I feel nothing for them

[SarahM333]

Hi everyone

I'm 10 weeks pregnant with my first child. My OH has a son from a previous relationship, and sees him every second weekend. His ex (and therefore his child) live 5 hours from us, therefore he has to keep a rented house up there, so that he has somewhere to take his son to stay when he's there. He gets him for longer in the holidays etc.
When he takes his son, he also takes another of his ex's children (she has 5, she youngest is his and he takes the second youngest as well. All the rest of her children are late teens early twenties, meaning that when he has the kids she is "free").
My problem is that I feel nothing for his child, and even less for the one who isn't biologically his. Our baby is due in May, and we will move in together after Christmas. If I'm honest, I don't want his other child and the one that isn't his in the house. I think I'll also start to resent the money that he spends to keep a house up there, which only gets used about 4 nights a month but can't see another option.
Does anyone have any ideas as to how I can become more accepting?

If I had a blended family, I would want it to be as strong a family as it could possibly be - and I don't think that would be possible if my new partner didn't at least try to have as good a relationship with my children as he did with our children.

But you are viewing your "blended family" in isolation - which it isn't. In that situation, your DCs would also have another "family" - one which you had no involvement in and which would influence their relationship with your DP.
And, whereas you would have some influence if their other family became hostile towards you and/or DP, the OPs DH does not have that. His non-biological son is only a part of his life for a long as the DCs parent(s) choose him to be. I would be very worried about forming a bond with a child in those circumstances, and even more worried for the emotional welfare of my DCs.

Just dipping in and will read later to see if pretty and Mascara have finally realised how spiteful they come across.

Pretty

Just read your post about the ' train tickets'
All I can say is W.T A F?

It's refreshing to hear about a situation where the estranged family have worked to continue to give the children security without making a child feel 'less' for not having a 'proper' nuclear family.

There is nothing in the OP to confirm this is the motivation. It is one interpretation of the situation.

My daughter has never met her father. He left the country before she was born. She calls my DH 'Dad', they both love each other very much and he has never made her feel 'less' than his 'real' children (who, incidentally, call her their sister. Not 'step-sister'. Sister. It's what they choose to call her). How dare someone judge whether that's allowed or not

This is not the situation described in the OP though. It would be, if you were separated from your DH, and he was expecting a baby with someone else who lived a five hour journey from you.

I would suggest that there are a wider range of options available to maintain the relationship between the OPs DP and his one biological child (currently aged 6) than just "renting a house close by", however

there is a 5 hour distance between the OP's partner and his biological child. It is not clear why there is that gap - other than 'work'. I would hazard a guess that as the mum has 5 children, it is likely the OP's partner who has moved (I could be wrong, of course). It is not clear if the 5 hours is a round trip or one way by car or a round trip or one way by rail. Round trip or one way, it is highly likely that driving is the most economical method of seeing his child - which makes the train argument invalid (and a family rail card could probably overcome the issue anyway). If it's one way - are you seriously suggesting that a father can have a meaningful relationship with his child that involves a 10 hour round trip over a weekend?

You are looking to specifically exclude the non-biological child from a relationship with a man who cares about him and who, presumably, the OP's partner has a high level of emotional attachment to when in actual fact, his existence is likely to cost nothing more than the same as having a friend over.

The non-biological child is not the issue in this situation. Having a relationship with a man who's children you want nothing to do with is the issue (although I note the OP has recognised it is possible to overcome this with time and effort) and understanding the very serious commitment you are making when you get with a man who already has children. It will, inevitably, involve some kind of sacrifice. If, as a new partner, you take the view that only you and your biological child together matter, your relationship is going to struggle, over time. Or, you are going to commit to a man without a care for his children which is pretty vile (and obviously more prominent than some of us had hoped).

Any comment on the OPs stance of not even wanting his biological child in her house Pretty? Or are you just going to keep validating her position?

disco. I'm sorry, what do you mean? It's basic economics, isn't it?

The OPs DH is currently maintaining two homes, 5 hours apart, in order to maintain contact with two DCs. If there was only one DC, then it may be more economical to travel with the DC for contact in the home near the dads work, rather than keep two homes.
What have I missed?

Any comment on the OPs stance of not even wanting his biological child in her house Pretty? Or are you just going to keep validating her position

It's fairly self evident that the OP and her DP can't cohabit in that situation, although if the DCs remain living 5 hours away, and a 10 hour journey is detrimental to them, then I'm not sure why they'd be in her home even if they did cohabit anyway?

Tbh, if the OP wasn't pregnant, I'd see nothing wrong with her DP maintaining the status quo, irrespective of whether they live together - but as he has decided to have a DC several hundred miles from his "first family" then something has to change. His priorities lie with his biological DCs.

I can't think why OP married. I simply wouldn't have a child with someone who saw my children unequally and no way would I change arrangements.
My child came with me- for life. I think it is wonderful that he keeps his contact with all the children and didn't break when he broke with mother.

I think it is wonderful that he keeps his contact with all the children and didn't break when he broke with mother.

