Is literally splitting the house a reasonable thing to do?

[EddSimcox]

I've had a couple of threads here in the past. Quick potted summary, long running issue in my relationship with DP, verge of splitting up for 2 years, stayed together because we sort of still love each other, have 3 DC, and there's no cheating, abuse, etc etc.
All come to a head though a couple of times recently in counselling, net result of which is that we are currently on a temporary / trial separation. Just for two weeks initially. Moving in and out the house, swapping each night (more or less).
What I've learned:

• We both hate being away from the DC
• We're not missing each other all that much
• The moving in and out of the house thing is unsustainable for any longer than a couple of weeks
• We're fine and grown-up about arranging practical things to do with the DC

Which makes me think that we are probably more likely to split up for good than to get back together over the summer. Anyway, this post is on that assumption.

We live in a big house in London, and have 3 DC who are of ages and sex that makes bedroom sharing difficult. There is room in the house with a bit of reconfiguration for the DC to retain a bedroom each and DP and me to have living room, kitchen, bedroom each and share the 2 bathrooms with the DC, one each. We would be split over separate floors. I think this is absolutely ideal because

• The DC would stay in the same house, with a bedroom each and all their stuff in one place, no upheaval (or not much), and no moving around from house to house
• The DC could see both their parents every day (though we'd have a rota, so it wouldn't necessarily be every day, or it might just be for 5 mins goodnight kiss), and us them
• It would be affordable
• We'd each have our own space to do what we want with.

DP refuses to consider it because she says she wouldn't be able to stand seeing me coming and going and would be too upset to live in such close proximity. But the consequence of that will be:

• We will have to see up and then neither of us will be living in a 4 bed house, so the DC will move from one shared bedroom to another every few days, which they will hate
• Huge upheaval for everyone
• Both of us struggling financially so the DC get less of all the other stuff (activities, holidays etc etc)

AIBU to think that we ought to be able to live like that - in different parts of the house - for the benefit of the DC. Or am I being insensitive and is she completely reasonable to say that we'd need to sell up and live in separate (but much much smaller) houses?

What happens when one of you meets someone else?

I know this can work because a previous house I lived in was sold to us by an ex-couple who did exactly this - each had effectively a self-contained flat, one in the basement one in the attic, where they had little kitchenette, shower room, sitting room/study and bedroom. The in-between floors had family kitchen and dining room and the kids bedrooms. Obviously once the kids grew up the place was sold, but the vendors didn't seem to be regretting how they handled it.

However it would depend massively on a lot of factors about why you are splitting up. If either of you tends towards being controlling for example it wouldn't work. You would both need to verify intensely relaxes about each other's comings and goings and nocturnal activities.

If DP doesn't want to do it, then it's not an option, surely? I personally agree with her that it isn't a very workable solution. It's not exactly moving on, is it?

Sounds like a living hell

No I suppose it's not moving on, or not completely. I just think it's better for the DC than losing their home, their own space, their lives - because we can't get along. Seems fairer on them. Obviously it would only be for a few years, and we'd sell when the DC leave home, or one of us wanted to get properly hitched to someone new. I just don't really get why it would be a living hell?

Obviously I can't force her (nellie). I wouldn't want to. I'm trying to understand why the DC having stability and both their mums in close proximity is not the over-riding factor for us both.

i had considered this with DH, I posted here about it, most people said it was a good idea - esp. as in addition to everything you mention above we both have health issues meaning we are reliant on each other to help out. we tend to sort out jobs so one is at home and one away/at work as well. I suspect DH would have done this very reluctantly and soon made a massive fuss/made it unworkable as he resented it.

But don't they just call this a parenting relationship? And isn't it best for kids to have one main base? Anyway, I think you could do it, but ultimately if your DP says no, then that's that.

PS - I am no nearer sorting my situation out.

Interesting. I fantasise about this kind of solution during our less sparkly moments, for the very reasons you mention. Neither of us could afford to set up a new household independently, and I wouldn't see DP worse off than me.

There's a Grand Designs where the family did this, might even have included one new partner if I remember correctly, was Chorlton, South Manchester if that helps you find it if you think it would be useful to watch.

Of course the DPs wellbeing is the over-riding factor but it's not a rational process. I'm sure if it was then everyone would be doing this. It's really hard to gain perspective when your STBX is in the same house.

Sorry - DC not DP.

If it works for both of you then great. But if it's difficult for either of you to imagine the other with someone new then it'll be difficult. Unless you're both prepared to put relationships to one side for the foreseeable future?

I don't like the rota idea though. The children should be able to move freely through the house and see who they want to whenever they like.

My brother and his wife split years ago but still live together. No children even. It works for them I think but I don't understand how their new partners accept or put up with it - I wouldn't!

Oh yeah the children would move freely and see whoever they want when they want . The rota would be so that one of us had responsibility each night to cook tea, be there etc. We wouldn't be living as a family. On her nights I'd stay out of the way and vice versa. (But eg. if it were her night and she was taking one of the DC to a club, then I'd probably be on hand for the others - so a lot more flexible than completely separate houses)

I think it could get awkward because of the new partner issue and the kids visiting the mum who's off-duty. I think it would also prevent the on-duty mum relaxing as off-duty mum could hear all her parenting.

Imagine one mum disciplining the kids. They storm off to their room (or to other mum's room). If a child has a blazing argument with mum, is the other supposed to ignore!

When I was considering it, one of the rules would have been that any new relationship be conducted entirely outside of the home so no visits at all by any new partner, not coming to the house at any time. Either of us wishing to start a permanent new relationship would need to end the arrangement and move out.

The discipline thing wouldn't be an issue, the DC are all over 10. And we'd both be out a lot when not on duty, at least early evening.

And we'd each have 3/4 nights a week off-duty as it were - so could conduct any budding relationship out of the house on those nights, at least to start with. Not that I can see either of us jumping into something new - that's not on the cards at all.

I know you have mentioned lots of positive points for the DC but ultimately it's very confusing for them and doesn't set the healthiest example for their future relationships. I know lots of people don't but if you can set a good example then why wouldn't you.

They will also hold onto false hope you may get back together and be devastated more than once when you tell them no, on many occasions over the course of the next few years whilst being under same roof.

I know a clean break would initially be hard for them but it's cut down the line, no ifs but maybes, they know in their little heads it's final and can adjust properly.

I'm assuming an apartment close by isn't an option? Even if it makes things tight and just get through next couple years.

If she would be too upset, then she would be too upset. You can come up with all the rational arguments you want, present yourself as the reasonable party and garner support from posters on mumsnet but if it's actively painful for her, then you are being cruel to pursue this.

Could you buy/rent a one-bed flat nearby and both use that on your off-duty days, with a bedroom each at your main house? So the kids stay put and you/she take turns being there?

I agree your solution sounds very practical, but it won't work if DP feels like the proximity will be too upsetting.

I think it could only really work if you could make two completely separate flats with Jack and Jill access to the children's rooms. Separate entrances to the two flats so that you really can lead separate lives.
Seeing each other at odd times if you are not happy about it, as your dp isn't, would be very intrusive and would make it very difficult to move on. It's not a fair ask.

We can't afford to buy an apartment close by without selling the house so that' not an option. Though DP is head in sand about that because it's her preferred solution. Though I have to say also that the idea of my living in 2 houses is about as unappealing for me as I think it will be for the DC!