Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Step-parenting

Connect with other Mumsnetters here for step-parenting advice and support.

Original poster

Renegotiating conctact arrangements - am I being unreasonable?

70 replies

Anna8888 · 11/10/2007 16:49

OK - I need some second opinions to get my strength back for the negotiating table (or to decide to lay down arms).

We are currently renegotiating contact for my two stepsons (12, 10). The outcome is expected to be that, during term time, they will spend every Wednesday and Thursday night at our house and every Monday and Tuesday night at their mother's. They will spend every other weekend (Friday evening to Monday morning) with us.

Holidays will be split 50:50, though in reality they will spend a little more time with us as my partner can take more time off work than his ex-wife.

My partner's ex-wife works 4 days a week in a management job that requires quite a bit of travel. She would like us to agree to have the boys whenever she has to travel for work and that her travels must unavoidably be scheduled for the nights that the boys are supposed to be with her.

My partner's ex-wife has a full-time live-in nanny who cannot have sole charge of the boys overnight (she is too gormless). My partner pays the nanny's salary.

I think that my partner's ex-wife ought to change her very gormless (and wildly underemployed) nanny for a more responsible person who would be competent enough to manage the very flexible childcare arrangements my partner's ex-wife requires. It is a pain in the neck for me to always leave my diary open just in case the boys are going to be here and I want it to end so that I can plan ahead in my life.

What do you think? AIBU?

OP posts:
flowerybeanbag · 11/10/2007 17:01

How bizarre to have a nanny who cannot be left in sole charge! If your partner pays her salary it would not be unreasonable for him to request a more suitable person.

Original poster
Anna8888 · 11/10/2007 17:05

The nanny has been in situ for a very long time, and pre-dates my partner's separation from his ex - hence they had a nanny who never needed to be left in sole charge because one or other parent was always at home at night. She was chosen for other life circumstances and hasn't been changed under the pretext that she provided continuity for the boys (actually, it's just their mother being lazy because the nanny has nothing to do now the boys are at school all day and with us half the week).

OP posts:
LittleBella · 11/10/2007 17:10

I would work it this way:

Agree that you will have the days you've stated. If the travel happens on the other days, agree that you will be flexible enough to change the days IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY MADE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS.

I don't think you should be inflexible for the sake of it; I'd be willing to be flexible as and where it's possible and not wildly inconvenient.

I have a similar arrangement with my cm btw. I have a job where meetings might be on Wed or Thurs. CM has kids on Thursday, but if a meeting does fall on a Wed, she will swop days if she can. Only once has she been unable to. It works well.

Original poster
Anna8888 · 11/10/2007 17:12

Well, being a stepmother is not the same as being a childminder or childcarer of any description. That's the point I'm trying to get across to my partner's ex-wife. I'm not paid, having the boys creates a lot of extra work and I don't get to spend the evening with my partner.

So I'm afraid I don't agree with that point .

OP posts:
LittleBella · 11/10/2007 17:13

OK so you want to be told to stick to your guns.

Be inflexible then. Make her life difficult.

Original poster
Anna8888 · 11/10/2007 17:18

Why should she be allowed to make my life difficult? What's the justification?

I am genuinely interested in all the possible arguments .

But the CM one really does not do it for me - you don't become a free and always available CM because you become a stepmother

OP posts:
swift1 · 11/10/2007 17:25

Hi,

completely agree - you are etitled to a life too . If it were me I would feel like I wouldnt be in control of my own life.- that the boys can come over at the drop of a hat whenever she decides. Even if you arent busy , thats not the point.

I would say its not possible and try and push for a new more capable nanny.

Original poster
Anna8888 · 11/10/2007 17:37

Thanks .

That's exactly it - I need to be in control of my own life. Sometimes I plan things months ahead and they end up getting shelved because her work says so .

She has a responsible job and lots of money (income and capital) so I feel it's really an issue of her not taking her responsibilities towards her sons properly and offloading them on us because it's easy and convenient.

OP posts:
WanderingTrolley · 11/10/2007 17:46

Anna I see your point.

Ex-w gets round the clock free childcare, you and dp on permanent stand-by.

Bearing in mind that he who pays the piper calls the tune - dp is his sons' parent too, he gets a say in who is their nanny. Ditch Nanny McGormless and get a responsible au pair.

Original poster
Anna8888 · 11/10/2007 17:56

Wandering Trolley - thanks .

OP posts:
LittleBella · 11/10/2007 21:10

Anna didn't you read my post? I said (in capitals) only agree to swapping the dates IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY MADE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS. IE don't make your life more difficult. Only agree to swapping the dates if it doesn't inconvenience you. How is looking after the boys on a Wednesday instead of a Thursday any more trouble?

Of course, you can be intransigent if you want and insist on the Thursday as a matter of principle, but I can't see the point of that tbh. Except to make a point. Which if you want to do, go ahead.

I suppose if you have a formal, uneasy relationship with the ex, then you have to have formal, unchangeable arrangements. I'd always much rather have a co-operative modus vivendi, if possible. I suppose that depends on the relationship you have with her and whether you believe it is possible to have a flexible, co-operative give and take arrangement, or whether she would take the piss if offered that. Only you can judge that, you know her.

