Desperate

[CESCA86]

Desperate for advice
MIDNIGHT VENT
I'm sorry ladies and gents but I need to vent and unfortunately I don't feel like I can talk to any one.
I've been a step parent for two years, we have my Bf son every other weekend and for about 6 weeks spread out through the school year.
He lives with his birth mother about a 2 hour drive away wich my bf or I do every journey as the birth mother is unwilling to do the drive.
in the past few days my step child has got impetigo and has been given antibiotics cream as he has it in several patches over his body.
He's been off of school and is allowed back tomorrow as he has been in "quarantine".
Now me and my bf have an 8 week baby who's yet to have any injections and due to me being very ill during birth and since the baby has got oral thrush due to me breast feeding and being on lots of medication. So she is on antibiotics for that, that's has been for 3 weeks as her body's not fighting it effectively. It's our weekend to have his son and I have asked if we can swap weekends due to him being sick my concern is that whilst he may not be infectious his mother may not be showing symptoms yet as it can take up to 10 days so there's a chance of my daughter getting the infection via her farther or brother.
He says I'm being selfish as it will be a another week until he sees his son if we swap weekends.
He looked at staying at a hotel but I pointed out that whilst it minimises the risk if she has it then he may get it and bring it home with out knowing. His ex wife has stated she won't swap weekends due to having plans and as she's more stubbourn than I am my boyfriend is basically ignoring my fears.
I don't understand why he would take that risk with an already sick child.
I assumed he'd do the best for both children but I don't feel like he is.
I'm heartbroken that he is willing to take that risk and a part of me feels like he's putting his want to see his child (wich I totally appreciate) above my child. And I feel like his still may as well be with his ex as he never wants to say anything or upset her so I have to live with her rules.
I know I'm tired and on heart medication due to my preeclampsia but right now I'm sat down stairs sobbing and he's upstairs happily sleeping.
I know he's going to pick him up tomorrow and bring him home for the weekend and all I want to do is pick my baby up and leave and not come back untill the house has been thoroughly cleaned.
Am I being over the top?
Feel like I need some perspective as he's making me feel like it's all unfounded claims and it's all ok.
But due to previous issues with his ex I'm about ready to throw the towel in and walk away.

Hugs to you OP.
When a baby is first born everything can be very overwhelming without preclampsia, without a sick baby and without travelling to pick up a step child.
It's understandable you're feeling protective. If you're careful it's possible to be in his company without contamination.

I really wish people showed some empathy when responding and in their tone. When you're sobbing because something upset you and scares you the other things are not as important. The terminology used, her status as a SM.

MN is so bloody insular at times.

In other cultures, the term "Mom" is used interchangeably between mothers and stepmothers- so 'birth mother' or 'baby mom' is used to distinguish between the two.

A few years ago there was a huge debate here on MN about adding it to the talk guidelines as an offensive term. MNHQ decided not to.

However, attacking someone because your cultural values conflict with theirs is completely against the spirit of MN.

Could you be any more patronising?

Not just in other cultures but in families in the UK too. But because some people feel threatened by a term which basically just differentiates between different roles when providing background on something, it has been decided that it's offensive.

If I feel offended when someone refers to me as an adoptive mum or a step mum because it doesn't reflect the significance of the role I have in my children's lives that doesn't mean that it's an incorrect or offensive term.

Seeing as the thread has taken a swerve and the op hasn't posted again, I'll add my 2p worth on the birth mother thing.

It makes no sense to me at all. Surely the way to differentiate is by saying mum and step-mum? I don't see any need to be adding anything to mum. I've never seen a man referred to as a bio-Dad or BD in a post where BM is used, so why add it when you are referring to the female parent?

^^This

debrazebra exactly. I believe the OP uses it to insult the Mum as she is jealous and insecure . It comes across that she is jealous of the little boy too which is ridiculous. Playing which child do you love more will not end well. I stand by that she's not step mum. She is merely the fathers girlfriend who has his baby. I feel very sorry for the little boy.

She is merely the fathers girlfriend who has his baby

Whilst I detest the term 'birth mum' in this context, I think that is way over the top. Plenty of long term, solid relationships don't involve marriage. At what point will you accept this woman in the children's lives?

OP if I offended you, I offer my apologies. I have seen many step mums come and go from my children's lives, the term 'just their birth mum' has been used about me many times. I am not 'just their birth mum'.

My view is that the child is the most important part of this, they don't 'belong' to anyone so it's pointless getting defensive and jealous - although I do understand that might be a natural reaction when you see your child forming relationships with someone else.

It takes more than biology to make a parent. Marriage or not, it's possible to be a good parent to a child. The labels and hierarchies attached to the different roles are laden with all sorts of values and judgements, with the reaction of biological mums to step mums here on MN being a perfect example of that.

she is merely the fathers girlfriend who has his baby

Charming! I'm sure someone will shortly be accusing her of being the OW ....

I stand by that she's not step mum. She is merely the fathers girlfriend who has his baby. I feel very sorry for the little boy.

......and I suppose I am a stepmum, because I've been married to my DH for 5 years?

Course, I've not seen either of his DCs for years - but hey - the label is just that, isn't it; arbitrary, rather than a reflection of the actual value a woman has in the life of a child.

Fucking ridiculous, if you ask me.

I am a mother. If anyone called me a Birth Mother, I wouldn't be offended- why would I? I would however find it a bit strange. I can't imagine saying to one of my kids' friends "What time is your Birth Mother collecting you?"

Actually I don't think your fear is irrational. Impetigo can be very dangerous to suck a young child who o slat easy immunosuppressed.

