would anyone else find this a bit odd/frustarting?

[Stepmooster]

DH has been told today by DSS that his mum and her DH are going abroad on hols for 2 weeks in summer. Forgetting for one moment that DH has been helping with her court ordered mortgage payments until FMH sale has gone through because she's supposed to be skint, isn't it a bit odd not to tell the only other person with PR that you are planning to be out of the country?

What makes this especially annoying is DSS doesn't know the dates. DH will have to ask his ex and no doubt she will send him some usual bitchy reply.

We got told what 2 weeks we're having DSS by his ex a few weeks ago, not open for discussion. No probs that I will be 8 months pregnant and both of us working FT. First baby born 2 weeks early too. DH has managed to sort time off but I need to help us through maternity leave financially so I will have to work. I am guessing this is when they are going abroad. Although DSS has been known to stay for a week or 2 with his maternal gran when ex has gone on holiday (and Dh not asked if he would like to have his son then instead).

I'm just dreading August, a long commute on the tube, a 13 month old, a bored 11 yo for 2 weeks. What are we going to do if babba arrives early we only have a 2 bed?!

[NotaDisneyMum]

But when the DSS is with his father, it's his father's responsibility. If he was a DS not a DSS he wouldn't be protected, therefore he is more worthy of protection than a DS

As I've said, I disagree that a parent ceases to have responsibility for their DC when they are in the other parents care.
Both DCs have two parents making decisions about them - neither is more worthy, it's just that the OP disagrees with her DH and his ex. She has protected her own DC; and I believe it is the DSS mums responsibility to protect her DS if his Dad isn't, just like the OP has done.

[NotaDisneyMum]

Why can't whoever is looking after the OPs existing child look after the DSS? Surely that's the simplest option?

Who knows? But that isn't the OPs problem - it's up to her DH to arrange that and if he doesn't then his ex could do something herself.

[FreddieMisaGREATshag]

But surely the simplest solution is to have whoever is looking after the OPs existing child look after DSS as well?

And are you really really saying that the exW should be at the beck and call of the current wife and her exH all the time?

[FreddieMisaGREATshag]

But saying that means you're buying in to the hierarchy of parenting where the mother is more worthy and the father isn't an equal parent NADM.

And I don't.

[NotaDisneyMum]

And are you really really saying that the exW should be at the beck and call of the current wife and her exH all the time?

No, I'm saying that she has a responsibility to her DS all the time. If her ex is failing to protect their DS then doesn't she have a responsibility to do so?

The OP has no responsibility for her DSS.

[FreddieMisaGREATshag]

But if she really really believes that her ex is failing to protect her DS, why is she not seeking a restriction to contact?

If I believe my ex is a suitable person to have contact unsupervised, then I have to let him do that.

If I thought he was "failing to protect" my children, I would be getting my arse and his arse into court ASAP,

I never said the OP had responsibility for her DSS. She doesn't. Hence why she should disengage, stop doing pick ups and make her DH step up to the plate.

[NotaDisneyMum]

But saying that means you're buying in to the hierarchy of parenting where the mother is more worthy and the father isn't an equal parent NADM.

No - I'm buying into a model in which both parents are responsible for their DCs wellbeing all the time.
I don't stop being DDs mum when she's with her Dad any more than my DP stops being his DCs Dad when they're at home with their Mum.
If one parent believes their DCs welfare is at risk then they always have a responsibility to protect them.

This is the underlying principle of the Children's Act - a parent is always a parent regardless if whose care the DC is in and parents are all equally responsible at all times.

[FreddieMisaGREATshag]

I know that NADM.

I just don't see why you would let a parent who you thought was at risk of significantly failing to protect your child, to the point where you can't do a job in case you're phoned, have contact other than supervised.

[NotaDisneyMum]

But if she really really believes that her ex is failing to protect her DS, why is she not seeking a restriction to contact?

She doesn't, though, does she - it's the OP who thinks its 'odd' that mum isn't more bothered.
Mum and Dad are in agreement that the OPs DSS won't come to any harm - the OP faces a situation in which she believes her labour will upset her DSS but she can't do a thing about it.

[FreddieMisaGREATshag]

The mum isn't bothered. The father isn't bothered. It's not the OPs business.

Non-issue. Let the mother and the father deal with the fall out then and disengage.

[NotaDisneyMum]

Easier said than done!

I have faced a similar (more low level) situation with my DSS - he displays significant distress when in my sole company - even if DP is elsewhere in the house.

I could disengage from the distress and carry on being alone with DSS when my DP chooses to leave the room- just like the OP will have to disengage from her DSS distress when she's in labour.
The difference is, I have a choice - I can refuse to be alone with my DSS - the OP can't refuse to go into labour when her DSS is present. She is totally at the mercy of her DH's decisions, even though it is her actions that will cause the distress.

