Elder daughter father giving rules about my younger kids

[Dazedandconfusec]

My elder daughter is 12 and Grade 5 piano and flute and began guitar in an afterschool club at school last year. She gave up violin when the teacher moved house but still has two violins which she occasionally gets out.

My ex has facilitated her music and has bought all of the instruments and paid for lessons but I obviously had to facilitate the lessons for flute; the piano teacher comes to the house.

My younger daughter elder daughter’s half sister, has now started piano at school. Elder daughter has locked piano as her dad has instructed that my younger children cannot use the piano or have use of the other instruments.

The 12 year old is unable to set boundaries about her blended family using her gifted things without her permission and her dad stepped in to support her.

Piano, hair dryer, makeup, whatever. She's allowed to have her own stuff and not have to share. Forced sharing is the way to fracture a poorly blended family even more.

OP wants her eldest at hers. She knows that if she hands this gift other kids, OP will likely walk. She's come to an acceptable compromise.

I'd guess it's highly likely that eldest will move in with her dad when she's able to be self sufficient. This family didn't blend, her sibs want to use her stuff, OP was so distracted by new family and moving that eldest dropped 2 grades behind and neither the dad or the stepdad stepped in during that period for support. She's kind of on her own.

@outerspacepotato acceptable to who ? Has she asked her younger child if she’s happy with the arrangement ? And as I said where does it end

It's acceptable to OP, her eldest, and the owner of the piano.

Youngest doesn't get a vote. It's not hers.

Does he try poison her sibling relationships in other ways too? what a prat.

I would just be matter of fact about it. “DD, your sister has as much right to learn piano as you do. We do not have space for 2 pianos, so if you & your dad insists that she cannot use this piano then we will have to move it to your dad’s house and get a smaller one which you can share. this will mean you cannot use the grand as much. this is not a good idea in my opinion, but if it’s what you want then go ahead and tell your father to book the removal company. I’m sorry that your dad’s shit stirring has led to this situation which ultimately only disadvantages you.”

You seem a bit passive and ready to accept blame for a situation not of your making. give them the options and let them choose and make it clear “preventing little sister from learning piano” is not on the table.

No, I just read OP’s post.

It hasn’t been treated as a family piano because it isn’t one. It’s there for her eldest daughter, not her younger children. OP knew and knows that.

AFAIA, an instrument being considered communal generally isn’t dependent on each family member beginning formal instruction. That the younger daughter started piano lessons does not mean her sister’s piano became available to her.

well all these years that the eldest child was playing piano she was getting the exclusive benefit of 2 things 1) the piano and 2) the portion of the sitting room that the piano was located in, which was a communal space that the younger children obviously had to give up to their older sibling.

if dd1 and her dad were so fixated on not sharing why weren’t they clamouring to have dd1 designate an equivalent portion of her bedroom as a play area for her half siblings?

i will tell you why: because that would be petty and ridiculous. and they only want petty and ridiculous when it benefits the older kid.

Ok. Still atypical to have 2 pianos. Your mother must have been an unusually particular musician to have dedicated her home to accommodating 2 pianos. OP is not a musician at all. This is not her piano. It is her ex’s piano that he just expects her to accommodate. Maybe she should start charging rent?

Yes, but parents don’t always get these things right, do they? Allowance can be made for a child of 12, but the adults really need to step up here.

Uprights are still massive, take up a huge amount of space, cost a fortune to move (even across the room) and still need tuning, maintenance etc. I wonder who is paying for the current baby grand to be tuned?

Who says it hasn’t been treated as communal? Obviously a younger sibling that isn’t taking lessons isn’t going to use it for regular practice, but might tinker on it from time to time.

The dd is being unreasonable if she wants to keep the piano for herself. A reasonable parent would explain this to her, not double down on it.

If half-siblings really have disadvantaged the elder dd then that’s very sad, but overcompensating in other unrelated areas will not help matters.

Yes, I know. What about it? Those aren’t factors that will dissuade anyone who wants pianos/ a piano, has the space, and can afford to pay to move and/or maintain it/ them. The father already had pianos at his own houses, so it’s hardly like these are things he’s unfamiliar with.

I suspect the person who pays to have it tuned is the owner of the piano, who is also the only person that has insured it.