Op you have my sympathy. My dscs mum sent dsd when dd was 3 weeks old and never told us she had impetigo. I wrongly assumed it was infected eczema and was bloody livid when I found out. Had I know here is no way I would have let her near the baby. BUT I wouldn't have stopped dp seeing them. I would have sent them to his mums for the weekend to have their time together there. Is that an option for you? Honestly the chances of an adult catching it are quite small

I would actually be worried too, you are not being unreasonable.

I am a bit appalled by how many posters are berating you on terminologies when you are in a place of stress recovering and coping with a new baby. I have a son and if his SM had a young baby and he had impetigo or similar I would not send him. It's just basic care and consideration.

You are not mad. But your baby is stronger than you think. I would ask a pharmacist for advice to get an objective view.

If we were talking about a 'together' family, where everyone lives together all the time, then you just have to cope with these situations and hope for no cross infection. But in a two-household situation, where you've got the option of a 'quarantine' for a short period, then I would possibly keep the little boy away from the baby til he's properly better.

This would probably be a no-brainier if we were talking about visiting cousins for example - ie you'd postpone the visit for a week or so, but bring step children into the mix, and it all gets very emotive with common sense leaving the room.

And if we're diminishing the OP's status because she's not married, then God help us all! Aren't 1 in 3 children born to unmarried parents these days?

Just one other point: There somehow seems to be an underlying suggestion that the health of the baby is less important than the access visit (which could easily be postponed or rearranged).

And if the situation were reversed?? If the OP's child had something potentially contagious, I wonder if everyone would be so desperate for the access visit to go ahead, knowing that it's the step child who would be at risk of cross-infection ........ I think we'd see some double standards!!

I think it's massively offensive swing, most of why you do say I agree with but on this occasionI think it's been used in a derogatory way, just as the word sperm donor is wrongly used

The way I see it is both step mum and mum ARE mums. When is a step and the other is? well, the other gave birth which is what differentiate her to the other who is step, hence why it makes sense to add the word birth to it. The fact that this term is commonly used when referring to the adoption process is irrelevant, there is still one mum who gives birth and others who don't.

The irony is that I find the reference to STEP-mum much more offensive. What's a STEP mum? One that gets to step into the role of being a mum? I find this quite insulting as in some cases, SM never do get to 'step' into that role whilst others do very much so (especially when they become the resident parent). How does marriage make you 'step' more than when you're not is even more puzzling.

In France, step-mums are beautiful mums! Talk about being insulting the mums if they were to insinuate that this insinuates that mums (ie. those who gave birth the child) are ugly!

It's really about semantics. What you read behind is what you chose to read. If the rules here are that we should only write 'mum' when referring to the mother who was pregnant with the child and went through labour to give it birth, fine, but a mention of it is all that is required, no need to make such an outrage of it.

It's just language - nothing more. It's a shame this has derailed the post.

I might make sense to add all sorts of things to a word.

And on other sites it may be norm.

But it isn't the MN lingo, and posters who find MN incongenial have oodles of other sites to choose from.

But the DS here has only one dad, and access isn't just a visit. It's normal to be protective of a new baby. But if the disease risk from siblings is too great and the newly delivered mother feels the risk of encountering people who have been in touch with someone who has recently recovered from an infection us too great, then it's probably best if she and the baby move somewhere where full isolation can be achieved.

Does that seem OTT? Because it is disproportionate. Siblings may be germy, but you can't just ban them.

"One that gets to step into the role of being a mum?"

Etymologically, it comes from the old Norse/proto Geman and mean 'pushed out' or 'knocked back' and was used only to refer to the pushed-out child. It later transferred to include those who took in the pushed-out child.

Other European languages do similar - eg in Latin the word for 'step-child/orphan' is closely related to that for 'deprived'

The history of the language is all about the child.

As this situation should be. The son should not be impeded from contact with his father in his home.

on other sites it may be norm.

Posters on this thread are implying that ANYONE who use the term are doing so in a deliberately offensive manner.

It may not be MN lingo, any more than "Hun" and "lolz" is, but accusing someone looking for support as having an agenda when they use a term on MN that is perfectly acceptable in wider society is, IMO, totally contrary to the spirit of MN.

Every time this debate arises, I am disappointed in the response from MNHQ. They sit on the fence, and allow posters to undermine each other due to cultural differences in the understanding of a term.

I guess it doesn't matter to MNHQ what the OP thinks of the site - there are enough members without needing to protect new users from the minority who attack anyone who isn't psychic and doesn't know that things are different here.

The son should not be impeded from contact with his father in his home.

petal made an interesting point, though - what if the non-resident child was in danger of being infected by a child resident in the fathers home? Should contact between the child and the father in the fathers home go ahead, at the expense of the non-resident child's health?

Why not the other way round though Swing? There's mum and then add step to denote the one who didn't give birth. Would you call your ex bio-Dad to denote the difference between him and your dp?

I don't think it's being married that makes someone a step-parent, I think it's something that evolves over time as your relationship with the children grows, and I think probably depends on the type of relationship you have with them. Step-mum is certainly not a derogatory term for me.

I do despair sometimes. It's one weekend!!! If the DSS and Dad and his mum can't be a tiny bit flexible for the sake of a newborns health then no wonder being a step mum is the lowest peg in the pecking order.

Of course it's important for access visits to take place, but isn't the health of a newborn just a tad more important, just for one weekend?

And I'm still waiting to hear what people think about my earlier question - what if the visiting/step child were at risk of infection from the resident child? What then?