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?

disco. You sound unnecessarily aggressive in your posts "penny finally fucking drops" & "twattish reasons" ....... I'm not proposing dropping a DC in boiling oil!

At no point have I said that the OPs DP should cut his former DC out of his life. But, he has created a situation in which he will have responsibilities in two families, hundreds of miles apart. He will have to rearrange, and reconsider, how he meets his various responsibilities in future. There will, inevitably, as they are in all families, be times when the needs of one DC will conflict with the needs of another. Illness, birthdays, milestone events, financial needs, family holidays - the OPs DP will need to juggle these conflicting demands and imo, his responsibility to his biological DCs outweighs the commitment he has made to his stepDC.

My only opinion is that when those decisions are taken, the biological DCs should be given a higher priority than the former stepDC.

The level of vitriol on this thread is startling - particularly as the same people who are defending the stepDC on this thread are often the first to flame stepmums for wanting equality for their own DCs alongside their stepDCs in the family home.

If you get step children you can't just drop them when you move on.
I have just been to a wedding where the bride's mother's ex partner made a speech. He had been the one who was the father figure from the age of about 4 yrs to 15 yrs and that is a long time. What was lovely is that he mother's new partner was there and his children. The extended family has great advantages for all.

mehitabel morally, that may be the case, but there are very few parents who apply that in practice. In the vast majority of cases, a DC whose parent splits with a stepparent rarely, if ever, sees that stepparent again due to choices made by their parent.

If it is such a crucial part of DCs welfare, why isn't it written into legislation in order to protect DCs from poor decisions by their parent? Why isnt the relationship with a stepparent given the same protection as a DCs relationship with a parent?
Family Law (which is based on the fundamental principle of the child's best interests) only permits former stepparents to maintain contact with their former DSC in very exceptional circumstances.
Given how frequently DCs experience that loss, if it were so damaging, surely the law would have been changed to protect them?

I'm not suggesting that it shouldn't be an aspiration; in an ideal world, the situation you describe should be the norm. But the OPs DP has created a "less than ideal" situation. Decisions have to be taken. It's clear from the tone of this thread that the majority opinion is that all three DCs should have equal status.

If it was in law it would just build up resentments.
Personally I would marry a man who kept his relationships with children. I wouldn't touch with a barge pole one who just walked out saying 'sorry, moving on to my own nice little family, you don't fit and you are not my responsibility- and furthermore my new wife doesn't want you in our house'.

Why resentment? A DCs relationship with their parent is protected by law - if stepparents are considered interchangeably with parents, then why is that relationship not considered equally?
What about all those parents who rob their DCs of that relationship when their relationship with the DCs stepparent breaks down?

If you get step children you can't just drop them when you move on.
And what if their parents are firmly in their life though? Do you expect the stepparent to arrange their own contact arrangements to see the child? Keep a bedroom for them? Continue to financially support them?
What if they struggled as a stepparent and just want a fresh start? And if they have no DCs of their own with their ex they want a clean break from their ex which means no contact with former stepchild? What if they want to move away or want to do something with their life? Should someone else's child hold them back?

It seems that some posters think certain children (ie stepchildren) should be the centre of everyone's universe.

So if I've read this correctly: the OP and DP will be moving in together after Christmas, and as she's stated she's worried about having the children in the house, I assume this means the DP's stepchild will be coming to stay at their home.

Whilst you have to accept access visits from your partner's bio children, I think extending 'access weekend' invitations (on a regular basis) to his ex's children, would be a step too far for a lot of people, not to mention the practicalities, ie how many bedrooms? What if, for example, his ex had four children he wanted to keep in touch with, where would it end?

Pretty
I see the 'penny hasn't dropped' still
You keep spouting about Courts, family law,legislation etc. Why? Wtf has that got to do with a scenario such as this where this man appears to want to take the role as 'dad' to his stepchild, and his stepchild obviously wants to spend time with him and likely views him as a father figure?

The childs 'biological' father may not be in this childs life anyway, for whatever reason. Does that mean, in your opinion, it's 'tough shit' for the kid and he shouldn't expect Op's partner to treat him as one of his own, simply because he's not blood related?

If he 'officially adopted' this child, would you accept that he should be treated equally to his two siblings? Or do you still have the belief that ONLY the biological children should come first?

I wonder if you'll answer my questions or just skirt around them.

