Refuse to make financial sacrifices for DSS

[usernc76482]

NC but regular poster. Cannot sleep as I'm drowning in a sea of anxiety.

I'll keep this brief: we (DH and i) can no longer afford to send DSS (Yr 12) to private school. ExW and husband comfortable but I don't think in a position to pay till he finishes secondary education next year. ExW and husband also have DC together who are also at the private school), but I mean, why would the step dad pay for his step son to go to private school when that is my DHs job and part of the original court order? ExW does not work.

At the same time, our DC1 has started at private pre prep (Reception) in September last year. It's looking unsustainable being able to send her there now and we will have to pull her out next term.

We could afford to send one or the other but not both children.

So: we COULD continue sending DSS to school if we take our DC out. I just don't think that's fair? If the children's are going to suffer it should be all of them?

It's been a very financially rocky few years but we had made it work, sold our car, no holidays etc. to continue sending DSS to school. We rent so cannot get a loan or anything against a property.

I'm fed up of making sacrifices.

Well I’m very glad I mistook your meaning.
I’m actually of the opinion that nobody in a family, child or adult, should “come first” all the time anyway, wherever there are steps/half’s/ex’s and court orders involved or not.
Sometimes one persons needs will be more critical than another’s (as in this case), sometimes one persons wants may be due a bit of attention so someone else will have o wait their turn etc etc.

But they have lost the right to ALWAYS put their child first. That's what they signed up to. There is no way around it
You might not like it, but is a cold hard fact

Bollocks, bollocks and more bollocks. I have not lost that right. I did not sign up to it, and there is a way around it.

I dont like it, but it's not a fact its BOLLOCKS.

Can i ask you if you are a step parent who also has their own child?

@OwMyNeck

Literally the card from last night on the other thread - 2nd tier mothers not allowed to put their children first because they have older half siblings

No, thats not right. Sometimes their children will come first, sometimes they won't. But they have lost the right to ALWAYS put their child first. That's what they signed up to. There is no way around it.
You might not like it, but is a cold hard fact.

But this is not even about having 2 families at all. The same would be true if they were all one family, the older childs schooling is more important that a very young child, whetehr they are half or full siblings.

The last paragraph completely agree with that.

OP also lives in a good area which to me means within a coveted school catchment. Her DD will really enjoy going to school with local DC and it will be only for a year till DSS leaves private school then OP can reassess.

Reading OP’s posts I think it’s not so much the current private school thing that’s the issue for OP. She’s jealous her life isn’t currently as comfortable as the ex-wife’s. Her own words she said she feels bitter comparing to what ex wife has.

Times change hardships ease. I do hope your financial troubles ease for you soon. But you need to discuss it with your DH without thinking about what his ex wife has (seemingly). And formulate a plan that will be best for your family’s financial future.

Bollocks, bollocks and more bollocks. I have not lost that right. I did not sign up to it, and there is a way around it

You did though. If your partner has prior children, his children with you cannot ALWAYS come first. You know that, why are you arguing such an obvious point?
You can shout bollocks all you like, you're still wrong. Unless, of course, you are saying your partner is a terrible, weak, parent who allows you to always put your joint children ahead of his children? In which case........

You did though. If your partner has prior children, his children with you cannot ALWAYS come first. You know that, why are you arguing such an obvious point?

eh... to me he can. Me and DP are not one person, you know? He is free to put whichever of his children first that he sees fit in any given situation. I, on the other hand only have one child. So if DP "chooses" DSS, whats stopping me putting my own child first in that scenario and doing something with him, or paying for something, or whatever? oh yeah, NOTHING. Dp luckily has more brains than half of mumsnet and realises that i am not DSS's parent, and therefore do not have to make the same considerations that someone with two children does.

You can shout bollocks all you like, you're still wrong. Unless, of course, you are saying your partner is a terrible, weak, parent who allows you to always put your joint children ahead of his children? In which case........

I, personally, always put my DS first. Just like his ex always puts her child first. Because, you know, we only have one child. Dp is the only person that needs to balance this because he is the only one who has two children.

You wouldnt expect his ex to have consideration for my child, so why do you expect me to have consideration for his?

