Holidays

[HotChocolateLover]

Firstly, this is all hypothetical. I only want genuine opinions as neither DH or I know what is the right answer.

I have one DS from a previous marriage, he has a DS and DD. We have done holidays the last three years including all three, one UK based and 2 foreign. This year is a ‘staycation’ as buying a house last year completely wiped us out.

Right, so next year, the ex is considering taking DSS and DSD abroad. This would mean that if only DH, DS and I went abroad together then our holiday bill would reduce by 40%. Everyone would get a holiday and surely that’s ok? We’re just agonising over it in case the step-kids think that their dad (my DH) is picking my son over them. But if their mum is taking them away then we will have the money to go away so why should we sit at home? We can’t really afford £5-6k for a week 🤦‍♀️ I just don’t want to offend anyone. Oh and by the way, my son’s dad had never taken him anywhere, never will and doesn’t even pay maintenance.

I think he should contribute towards the kid's share of the holiday.

That’s not how it works though. I’ve just booked a holiday (in the U.K.) for next year, and I don’t expect my ex to pay towards it because it’s my choice to take my children away. In fact it will be the first holiday on my own with them and I’m really looking forward to it! I don’t want his contribution.

And when it’s time to take them somewhere more expensive, it’s not his job to pay towards it because it will my choice to take them to the chosen destination.

@Kewlwife - you are seriously deluded in your thinking!!! That a man should pay for his ex & kids to go on long haul holidays!!! What planet are you living on? The planet of milk your ex to support your lifestyle????

The way you mention divorce is as if now Ben is with Mary, other than legal maintenance, his money should be directed towards enhancing his current partner's lifestyle (and in turn, her kids) and the divorced party needs to accept that is part of breaking up.
@Kewlwife - honestly don't know how you took that from my post.

In our family, we all contribute towards things like holidays so the kids (and us) have as many opportunities as possible. But everyone is on the same page about wanting to take the kids exploring/travelling so it's a shared goal.

Nobody would do things alone that they couldn't do with the kids due to money. That doesnt mean adults never holiday alone. We do. It's only possible because we think of ourselves as a network and share the load. That's how we all have regular date nights and time for hobbies etc.

But I know many more traditional families where both parents contribute somewhat towards major expenses like holidays with the ex partner and maybe their SP and SS too. It might be just spending money or it might be paying 1/3. For example, my sister's kids went to Australia with her and her new partner (their dad paid 1/2 of the cost of kids) and to the Seychelles with their father and his wife (sister paid about 1/2 of kids fare). So the kids got 2 holidays out of the parents paying for roughly the cost of 1. She also dog sat for them as they were going to fork out for kennels so that reduced their cost too.

@Kewlwife It’s great that your extended/blended family get on so well but you are very much in the minority. Both DH’s ex and mine would tell us to fuck off if we asked for contributions towards holidays. My ex did actually promise DS a holiday about 2 years ago but when he found out there was a supplement to pay for an extra person in the chalet he told DS he couldn’t come 🤬 He’s also been promising Florida for about 5 years, yeah right.

@Hotchocolatelover

What about if it was the default so you helped them and they helped you? I resent when people think things are like this because the adults all like each other so much. It just isn't the case. Some adults in our group of parents and partners are genuinely close and would be regardless of how they met. Others not so much because they are completely different people and would never bond if they didn't have the same (ex) partner and/or co-parent. It's just that we all have the same (not very altruistic goal) of having it all so we know it's in everyone's best interests to club together to get stuff done.

@Kewlwife I can assure you that it just wouldn’t work. It’s as though our exes go out of their way to make life hard. His ex more than mine tbh. My ex tends to ignore me 😂 Think he’s miffed at the house purchase seeing as he’s stuck in rented.

I just don't understand it. It makes no sense to me at all.

*Again, I do not see why my partner’s children’s needs or wants should come before my children’s

by saying that is the reason SMs have a bad name, which suggests you believe the resident kids needs should come after the step kids*
The negating of something doesn't mean agreeing to the opposite. Why does it have to one or the other? It's about treating All children within an household the same.