Mascara
As for your post what planet are you on? Wtf are you talking about?
Nobody is FORCING this man to have a relationship with his stepchild, he's doing it because he WANTS to have one!

I'll check back later to see what crazy comments you've put on.

Look at the quote I was responding to.
If you get step children you can't just drop them when you move on.
Apparently if you get with someone with children, then if that relationship ends you have to keep making those children a part of your life. I was listing the what ifs that's all.

Petal
Before I go for now, I've just read your post.

Another WTF moment for me.
The Op KNEW her partner had TWO children in his life when she met him and therefore she should expect to have them both in her house!

I need to go and bang my head, your comments are also unbelievable.

Mascara no one said the partner, or any other step parent for that matter, HAS TO maintain a relationship with their ex's children if they or the children don't want to.

In this case the partner WANTS TO CONTINUE TO PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE in his stepchilds life!

I have to go for now will bang my head on the wall in utter fucking frustration first

Here's another view point.

My Mum (who I am NC with and have been for the better part of 10 years) has been divorced from my Step Dad for 5 years. If my SD dropped me like a hot rock, I would have been devastated. And I was 23 when they split. He came into my life when I was 8, as did his children, who I am still close to, and I class as my sisters, not step sisters. Even when I first went NC with Mum, he maintained a relationship with me, despite her loud protestations. He is a Grandad to my DDs, and we see him about once a month.

SD has had numerous girlfriends since the split and only one of them took issue with him still seeing us. And he got shot of her very quickly.

Family doesn't end with blood.

That's exactly what Mehitabel said though. She said you can't just drop the children when you move on. I'm not sure how you can interpret that any other way .

I don't think anyone was suggesting the DP should stop seeing his step children, but if he's going to expect the OP to accommodate them in her home on a EOW basis, that might be a big ask.

We seem to have tunnel vision sometimes, and assume a relationship can only be maintained with overnight visits and an access rota. Fine for bio children, but a bit tricky beyond that.

I wonder if you'll answer my questions or just skirt around them.

Of course I'll answer your questions - as you asked so nicely

You keep spouting about Courts, family law,legislation etc. Why? Wtf has that got to do with a scenario such as this where this man appears to want to take the role as 'dad' to his stepchild, and his stepchild obviously wants to spend time with him and likely views him as a father figure?

This man has also decided to have another baby with the OP. He has therefore chosen to change the responsibilities he has to fulfil. Some of which are required by law, hence my reference to legislation and the differences that are legally perceived between stepparents and parents. It appears that the Law is out of step with the views on this thread - after all, if it is so damaging for the DC in this case to have his stepdad removed from his life, then it must be damaging for other DC's to. Yet, the law does not protect them.

If the OP's relationship breaks down - should her DC's support from his/her father take account of his fathers choice to maintain as relationship with an unrelated child? Would it be OK for the OP's DP to say to the OP - "I can't afford more than the legal minimum in CM, because I'm supporting a child whose biological father has abandoned him?".

Why should the OP's baby get "less" (irrepsective of whether the OP and her DP are together) because his/her Dad was previously a stepdad to other DC's?

It is generally considered unjust that a NRP's Child Maintenance payment is adjusted to take account of stepDCs' which live in the NRP home - especially if they are in receipt of CM from their own biological NR parent; how is this different?

If he 'officially adopted' this child, would you accept that he should be treated equally to his two siblings? Or do you still have the belief that ONLY the biological children should come first?

Of course not - legal adoption is quite diffferent. Its not the "biology" per se as the legal responsiblity that is the key factor in my opinion. If the OP's DP had legally adopted his dSC, then he would be an equal parent, with equal responsiblities. But that is not the case. The OP's DP has voluntarily taken on repsonsibility for this child, which is admirable, but it should not imo be at the expense of his legal responsiblities.

If the OP and her DC will be expected to make sacrifices because her DP has chosen to continue to provide voluntary support to a DC who has two parents who have a legal responsiblity to do so, then her DP is not the "marvellous man" that he is being made out to be.

but it should not imo be at the expense of his legal responsiblities

except there is no suggestion whatsoever from the OP that in exercising his moral responsibilities towards his step child, he is somehow denying his biological child his legal rights. In fact, she doesn't want either her partner's biological or step child in her (not their - very telling) home.