As it happens i do choose to consider his child, but my child will always come first to me. I wouldnt prioritize DSS over Ds, but i wouldnt be upset if DP did iyswim.

He is free to put whichever of his children first that he sees fit in any given situation. I, on the other hand only have one child. So if DP "chooses" DSS, whats stopping me putting my own child first in that scenario and doing something with him, or paying for something, or whatever? oh yeah, NOTHING

Christ, keep up. In a situation like the OP's when you have to choose one, your DP could choose his. Which means you would not be able to put yours first.
Are you struggling to follow?

Christ, keep up. In a situation like the OP's when you have to choose one, your DP could choose his. Which means you would not be able to put yours first
Are you struggling to follow?

is there any need to be so rude?

Sweetheart, i could put mine first. I could up and leave and privately educate him allllll on my own, couldn't i?

Op cant do that (because finances) but she could up and leave and put her child first if the presence of DSS in their lives was of detriment, couldn't she?

There is ALWAYS a way to put your own child first. Nobody signs that right away, ever.

No, thats not right. Sometimes their children will come first, sometimes they won't. But they have lost the right to ALWAYS put their child first. That's what they signed up to. There is no way around it.
You might not like it, but is a cold hard fact.

If you’re a mum to just one of the children, you have the right to put them first whenever you like if you are able to do so. All depends on the situation whether people will agree with it.

WRT to this thread, I think the DSS should finish school. But the point is that DSS shouldn’t take precedence in everything. His father can’t plunge all of his money in to DSS’s uni costs and provide a lesser childhood to his young daughter. Once he finishes uni she will be almost a preteen. That will be 4/5 years of her childhood plodding through and everyone’s lives on hold until DSS finishes uni. And the op would be well within her rights to put her foot down and put her daughter first in that case.

@funinthesun19

No, thats not right. Sometimes their children will come first, sometimes they won't. But they have lost the right to ALWAYS put their child first. That's what they signed up to. There is no way around it. You might not like it, but is a cold hard fact.

If you’re a mum to just one of the children, you have the right to put them first whenever you like if you are able to do so. All depends on the situation whether people will agree with it.

WRT to this thread, I think the DSS should finish school. But the point is that DSS shouldn’t take precedence in everything. His father can’t plunge all of his money in to DSS’s uni costs and provide a lesser childhood to his young daughter. Once he finishes uni she will be almost a preteen. That will be 4/5 years of her childhood plodding through and everyone’s lives on hold until DSS finishes uni. And the op would be well within her rights to put her foot down and put her daughter first in that case.

i agree with this.

Yes, there is.

Sweetheart, i could put mine first. I could up and leave and privately educate him allllll on my own, couldn't i?
Could you? As a single parent, you could up and leave and pay for all of your costs plus private school? I doubt it.

There is ALWAYS a way to put your own child first. Nobody signs that right away, ever

Anyone who has more than one child signs away the right to always put one first. And anyone who has children with someone who already has children also does.
Unless they are the stereotypical evil stepmother. You know why people complain that SM get a hard time on MN? It's the likes of you and OP leaning right in to the stereotype.

@OwMyNeck

Yes, there is.

Sweetheart, i could put mine first. I could up and leave and privately educate him allllll on my own, couldn't i?
Could you? As a single parent, you could up and leave and pay for all of your costs plus private school? I doubt it.

There is ALWAYS a way to put your own child first. Nobody signs that right away, ever

Anyone who has more than one child signs away the right to always put one first. And anyone who has children with someone who already has children also does.
Unless they are the stereotypical evil stepmother. You know why people complain that SM get a hard time on MN? It's the likes of you and OP leaning right in to the stereotype.

If i was sending my child to private school now and then left, then yes i would ensure it continued. As it happens, i am not, and wouldnt ever anyway, but what you're saying is that i CANT put my child first. Yes i can, and i will.

You're forgetting that i DONT have more than one child. His child is not my responsibility. I havent signed the right away to put my ONLY CHILD first.

Haha, evil stepmother. Original. Except its you thats getting your posts deleted for abuse, isnt it? Not me.

Awh, another insult. That's nice.

How i come across? Yep. Someone who stands up for their own childs interests. And yes, i would leave my DP if something very detrimental would happen to my child if i did not leave. Any good parent would do the same. Wouldn't you? or would you let your child suffer?