I do agree that each situation is different, this is about principles. Take a SC who went to Disney world with mum and her partner. Her partner paid, but he is happy to do so for his SC. You want to take your kids on a cruise but can't afford it if you take your SC, so décidé as he's had a nice holiday already, it's fair he doesn't get to go. What if though a month later, the SM's children father announces that he had an unexpected bonus and is taking the kids to Spain the following week and lapland for Xmas and to What do you do then for equity? Do you suggest to your OH that you and the SCs go to Disney Paris at Xmas without your kids because they get a treat with their dad and the SCs deserves a nice Xmas break too?

Then ces into it the financial position. For those SM who see fit to go on 3 holidays a year with their kids without the SCs, who funds these? Do you pay for you and your kids and your OH only pays for his place? Or is he expected to pay and or maybe even all if SM has no revenue?

I do think it is totally reasonable for a SM to take her kids away on hols if she is fully paying for it herself and usually contributes 50% of the bills. I would find it utterly disgusting if the trips with the SM's kids excluding the SCs were funded exclusively or almost fully by the SCs' father.

It also depends on the kids age and what they want to do. There have been threads a put older SCs not interested in wanting to go. As long as it isn't because the holiday has been fully arrange to please the other kids, it would be silly not to go because they don't want to themselves.

I also think that it might be fine to go away when the SCs are away with their mum if dad's were then to take the SCs on his own somewhere at another time.

The way you mention divorce is as if now Ben is with Mary, other than legal maintenance, his money should be directed towards enhancing his current partner's lifestyle (and in turn, her kids) and the divorced party needs to accept that is part of breaking up*

Just read this and that is exactly what I think some SMs think. The SCs are seen as the ex's kids and her kids as the new resident children so deserving at least the same from him towards them as his kids from the exes. I find it shocking when I see a man clearly treating his SCs, ie. partner's children before his own just because they happen to live with him and his kids don't. Then cry when his kids are not too keen on visiting any longer.

No way would i subsidise dps exs holiday. I wouldnt expect her to pay for ours either.

What if it costs 100 quid for child to go on holiday with parent a but it costs 1000 pounds to go with parent b

Parent a is missing out massively because they'd only get say 50 quid off parent b but would then have to give parent b 500 quid for their hol.

Makes no sense whatsoever.

swing again a lot of us have joint children with our partners so they are not out partners step children.

And tbh yes maintenance and extras like uniforms school trips and whatever else should be paid but no i dont think you should have to subsidise your ex wife or husbands lifestyle. You get divorced its time for both parties to stand on their own two feet.

Each family is responsible for themselves -what goes on in the other is irrelevant.

If the DF( usually) is going on holday with his step DCs and often new DC, the his DCs should have the opportunity to go aswell. What goes on anywhere else is irrelevant.
Toronto, Joan - your comments all relate to monies and too often the comments on here are - we can afford x for ours but if we add in steps then no we can't. The SMs ( mainly) resent their SDCs expense, presence and upsetting the new "family".

Mine want a holiday with their Dad and who ever else goes along. This could be Bognor, Mexico, Florida or Spain - what they resent is their father having a holiday with other kids and spending fun time with them and they are no included. The location and expense is irrelevant to them, it is his time they want.

My biggest gripe is the constant - the SDCs cost too much to take on holiday which pervades so many of these comments.

I understand reading this why monogamous people are generally so miserable. Especially when they break up. Teamwork people! It really does make the dream work. With teamwork parent A wouldn't have to spend just £100 if they didn't want to. But parent B might have to only spend £800 per child to make it all work.

The SMs ( mainly) resent their SDCs expense, presence and upsetting the new "family" i dont resent anything about my stepchild, thanks but keep making things up if it makes you feel better.

Mine want a holiday with their Dad and who ever else goes along. This could be Bognor, Mexico, Florida or Spain - what they resent is their father having a holiday with other kids and spending fun time with them and they are no included. The location and expense is irrelevant to them, it is his time they want

Maybe thats true for your kids but as i said it isnt true for dss. He will stay with whichever parent he can get the most out of, unfortunately. If they truly want his time they could do that with him at home and so holidays would be irrelevant.

My biggest gripe is the constant - the SDCs cost too much to take on holiday

Well, yeah. Like for us dss is in high school. I could take ds whenever i wanted for peanuts. I cant do that with dss.

I will take ds out of school. I am not "allowed" to do that with dss (even though his mum does)

But why should my ds miss out because we dont have 3 grand to go away in aug but we do have 500 quid to go in june? Dss goes with his mum anyway. Everyones had a holiday everyones happy.

Like i said before dss finds out holidays "boring" so i wont be spending 3 grand for him to be bored when i dont need to.

I imagine his mum will feel that way soon too.

Depends whose paying doesn't it? I choose to have one child - the child I ahve with my partner - this means I can afford stuff for him such as holidays etc. Dp is absolutely invited on these holidays if he wants to come, and I may subsidise him. But I will not pay for 3 dsc as well. If he wnats the dsc to come and they are more than welcome, although we often go in term time as our joint child is a toddler, then he can pay for them to come along. It's a none issue. Same if he doesn't want to come without all the children, fair enough, but I'm still going to go away. My child won't miss out.

And just to clarify I paid for my own maternity leave and pay more towards living generally as I earn more, which is the way it is. But I have to drawn the line somewhere so as not to disadvantage my child.
I think this is fair for my son and the dsc, before their dad met me they had only been away onec in 5 years with him due to Finances. Now they go away more, t least once a year, although me and my child do go more often sometime with dp. And sometimes without . Hardly unfair if you look at it objectively.

kewlwife

Why? Is parent b going to subsidise parent a, their partner and new child too? Maybe £100 per person is all they can afford.

But parent b will still expect 500 when their hol comes around.

Doesnt work. Cant work. Youre living on a different planet.

When you work as a team, you acknowledge each member's strengths and weaknesses. So that might mean putting some money but helping out in other ways like pet sitting to save them money. Buying new clothes the child might need. Doing the airport run for them. Whatever. If everyone puts their petty disappointments and insecurities aside, you can live a really pleasant existence.

Do you suggest to your OH that you and the SCs go to Disney Paris at Xmas without your kids because they get a treat with their dad and the SCs deserves a nice Xmas break too?

Erm, wouldn’t the equivalent actually be the dad suggesting it? He wants his children to do something fun with his own while his stepchildren are away having fun with their dad? I bet you wouldn’t have an issue with that would you? That’s just the same as a stepmum wanting the same thing for her children while her stepchildren are away with heir mum.
In both cases I don’t see the issue. Have a holiday with the children who will be at home.

You think i should dogsit for dhs ex or she should drop me off at the airport?

That is batshit. Absolutely batshit.

In that case @JoanMavisIcecreamGirl Swings comments don't apply you. And from your earlier posts it would appear your stepson doesn't want to holiday with you, his dad and your joint child so fair enough to crack on in that case.

There are valid reasons why a stepchild may not holiday with the non-resident family unit. The fact they have had / will have a holiday with the other family isn't one of them.

The more contentious situation is where the decision is made because the desired holiday isn't affordable for the whole family so the stepchildren are excluded to make it affordable - laying lie to the oft trotted out statement that all the children are treated equally. Except when they are not of course.

This is exactly what the OP is suggesting doing. A whole family holiday is affordable next year - just not the one she wants.

Equally unreasonable is the scenario where the stepchild is excluded as they are a grumbling pain in the arse of a teen - I've one child who wants 5 star; one who wants to adventure rapid down in the Amazon in handmade boats; and one who just embraces whatever. They get told to get on with it. Not left at home.

Explain why dogsitting for your ex or dropping them off at the airport so they save a bit of money and can take your kids is batshit? Would it be crazy to do that for a friend?

Theyd save what £100 at most. That doesnt pay to take a child on holiday in most cases does it?

And if they've decided to take their child on holiday they can pay for it. Dhs ex would have laughed in my face if id asked her to contribute for out holidays.

Id do it for a friend because i like my friends. I am not friends with dhs ex.

Step kids are never treated 100% equally are they because like i said prev they have 2 x everything anyway. If anything theyre better off. They dont go on 1 holiday but still get 1 other. Or the bio kids dont get to go at all.

Only kids missing out here are the bio kids who get 0 holidays because their siblings are classed as more important.