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.

No, not really. Needing the money doesn’t entitle him to dump his children, that are his responsibility, onto his wife when she’s clearly not agreed to provide childcare for him.

On a purely practical level, a day out at an aquarium costs an absolute fortune- was Sarah in a position to pay for two extra children?

Well on the face of it the step mum made a cruel choice however-
Is there a backstory?

Does the dad have form for working when he should be doing childcare?
Was it pre arranged before he needed to work?

You’ve just added in a pile of hyperbole there. There’s only one post by the op, and no where does it mention dumping or that she clearly hadn’t agreed the childcare. It isn’t clear from the op whether the childcare was all agreed, then she did the dumping, or if the day out sans sc was agreed then he did the dumping.

If OP is the children's mum she is a CF for expecting her ex's wife to do more for her kids than her ex does.

Many men quickly find a mug to parent their children after a split.
Working at the weekend would be preferable to parenting and this is where the mug Sarah comes in.
Sarah now has a child with him, as usually happens so sarah feels stuck, while doing everything.
Sarah is likely pissed off at just how much she is being used as a skivvy aupair and decided on a day out.
Sarah was not wrong to go out with her child.
Perhaps she is waking up to what a mistake she made signing up for a thankless job of free childcare and skivvy.
Sarah needs tp make clear if he can't parent his children at the weekend, he should send them back to their mother or pay a babysitter.
She is entitled to a day out with her child, not three children to mind on her own.

They are their to spend time with their Dad not their step parent. If he is working he needs to refuse to have them or make another arrangement. In years from now the step parent will not be seen as a big part of the kids lives even if she cares for them frequently as children...it will about Mum and Dad. So step parent must start as she means to go on.

No one should have to mind their kids while at work unless its an emergency. Going to the aquarium was not an emergency. I see why sometimes it might be important for Sarah to be with her family and child alone but not on the days SC are around and especially not when their dad is working.

Only to an extent to self employed people can choose when they work. If you are a DJ for example you won't get far wanting to work Mon till Fri 9-5. A self employed domestic repair man often has to go to customers houses when they are there etc etc etc

If sarah hasn't married him, i hope she rethinks being a mug.
Even if she has, she should rethink it.

Can I ask why the step parent won't be a big part of their lives when older? Mine step parents both are and I was nowhere near as young as these kids when my parents got remarried

I added supposition.

I am inclined to believe that if she had agreed to provide childcare then she would have done so. That she took the children to their father suggests that she hadn’t in fact agreed.

@Blueskystoday that's a mighty leap from the OP. You are assuming Sarah is a skivvy au pair? And that the Dad is choosing to work over parenting? There is no context in the OP and you are making big assumptions about the character of this man. If he was called in on his scheduled day off to perform heart surgery on your Mum would you feel any different?

There is usually form when OP's start threads like this.
History of being used.
If it was a once off, most wouldn't open a thread.

It was an emergency. No one was available to look after his children.

“I see why sometimes it might be important for Sarah to be with her family and child alone but not on the days SC are around and especially not when their dad is working.“

That’s Sarah’s judgement call. The children are their father’s responsibility, not Sarah’s. He shouldn’t be agreeing to work if he doesn’t have childcare.

If I was Sarah I’d have said to my sister that I couldn’t go to the aquarium because I was looking after my stepchildren. Presumably that’s the way the family is organised at the moment. That he is working outside the home to pay the bills and she is working inside the home to ensure that can happen.

Surely the kids are there to spend time with their half siblings and step mum too? I really don't get this division, if Sarah is their step mum then her friends and family should be part of the kids lives too.

This ^
I wonder if it’s a desperate measure on Sarah’s side because she couldn’t get the message across to John otherwise.

Was there not a conversation had with John before he left for work. Or was the plan to visit the Aquarium made last minute? If the visit was known about before John went to work but he wasn’t made aware until DCs were dropped off with him then it was twatty behaviour by the ‘SM’.

Or perhaps Sarah is working all week and is the higher earner out of the two of them. Perhaps he just wants to work and feels entitled to leave his children with his wife whether she agrees to that or not.

It’s reasonable for sarah to have time with her own kid and own sister regardless of what activity they do. Possibly she needed a break from the weight of looking after all three kids, particularly as two of them are not hers. They are his kids and he is in charge of childcare for them and could easily organise his own visit to an aquarium

Anyone else think there is something fishy about Sarah's day out?

Whatever the dynamic between the adults here, the older children are old enough to understand that their sibling is getting a treat they are being denied. IMO Sarah should have taken them, if it was practically possible. Then had it out with John when there were no children present. It’s not fair to involve them in adult stuff.

It was mean of Sarah, but I wonder if it’s the whole story. If we take it at face value and if I was John, I’d stop working at the weekend and if that affected the family finances then so be it.

You’re lucky to be in the position to do that.