This is all made up outrage at a situation that actually exists only in people's heads. The OP needs to get over herself and recognise that she needs to accept her partner's children in her life. If she doesn't, it will more than likely signal the end of her relationship (or she ends up with a man who doesn't give a shiny shit about his children which I assume she doesn't want). If she is able to accept, then and only then would it be reasonable to look at how the existing contact arrangements with both children is going to impact on her family life and that of her relationship with her as yet unborn baby with his/her father.

Well of course the baby is affected yet seeing as he/she is not born yet. But you are turning a blind eye to what is most likely going to happen, and that is that the baby will have to compromise because his/her dad has chosen to carry on seeing a child that he has no legal (or moral imo) responsibility to carry on seeing. I made a list further up thread about the costs and practicalities of what this child will bring with him, and it just seems so unnecessary and unfair on his 2 children, who both must come first in everything.

the baby isn't affected yet

The OP needs to get over herself and recognise that she needs to accept her partner's children in her life.

I think thats fairly self evident.

The question is, what is a reasonable level of involvement for a non-biological DC, for whom the OP's DP has no responsibility? That's a fairly significant question for the OP and may determine the future of her relationship with her DP.

The consensus seems to be that there should be no distinction between the biological DC for whom the OPs DP is legally responsible, and the non-biological DC. I know that I am not selfless enough to accept that; I would want some assurance that my DC with my DP would be prioritised over his former stepDC.

Well of course the baby is affected yet seeing as he/she is not born yet.

I'm not so sure that is the case. The financial support the OP's DP can provide in preparing for the baby is already impacted by his support for his former stepDC.

The money spent on that extra theme-park ticket could pay for an antenatal class. The extra costs of housing/feeding his former DSS every other weekend could be the difference between a new, or second hand, travel system. Unless the OPs DP is very wealthy, he will already be making decisions about how to prioritise his money between the responsibilities he has - both the long standing and recent ones.

These things may not bother the OP, or they may be a big issue. But, imo, if the OP's DP makes a choice to provide for a former stepDC over his own biological DC, then he is not a great Dad.

That's very true Pretty. I had a pretty rough time during my own pregnancy due to lost finances (through job loss), and it made me quite ill. So you're right, the money lost through spending it on the former stepson could actually affect the baby by affecting the op's health and wellbeing.
And yes, the baby shouldn't have to have a second hand travel system in favour of financially supporting a child that his/her dad has no legal responsibility to financially support. This is what I mean about the baby and his brother coming first.

I think the lack of understanding each other here is that both Pretty and Mascara seem to have made up their mind that OP's OH has taken out SC by default yet planned OP's pregnancy when it is much likely that he is still in contact with his step child because he really wants to but didn't expect OH to fall pregnant.

Of course we don't know either way but I don't get at all how Pretty and Mascara seem so certain that this new child was planned by him since that is what seem to be the driving factor for their argument.

I guess my question is: if OP said that the baby want planned or even that her OP had told her he didn't want to be a father again would they feel differently?

I said upthread swing that I'm a fully paid-up member of the MN club that believes that if a man doesn't want to be a father, then he shouldn't have a sexual relationship.

It's incredibly unfair, but as biology and the law stands, when a couple have sex, only the woman has total control over whether or not she becomes a parent. A man can take steps to avoid it, but none are 100% reliable and if an accidental pregnancy results, only the woman has the right to decide that she does not want that responsibility. The man has no say.

In this case, whether or not the OP and her DP "planned" their baby is irrelevant. He chose to have sex, that comes with the risk of pregnancy, and with his current commitments, that inevitable results in a situation in which one or other of his DCs are disadvantaged.

Posters seem to be confusing the step child with a toy that can be picked up and dropped whenever they fancy.

From the ages of the respective children it sounds likely that the op's partner was involved with his step child through his formative years, and his dad was never around.

I have to say I think he has been pretty stupid to get a woman pregnant who feels the was she does about his children. I really hope he finds a way to be a dad to all three.

I think the way some posters see the step child as disposable is scary and hope that they aren't step parents themselves.

Her DP loves the step child, and has a strong bond.

Therefore he does have a responsibility to that child.

Its that simple.

Arguing legalities is ridiculous, he loves the child, pieces of paper do not matter.

OP needs to put her big girl pants on, get over herself and accept that the child is part of her DPs package, so to speak.