Well John's a catch isn't he?

How much are you prepared to bet he had an affair and left his wife because he couldn't be arsed parenting small children and felt miffed that she was spending so much of her time and effort on it?

Mind you, Sarah (even if she wasn't the original OW) had a child 2 years into a new relationship which isn't a particularly great idea either even without the added complications of his existing children.