Don't forget that this "wonderful man" has decided to have a baby with the OP, who lives hundreds of miles away from his "first" family. It's inevitable that one or other of his DCs will be disadvantaged as a result. I'm not convinced he's so marvellous, myqself.

His priorities lie with his biological DCs

except the non-biological child really isn't costing anything, is he? Not at the moment and not in the future as far as I can tell. Or are you begrudging the child the odd meal and entrance to soft play? The costs involved in this scenario do not come from the OP's partner maintaining a relationship with a child that isn't biologically his, the costs come from the distance and the fact that the OP wants a relationship with this man but doesn't want his children in her home.

The OP knew he had children before she became pregnant. It seems like she thought that would then put them all in some bubble where prior attachments are forgotten. The only way I can see this working is if they all go to the other house every 2nd weekend and spend time as a 'family' there, or move closer.

The child will cost a bit more than the odd meal and an entrance to soft play. An extra bedroom costs money, an extra set of clothes costs money, extra food costs money, extra baths and showers cost money, washing extra laundry costs money, extra travel fare costs money, an extra person on a day out costs money. Put simply- an extra child costs money! And then what if he's voluntarily paying child support for this child and paying towards things when the child is with their mum, such as school trips? That extra money could be spent on his biological child with his ex and the baby. Of course he might not be paying CM for that child but if he is then imo he should stop and the mum should find the actual father.
That's just the money side of it all. The child will need lots of entertaining, lots of attention and the OP just isn't up for that. 3 children as opposed to 2 is a big difference, and when you take in to account the fact that her DH isn't even the child's father, that extra burden of "parenting" the child could be well avoided and things could be easier.

So basically, Mascara and pretty obviously think that now Op's partner is expecting a child with Op, he should stop seeing and spending on the 'non biological' child.

How should he tell the child?

Should he sit this child down and say "Sorry but I can't see you anymore because I'm having a child that is biologically mine and therefore all my time, love and money should not be wasted on you, because we're not related "

How the fuck can you expect this to be the right thing to do? You should be ashamed of the disgusting comments you've both written!

Oh stop being so over dramatic! Of course he wouldn't sit the child down and tell them those exact words.

And I'm not ashamed of my opinion.

He wasn't 'marvellous' getting involved with OP when he knew that she wasn't committed to his family BUT he had been living with another woman, had a child and a relationship with her other children. You can't just walk out on those children saying 'they are not mine, biologically, and so I can just have nothing to do with them! I expect that they all love each other and they are half siblings to his biological child anyway.
If you decide to marry a man with children you get the family. Even if you discount the non biological ones OP,is a family of 3, shortly to be 4, and she isn't having a first child- she is producing a sibling. Most people try their best not to let the first child have jealousy - they certainly don't push them out and tell them that their sibling is the loved one and they are a visitor!
OP needs to keep her separate house if she can't take it because if I were her OH I would be putting all my children equally first and not favouring the youngest.

How would he tell the child? Or would he cruelly just wind the contact down until they got the message?

An extra bedroom costs money, an extra set of clothes costs money, extra food costs money, extra baths and showers cost money, washing extra laundry costs money, extra travel fare costs money, an extra person on a day out costs money. Put simply- an extra child costs money!

Ok. You win. He's being an absolute shit trying to do the right thing by a child he made a commitment to when he entered into his previous relationship

How the fuck can you expect this to be the right thing to do? You should be ashamed of the disgusting comments you've both written!

If had written that, I would be, but I haven't.
I have highlighted that the choices the OPs DP has made will, by their very nature, lead to the disadvantaging of one DC in favour of another. His DCs will live 100s of miles apart.
My opinion is that if he makes a choice to prioritise a child which he has no legal obligation to support, in favour of his future biological infant than that would be reprehensible.

When a NRP favours his resident StepDCs over his NR biological DCs, MN consensus is that his clear that priority lies with his own DCs. why is it different because the StepDC in this case is no longer resident?

I can't see any way other than 'sorry' I have a new wife and baby and they come first'.
The non biological ones get it even worse 'sorry- you are not mine- goodbye'.

I have shall have to stop reading- it utterly appals me that someone can expect a baby and not want the sibling in the house.

When I married my DH got my son- he wasn't optional and he got him for life. I wouldn't have had more children had they not been equal. I would not let my son live in a house where he wasn't loved.

None of this takes away from the fact op doesn't want the bio child there either. Ffs.
He has the house there for his dc anyway so talk of the non bio dc is a red herring.

Some of you will do absolutely anything to defend shitty behaviour towards children.
She don't want the kid in her house ffs.
Nooo lets not focus on that lets focus on the non bio kid. Even though it really wouldn't change anything.
Fucking ridiculous.

But the child isn't a sibling to the baby Mehitabel. Not step, half, anything. I've never said anything about his child with his ex, who absolutely should see his dad and his baby sibling.

And I don't know how he'd tell the child. His mess.

How is he fucking favouring his stepchild? He has the house there either way.
You call him selfish. Op had a baby with this man knowing the siblings will live far apart.
What about her eh?
Nooo for you pretty the sm must always be defended even when they are being a complete twat.