Baby on the way, partners kids overnights

[TheHonestHedgehog]

My partner and I are expecting a baby. We live in my small two-bed terraced house.

My partner's two kids (12 and 8, boy and girl) stay with us every other weekend, Friday to Monday, in the second bedroom, which they share, which is already an issue due to their ages and lack of space - it is also used as my home office the rest of the time.

We’ve been trying to move for 2 years but ongoing divorce complications have stopped this - we’ve been together over 3 years and the divorce is still ongoing with no end date in site.

Until the financials are settled we can not afford to move.

The second bedroom at some point will become the babies room. I’m aware people will have opinions on this, but there is physically no other option when it comes to the storage and things we will need for the baby, that room will have to be used for them.

The living room is not big enough for any sort of blow up or temp beds, and the dining room is open plan with the kitchen - which we intend to utilise as my new office and play space for baby. Further to this, with it being open plan it is near impossible to heat in winter.

The second bedroom is not big enough to have a double bed in, so we can’t even swap with ours as an option.

No other family are nearby, both sets of parents are over an hour drive away and paying for separate accommodation for three nights a fortnight isn't affordable either - we’re both self employed.

Our plan:

• Overnights continue for now with the kids in their usual room prior to the birth but with changes to the room setup while we prepare and get what baby needs.
• After the birth, we step down to Friday and Saturday nights, home on Sunday evening so they're rested for school and a small step towards the next adjustment.
• Overnights to pause once baby is 5 months old and we start moving them into the second room, they will resume as soon as we move (hopefully not long after this)
• Until then: Our Saturday and Sunday days, 9am to 7pm, plus continuing the other in-week contact my partner already has with them.

Their mum thinks we should find a way to keep all three nights, with airbeds or paid accommodation. We feel this is not realistic with a newborn and the space available.

And without giving too much context - most of the ongoing divorce complications are because their mum is fighting to keep the former family home (that she can only just afford at a big stretch) for the wellbeing and ongoing routine of her children as priority. A year before she had agreed to sell so everyone could move, my house was on sale and we had an offer in on a bigger home, which was all undone as she later changed her mind.

Finally - I know people will wonder why have you gotten pregnant when this is the situation, but with no end date or visible outcome to the divorce in site and me getting close to “that age” I didn’t want to wait and risk never being able to have a baby of my own. We expected to be trying for a while but have been extremely fortunate that it’s happened right away 🫶🏽

I would like people’s opinions on our plan, any other suggestions, similar situations or what they think should happen here, the last thing we want is to push the kids out but things are already a struggle with space, them sharing, their ages and genders.

Thank you

I'm quite shocked.

The children's mother is totally in the right here. It doesn't show your partner in a good light if he agrees with this plan.

Of course you have to keep the overnights; why on earth should he be able opt out of parenting because it's inconvenient? And why should their mother be penalised? You do realise the level of upheaval to her life that this will involve?

This is an ill concieved plan. Basically, life needs to continue in its current form with the addition of a half sibling who will fit into the current set up without their children's mother having to take on extra responsibilities.

In the words of my idol - Judge Judy

If he is the prize then I don't want to win

You just keep the baby in your room indefinitely so the older children still have a room.
I don't understand how two full size children can sleep in a room you can't fit a double bed in? Are they sharing a single bed?

Due to renovations DD stayed in our room until 18 months. Keep baby with you as long as you need to. Do not stop overnights it sends all the wrong messages to the other children.

Baby stays in your room until you move, they don't need their own room at 6 months old! My youngest was with me until 2 years old (as only had a 2 bed at the time) and my other daughter was a teenager. Think its fine to use other bedroom for some storage but his children should still be able to sleep over- they should not be pushed out, particularly as its not at all necessary. I don't think a judge would view your suggestions favourably either !

This is disgraceful behaviour from you both OP.

It's bad enough he's happily shacked up with you when his kids have to sleep in your home office, but now you want to push them out for a baby that could sleep in your room for at least 2 years?

I genuinely hope this isn't real.

Why? It's their father's responsibility to ensure they are safe, comfortable and looked after whilst they are with him. She shouldn't be doing the 'wife work'. The agreement is 3 nights - he has to make it work. It's nothing to do with her that his circumstances have changed. He has to sort it.

The poor woman will have no free time with the proposed plan; she'll be providing a dressed, fed, rested family for him to be a Disney dad.

So unreasonable I am assuming this is a joke.

Either keep the baby in for longer with you or partition the front room and turn that into a bedroom for you and your partner or his kids once baby moves. Then you use the dining room as the main living space. I also completely don’t believe that the smaller room upstairs won’t fit a double bed in.