[FreddieMisaGREATshag]

I think NADM the best thing is for us to agree to disagree. This is a circular argument and it's really not contributing to the OP.

[spg1983]

I have to disagree with the disengaging part. When my DSS is with me then he is in my care and I would not be able to sit back and watch this situation happen. I treat him like he's mine. However, I would never have made arrangements for my own child and not for DSS. They are both equal and should be treated as such, if that meant making arrangements for DSS where my DH had failed to do so then so be it.

[NotaDisneyMum]

spg disengaging is often best for the DSC when there is a high conflict relationship between the DCs parents.
Would you be as willing to put arrangements in place for your DSC if you knew that they would suffer the anger/abuse from their Mum as a result?

[spg1983]

Yes that's a good point. I think I'm very lucky that DH and I get on very well with DH's ex and her DP. I know there would never be any repercussions from anything DH and I did with DSS.

[wannabedomesticgoddess]

I think that the OP had arranged for FIL to come to look after her 13 month old.

But due to space (cannot think of any other reason) he now cannot come because DSS is there.

I am sure there is another perfectly reasonable way to provide care for both DCs during this time.

But its easier to blame the big bad exW isnt it!!!

[wannabedomesticgoddess]

Well, when I had DD2 my ex (DD1s dad) offered to be on standby when I was 5 months pregnant.

Two weeks before my due date he announces that he is going away on my due date. Yes, it was annoying, but I knew he was doing it to be a prick and we got DPs parents to have DD1. That wasnt ideal really, but thats what had to happen.

At the end of the day, I could have got wound up about her Dad not putting her first etc etc or I could accept that really, DD2 had nothing to do with him so it was my issue to sort.

DD1 wasnt aware of any of it, and having a sleep over at DPs parents was a big adventure. I appreciate that with an 11 yo its harder to shield them from it. But it can still be done.

[spg1983]

Just remember though that the best laid plans can change, DSS' mum was on standby to collect DSS if I went into labour when he was with us. However, just an hour after my first twinge, I was pushing dd out. Luckily DSS was not with us but if he had been, his mum wouldn't have made it and DSS would have had to go to hospital with us. These things happen and not just because of lack of organisation. I agree it's not ideal but it's certainly not a disaster.

[NotaDisneyMum]

It's called working together and showing a bit of consideration, instead of swanning off on holiday at a time when their child could need them.

It's a model that requires both parents to buy into it.

I'm the first to admit that for a long time, I selfishly left my ex to it when DD was with him - he wanted 50:50 care, so I considered it to be his problem when DD was with him.
As time has gone on, I've realised that DD doesn't benefit from that. By being flexible and putting her first, even if that means sacrificing my own wants, she has had both parents there for her when she's needed them.
Of course her Dad is more than capable of parenting her alone half of the time, but why should DD miss out on having two parents at the same time, just because we don't live together?
Why shouldn't she benefit from having both parents input in major events in her life, no matter how unexpected or unplanned they are?

[FreddieMisaGREATshag]

Even if I was still married, my job is such that my DC can't have two parents at the same time.

That's what life is like, separated or not.

[wannabedomesticgoddess]

I didnt realise that if one expected their childs father to act like the other parent it meant one didnt care about ones DCs.

Funny that. I have managed for 4 years to love and care for my DD1 while still having a life while she was with her father.

[mumandboys123]

they way I read it, NADM, is that the OP has indeed put something in place to protect her other child - that would be putting them in the care of her husband's parents. That would be his grandparents. That would be the same set of grandparents as the DSS has, no family boundary crossing. She doesn't want to ask them to take their other grandchild because they live a distance away and are old. I do wonder what extra effort it would take to pick up an 11 year old child at the same time as a 1 year old given that presumably, the 11 year old can dress himself, take himself to the toilet and strap himself in a car seat, follow instructions etc. And why the OP's husband can't ask his parents to care for BOTH his children whilst another is born is beyond me, but I think it is clear that alot of the frustration here is that the husband is not really taking much responsibility for the care of his child, is he?

[NotaDisneyMum]

And why the OP's husband can't ask his parents to care for BOTH his children whilst another is born is beyond me, but I think it is clear that alot of the frustration here is that the husband is not really taking much responsibility for the care of his child, is he?

Quite. Both the OPs DH and his ex have equal responsibility for their DS - who has, based on the account of the OP, some fairly traumatic memories of her giving birth. The parents could work together to minimise the impact on DS this time, whether that is for Mum to be available if DS needs her, or Dad to put arrangements in place for both his DCs. Neither parent has done so, and I think the OP is perfectly justified in feeling frustrated that neither parent is doing what she thinks is best.
Of course, that means that the OP, as a step mum, is questioning her DSC mum (as well as her own DH) - something that just isn't the done thing in MN!