OP, I think your decision to get a keyboard for your younger child is the right one. And as you stated, to only upgrade once grade 2 or higher is achieved. That way younger child shows that they are disciplined and practicing and serious about learning to play. By that time feelings may have changed and you may be able to come to a compromise that both children are happy with. Good luck.

I’m talking about the OP, who isn’t a musician yet still has to have these instruments housed and maintained. Not the ex. I’m sure he’s very aware - that’s how he knows that this flex will be so effective.

I’d be surprised if it was the ex having the piano tuned, but you never know. I suspect that OP will not be back to fill us in.

OP said that younger children were allowed to tinker on a couple
of occasions when their sister invited them to. It is only recently that the younger daughter has started to use it, hence this issue arising.

It is not a communal piano. Even OP was somehow under the impression that it was, she now knows and has accepted that it isn’t. That’s it. She resolved the situation on the same day she started the thread, and has quite possibly already bought her youngest a keyboard.

She’s not being ‘overcompensated’, she’s being provided for by her parents, one of which is wealthy. Her siblings have less in comparison because their parents are not wealthy. This is just the reality of their respective parents having vastly different levels of wealth, and it’s something they have little choice but to accept and come to terms with. It isn’t something their sister needs to compensate them for.

She’s not unreasonable to keep to herself the piano her father provided to her. She’s allowed opinions that don’t align with OP’s, and she cannot be forced to share her mother’s perspective. Luckily she has her father’s support. If the younger siblings want their own piano it’s up to their parents to either facilitate this, or not. It isn’t the responsibility of their sister or her father.

She doesn’t have to do any such thing. She chose to house the piano for the same reason that her ex chose to allow his piano to be at OP’s house. For their shared child. They’ve now resolved the issue by choosing to continue this arrangement.

OP said her ex is the one who shares and facilitates their daughter’s interest in music. The ex paid for the piano and her other instruments. He pays to insure it, and pays for their daughter’s home tutor. I’d be incredibly surprised if he wasn’t the one paying to have it maintained. I also suspect OP would have said if this were the case.

Did the OP choose it though? Can you copy and paste the part where she says this was the agreement from the start? Because it would be strange to agree to that and then post this thread complaining about it, no?

Anyway, I’m guessing this comes down to the OP not willing to put her hand in her pocket and just buy her children a piano. That’s up to her, but it might come back to haunt her.

Yes, I suspect the OP doesn’t want to rock the boat in case other gifts and privileges afforded to the elder DD are withdrawn. I imagine there’s a lot more at stake here than just a piano. Well if that’s how you and the OP are happy to live your lives, good luck to you both. I’m sure the OPs ex will enjoy pulling the strings via the DD from afar over the next 6+ years. Rather them than me.

Planning and thinking ahead is part of parental responsibility. It's not a unique or special skill.

It should be inconceivable that anyone would be so controlling and self-absorbed that they would expect someone to house a baby grand that only one child out of the 5 person household is allowed to touch. The OP will have been banking on her ex behaving like a semi-reasonable human being.

<<Yawn>>

Disagreeing with someone by interpreting the same information differently doesn’t automatically make them a man/ a relative/ troll. It just means they have formed a different opinion based on the information the OP shared.

The clue is in the name

AIBU Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions...

Opinion (noun):
A personal view, judgement, or belief about something that isn’t necessarily based on fact or proof.

HTH

I don’t believe a word of it. From a poster who has no idea how shit free FB pianos are.. this is not a likely story.

OP specifically said this has only become an issue since the other DD wanted to learn.

The problem with this is the foundation of technique starts from the very beginning. If you’re only ever going to tinker it doesn’t really matter if you mess around with a keyboard. But if DD turned out to have talent and wanted to play seriously it’s crucial that she gets the right fundamentals from the start.

A keyboard is ok for practicing on holiday for a couple of weeks when it’s that or nothing. But for learning - no.

Yes, indeed. So we know that OP did not agree to this when the piano first arrived. And it wouldn’t have occurred to her to ask the question because it’s such a ludicrous expectation.

Exactly. It’s a proviso that would have to be made upfront and OP would not have been likely to agree to it.

One can see why this man is an ex.