Original poster
Anna8888 · 11/10/2007 21:18

Little Bella - if you read the OP you will see that we have the boys every Wednesday and every Thursday under the new arrangement.

When the boys' mother has to travel for business it is not a case of swapping days, it is a case of extra days.

We have busy lives and busy schedules and there is always something happening somewhere. I have never, ever had the boys "extra" without having to rearrange the diary or my partner having to rearrange his.

Having the boys for extra days always involves inconvenience, basically. I am not a childminder.

OP posts:
chipkid · 11/10/2007 21:22

I hope these step boys of yours never realise what an inconvenience they are

clandestine · 11/10/2007 21:30

Isn't the reality of this situation that the boys are the joint responsibility of their mother and father?

I don't think that it is wholly unreasonable that when mum is working then dad covers their care. In fact I would be extremely worried at a father who didn;t want to care for them in those circumstances.

I really don't think that they should be farmed off to a nanny.

Perhaps a salient question for you is what would you want in the same circumstances for your own DD. How would you feel if her father didn;t want to look after her on a particular night, irrespective of whether it was your night or her night.

IMO you are really looking at it from the wrong perspective. You are looking at her needs vs our needs. Surely what really needs to be considered are the needs of the children and meeting those needs. Where one parent is feckless then I don;t think it is acceptable for the other party to walk away. Tough for all concerned, but the needs of the children come first.

chipkid · 11/10/2007 22:02

agree with everything Clandestine says.

LittleBella · 11/10/2007 22:11

Oh right OK now I get it extra days. Why don't you just say that yes, you're prepared to do those days (subject to not having arranged something beforehand and with the usual caveats about proper notice and arrangements etc.) as long as they're swapped, not extra?

I agree in principle that a father of course ought to be taking responsibility for his children when the mother can't - however, those of you are yelling at Anna about this must remember that if the boys are there more than 50% of the time, that has implications for maintenance payments and care and control status. So if he is expected to take responsibility more than 50% of the time (not an unreasonable expectation at all) then the ex wife must be prepared to accede c&c and possibly maintenance levels. That's where this sort of situation gets hairy.

BrownSuga · 11/10/2007 22:18

if you are paying for the nanny, should she (or a new more capable one) not follow the boys where they go, and help you out also, rather than sitting around an empty house scratching her arse?

CarGirl · 11/10/2007 22:23

It sounds like the nanny role is redundant??? So make her redundant. I would suggest offering to give the ex some of the money you would be saving towards babysitting or having a competent au pair (peace offering!) and you use the rest for the babysitting you need when having them the extra days.

Honestly at 10 & 12 do they need a nanny????

TBH would it not be easier if they lived with you and saw their mum on weekends when presumably she is not working so your life planning would be easier? And you could have a nanny/au pair!

LittleBellaLugosi · 11/10/2007 22:27

Cargirl, what do you mean do they need a nanny at 10 and 12?

Are you suggesting it would be all right to leave them on their own?

Thirty years ago, it would have been considered perfectly OK, but nowadays I think that would be frowned upon.

BrownSuga · 11/10/2007 22:29

cargirl is suggesting babysitting or aupair as alternative...

CarGirl · 11/10/2007 22:29

No - I mean why does the Mum need a F/T nanny when they are at school and at their Dad's over 50% of the time???? Yes they need an au pair/after school care but not a FT nanny - would she have her if she was having to pay for it, I think not! She may have a cleaner and an au-pair or use after school care!

LittleBellaLugosi · 11/10/2007 22:35

I really think other people's childcare choices are up to them tbh. Except if they're choosing Claire Verity, in which case i'll polish up my pitchfork and join you.

LittleBellaLugosi · 11/10/2007 22:38

Anna did mention that one of the reasons was continuity. Which she dismissed, but actually, that's a perfectly reasonable motive. I had a childminder last year which I really didn't need at all (I was only working 16 hours a week) but I kept her on because I wasn't sure whether my hours would change and I would then need childcare and of course I would rather my children went to the childminder they'd known for ages and got on well with. (And as it happens I do now have a different job and do need childcare.)

Surfermum · 11/10/2007 22:55

Is she really "offloading" them onto you and your dp, or is it that she'd rather the boys were looked after by one of their parents, rather than paid help? I can't really blame her for wanting them to be with you and their Dad when she's away. Why does it all fall on your shoulders though? What about your dp?

Original poster
Anna8888 · 12/10/2007 08:35

CarGirl - yes, I completely agree, it would be much easier if the boys lived with us . We would be very happy with that arrangement but their mother doesn't want that and that's understandable too.

LittleBella - the issue about swapping versus extra days is that the mother has a boyfriend (who doesn't live with her) and she sees her boyfriend on the nights that the boys are with us and doesn't ever want to forfeit those nights. So, if the mother has to travel for work on Mondays and Tuesdays, she never wants to have the boys on Wednesday and Thursday instead (or an extra weekend) because she has plans to see her boyfriend - who also has an ex-wife and a little girl and his ex-wife has a new partner... basically it's a long chain of complicated arrangements and because I'm the only one who doesn't have an ex-partner I'm supposed to fit in with everyone else's plans .

I shall ignore any comments about how the boys are an inconvenience because that is patently not the case .

OP posts: