Step daughter and new born

[Worriedmom98]

Wanting peoples opinions, I have a 7 week old and my partner has a daughter to his ex partner who he pays plenty a month for - on our weekend to have her she’s come down with a sickness bug ( mother hadn’t informed us it was my step daughter that told us). I do not want me or my new born getting if can be prevented, with that my partner rang her and explained both of our worry’s this is the first time in 5 years we’ve ever had to do this, she proceeds to call him a sh*t dad and that we have to tell her ourselves “we don’t want her” and that she can’t believe we’re not having her. I understand she isn’t gonna be thrilled about our baby but do people not have any regard over a new borns health? she is now asking for an additional money of £20 to feed her for that evening meal and for meals the day after. I don’t want the argument but I also don’t want to put my new born at risk of a sickness bug if it can be prevented

congrats on your baby. Totally understandable you not wanting to put your newborn at risk however, if SD was your kid what would you do then? Would you ship her off to her dad’s until well enough?
I say this as a mum to a newborn myself! Just crack on…dad should do something with his daughter and step daughter not allowed to carry baby/bottle prep/change nappy etc!
I took my little one at that age on a long haul flight… she is just fine.

But that IS sending a very clear message that she’s not viewed as a part of the household, and that it’s just an additional house, not a home IMO.

If it were truely her home she’d be able to go there regardless of how ill she was!

For people like you ! My step children are my child full siblings . Siblings are siblings , doesn’t matter what percentage of dna they share .

I share your concern but not your objection to paying the mother for the extra weekend. And you should make it up with an extra weekend to reinforce to the SD she is wanted

This ! Plus it’s a newborn , the girl will be feeling a bit different and possibly left out as it is . I would never do this to my step children

Ok that's nice in your head but reality and the dictionary say otherwise

What I would never do to my step children is make them pack up, get into the car and go some place else when they feel terrible.

what I would never do to ANY child, is put them at unnecessary risk of a bug that could really make them poorly.

MN HATES Step mums. Usually you have to be on the step parents board to notice.

Well for myself I’d much rather explain to the DD that she poses a risk to the baby and that’s the ONLY reason she can’t come this particular weekend, than find myself explaining that as a result of her visit while ill, the baby is now in hospital, or worse. She’s fifteen. She’s old enough to appreciate the risk and OP has already said they will make up the time. It’s one weekend, she’s not being banished from the house.

I appreciate that’s your viewpoint - sorry I haven’t read every single post on the thread. Do you have step children?

This. Couldn’t have said it better myself. A vitriolic pile on for OP simply because she’s a step mum, while the childs’ own mother remains free from any criticism despite taking a sick child out of her bed and packing her off to her dads’ - for no other reason that it’s his weekend. I simply fail to see the problem with explaining to DD that her illness poses a risk to the baby but that as soon as she’s better, they will make up the time lost. She’s fifteen, not five.

Some of the people arguing that SD should be able to decide where to stay ARE stepmums! I certainly don’t hate stepmums - I appreciate it’s often a complicated, delicately balanced position to find oneself in at times!

Yep. My own child and a step child. And I wouldn’t even think of sending either of the children to the other parent while they had an illness that posed a risk to anyone in their household - and neither would the other parents involved. It’s utterly irresponsible. And the notion that explaining to a fifteen year old that the visit would have to be delayed for a few days for a very good reason would make her feel pushed out is ridiculous.

And I say this in all sincerity, I’m really pleased that’s the case for you, and your family.

Its not the same in every household.

The NHS guidance for D&V is not to go to school or work and avoid contact with other people for two days until after symptoms have stopped

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/diarrhoea-and-vomiting/

Spreading illnesses to a potentially vulnerable baby is not acceptable!

Refer SD Mum to the NHS guidance and explain that basic bio security is important! D&V bugs can be fatal for young children!

At some point OP your child will get chickenpox, or another illnesses and I would put money on SDs Mum insisting that her daughter isn’t exposed to the bug!

Given her daughter has D&V demanding £20 for food seems incredibly heartless… her daughter is probably going to be struggling to eat very much for the next week!

A good parent would want to keep their child at home, let them rest and recover and would want to follow NHS guidance. Not send their ill daughter to a house to spread the infection and have disturbed rest because newborn babies tend not to sleep for 8 hours at night!

Finally imagine how guilty SD would feel if she passed on D&V to a newborn baby sibling that became seriously ill or hospitalised! Babies do die from contracting D&V bugs.

OP you are not being unreasonable!

Offer SD a full week with her Dad during half term or when she is feeling better by way of making up the time! I am sure she would appreciate getting to know her sibling when she feels well!

What a stupid and ignorant comment.

The OP's baby is just 7 weeks old.

Your whataboutery is completely irrelevant.
Go and bloody well educate yoursef about how a D and V visrus is spread and just how dangerous it can be for a tiny baby.

This isn't about a stepchild. It is about protecting a very young baby. If you can't see that you shouldn't have children.

God, there are some extremely thick posters coming out of the woodwork tonight.

I appreciate all of this.

However, it’s clear in this instance that SD’s mother is playing funny business with SD and feeding her “you might not be wanted there”.

Which is why I think it’s especially important it’s SDs own decision…

Sounds like, from the OP that showing the 15 year old girl the information might be more fruitful!

I also agree with lots of the posts which say if she’s really that ill surely she is going to prefer to stay in whichever bed she’s ill in!

Yes and I agree to some degree but it’s just unfair that it’s always this way. Would they do the same if they didn’t have a newborn? What about when inevitably the child is sick and the baby is older, say 5 with some sort of virus or bug. It’s always upto the other parent it seems and it’s exhausting! Both parents have equal parental responsibility.

It’s actually batshit that you think it’ll be easier for a mum to ‘take her newborn baby somewhere else’ (where??! A hotel??!) than for her 15 year old step daughter to rain check one weekend with her dad.

Regardless of whether you, I, OP or anyone else views it as batshit - what is clear from the original post is that SD’s mum doesn’t view it as a rain check, and so potentially SD, 15, will be sensitive to being brushed off.

I agree here dad could, and probably should, sort it out with SD directly if she’s 15!

I say this not to suggest that mums view is more important than OPs - just that it’s probably very influential to SD!

Haven’t rtft but it’s common sense not to move between households when infected with a highly contagious sickness bug. MN of all places is usually quite unanimous with that train of thought. Even more so when there’s a new baby in the house.
Obviously if she lived with you full time and picked something up it would be different but it’s very silly to spread it between the two households when there is the option for her to stay where she is. My dc would never have gone off to their dads when they had a sickness bug, firstly they wouldn’t have wanted to and secondly it wouldn’t have been fair to him or his family.
I think you have to tread carefully so it doesn’t sound like ‘we can’t have you here because of the baby’ type of thing. But the mum is fucking ridiculous and selfish to think it’s a good idea anyway.

God people are so weird! This whole ‘my child can’t be near others who are sick’ thing is odd frankly. But ostracising a step child (who is old enough that it’s not going to be a vom fest everywhere or anything) because she’s sick is… sick. All the money shit is weird though, on both sides.

Hmm this is hard. You can probably ensure that the child isn’t around the newborn. I think it sends a message to the child that my dad doesn’t want me if I’m sick.

It would have been better if the mum kept the child at home because she is sick. Most decent parents would have this mindset, when my dd isn’t feeling great I often encourage her to stay at home.

Parenting sadly doesn’t stop when the child becomes sick. And if you don’t want your partners child near the newborn, I would ask him to find a solution that works for everyone.

It’s also so so rubbish when a newborn gets sick.

YANBU, OP. I'll never understand why people's answer to so many parenting dilemmas is "other people have no choice but to put up with that, so you should too". That is really unfortunate, but there IS a choice here so it's just not comparable.

My view is that when someone's ill they should ideally be exposed to as few people as possible. That's even without throwing anyone vulnerable into the mix - surely that just makes sense if they're comfortable where they are? Then she can stay longer when she's better.

Wtf is odd about wanting to protect your new born from a d&v bug?

Don’t be so ridiculous. You’d expose a newborn to a potentially very dangerous D&V bug when there is a simple alternative for her to just stay put for one weekend? Madness.
As long as it is dealt with sensitively she shouldn’t feel ostracised. It’s just common sense.