On no account force your partner to stop seeing his young kids overnight because you want your PFB to have their own room from a ridiculously young age AND have a separate study/ play area. You’re pushing his existing kids out with no good reason and that’s completely selfish.

You can’t have the kids 9am til 7pm and expect that ticks the box. Surely you see how horrible that is for absolutely everyone, even a 6 month baby as it will disrupt their bedtime and probably their morning nap too. Nevermind the step kids and mum that you clearly don’t care about…. Mum would almost certainly end up needing to give the kids second dinner and do all the bedtime wind down and then breakfast and get them up and ready. It’s a stopgap to you never seeing them again which to be fair sounds like your goal.

you need to do a massive rethink

Keep the baby in with you for six months - that’s the advice, and in this case you have the additional very pressing moral issue of valuing and nurturing the children your DH already has! The baby cannot have the room that’s just the long and short of it here. I can imagine how stressful that feels but at the end of the day these are real people here that cannot just be moved out.

Poor woman? She made her choice living where she lives what on eaeth did she expect?

Baby stays in your room until you move.

You do realise that decorating bed 2 and making into a nursery and then not allowing step kids to stay over is really not ok? Your baby won't care where it sleeps. It doesn't care about decor. It won't remember that it slept in with you for the first 3 years (or more ) of it's life. Your steps will.

I'm sure that you have colours and decor in mind- which is not what is best for the other kids. This is going to have to be a grieving process you go through for what you thought life would look like once your first born arrives. But in no way push this onto your step children.....

This is conjecture. We don't know what has happened or if she is holding up the divorce, only the OP's version.

Why on earth does he think parenting his own children is optional? And why do you think they can just be downgraded like this? He’s their father, he can’t just decide he hasn’t got room for them. He’s already doing the EOW bare minimum, and now he’s decided he can’t even offer them that? Jesus Christ, they aren’t hamsters. This is absolutely disgraceful.

This has to be a rage bait.

I'd expect a decent father to make every effort to ensure his children have a home. The STBXW can afford the family home (at a push) so I don't understand why there's a hold up. I don't think we have the full story.

I'm surprised you're defending the OP; you're very much the minority.

Baby can be in with you much longer than 5 months. The kids' room can be used for some storage of baby's stuff. It was a big realisation for me after I had DS that I'd bought lots of stuff I didn't actually need and he slept in my room for over a year.

You can't transition your partner's existing kids out of the house and out of your lives. It's not the right thing to do.

Which is why I would try to muddle through in case he leaves you high and dry as a new parent once his divorce comes through.

Irrespective of how you got together, if his ex has the children 5 days and nights a week she is doing the lions share of the parenting. If she can afford to buy him out there's no reason she shouldn't. If she can't and she's asking to retain the house until they are older then the financial order should recognise that.

If you own your own house and could maintain a mortgage prior to this guy then he should have plenty of disposable cash?

New baby cannot overtake the existing children, they are the priority here in terms of the relationship with dad and emotional impact etc. The baby won't know what's going on.

The baby stays in your room as long as needed, you can get smaller sized cots once a next to me style crib is too small (a travel cot would be fine too, and then you could collapse during the day to save space, or even move it into the 2nd room on the nights the children aren't staying with you.) You may want to look at renting a storage unit so you can maximise space in your house - e.g. take stuff from loft and pop in storage unit, then you could move the kids' stuff into the loft in suitably sealed boxes/bags during the week when they are here.

You need to accept that the house will be cramped and less than an ideal living situation, but you have chosen to prioritise having a baby in these circumstances (because of your age, so possibly not an unreasonable decision) but it is you and your partner who must suck up the inconveniences and not changes the childrens' lives just to make things easier for you. Order of priority is the two existing children, then new baby (as they don't have awareness of whats going on), with you and partner at the bottom of the pile; that's what being a parent means!

You wouldn't believe how much stuff your baby does not need.

Personally, I think your ‘plan’ is shameful. But I figure you’ll do it anyway.

In fact, the more I think about it, the current set up is shameful. Planning another kid with the intention pushing the others out. Fuck me.

Wondering if this is a reverse.

Why does your baby HAVE to go into their own room at 5 months? Both mine stayed past a year. Keep them in with you and atep children keep their routine. New sibling is already a massive adjustment without literally being replaced

I don’t agree with the OP’s plan, but you cannot honestly expect a new first time mum to prioritise two children that aren’t hers over her own newborn child.

The existing children are not above the baby. They are all children of their blended family and all need to be considered equally.

"I want a baby and I don't care what impact that has on my partner's two existing children. He'll have to see them less because I think a 5 month old baby should have his/her own room."

Have I summarised that correctly?