Sweetheart, i could put mine first. I could up and leave and privately educate him allllll on my own, couldn't i?

That’s what I did! Well, not the private education part as I can’t afford that and neither can my ex.
But I put my children first by asking my ex to leave and I can now concentrate solely on them. Life is simpler and better.

You're forgetting that i DONT have more than one child. His child is not my responsibility. I havent signed the right away to put my ONLY CHILD first.

Surely if you're married to someone you wouldn't totally wash your hands of their child's health and well-being. I agree that perhaps most people would put their own child first if everything else is equal but that isn't the case here . The step child's education could be ruined by be taken out of school at this point whereas it would have very little impact on her own child to change schools.

What insult? I don't see one.

But I put my children first by asking my ex to leave and I can now concentrate solely on them. Life is simpler and better

That agrees with my point entirely (as does genies post but she can't see that)
I'm saying you cannot always put your child first if you are with someone who has other children.
The answer to that is "I can leave and do it on my own!"...which agrees with my point, you know you can't always put your child first in a family that already has children, if you need to leave that family to put your own child first, you are agreeing with me that you can't do it in that family!!

If it were just a case of choosing between paying for SS's school for one more year or paying for your daughter's pre-prep then I'd say take her out and pay for SS for his final year as she won't notice the difference but he will.

BUT it sounds like it's a lot more than that and that the lifestyle previously enjoyed by the family - including both children - is no longer sustainable. I would not move into a smaller house in order to pay for unaffordable school fees - no way.

In this case, I think your OH needs to have a discussion with his ex and let her know he can't afford to pay for the next year of fees and maybe they can find a way forward.

@Belladonna12

You're forgetting that i DONT have more than one child. His child is not my responsibility. I havent signed the right away to put my ONLY CHILD first.

Surely if you're married to someone you wouldn't totally wash your hands of their child's health and well-being. I agree that perhaps most people would put their own child first if everything else is equal but that isn't the case here . The step child's education could be ruined by be taken out of school at this point whereas it would have very little impact on her own child to change schools.

I havent washed my hands of anything, but his child has two parents and i am not one of them. I dont need to advocate for him because they do that.

I have already said that i wouldnt take him out of school now - about 10 times. But that if it went further than that, i would not agree with it.

Because no, it's not massively detrimental to her child right now - but if it carries on it will be. And thats what i am saying, when you NEED to put your child first, you should do that. Nobody signs that right away and to suggest they do is idiotic.

OwMyNeck

My situation has a massive backstory so you might want to pipe down. I was victim of abuse and my ex’s alcohol addiction. I had literally had enough of being a stepmum and putting my children second in an already shit situation.

So yes I will hold my head up high and say that leaving him made their lives better. For a multitude of reasons. And not having to factor his child in to my life anymore is one of those reasons.

@OwMyNeck

What insult? I don't see one.

But I put my children first by asking my ex to leave and I can now concentrate solely on them. Life is simpler and better

That agrees with my point entirely (as does genies post but she can't see that)
I'm saying you cannot always put your child first if you are with someone who has other children.
The answer to that is "I can leave and do it on my own!"...which agrees with my point, you know you can't always put your child first in a family that already has children, if you need to leave that family to put your own child first, you are agreeing with me that you can't do it in that family!!

What insult? Seriously? I mean your posts have been deleted so perhaps thats why you dont see one.

I am not agreeing with you, i am in a relationship and put my child first. nothing has happened that has not caused me to leave, but if leaving was the best option for my child i would take it. Its still putting the child first. I put my child first often by doing things with him on his own instead of just joining in with Dp and DSS. I put him first by saying actually no Ds has "whatever important event" were going, or i am going, or whatever. I prioritise him. You absolutely CAN do that whilst in the relationship, because i am doing it. For someone who has 0 experience of doing this, its strange that you think you know better.

I'm not disagreeing with you fun, or commenting on your situation at all.
I'm merely pointing out that you agree entirely with my point: you could not always put your children first in a family that already had children. You needed to leave to do so.
There's nothing at all wrong with that.

For someone who has 0 experience of doing this, its strange that you think you know better

I do know better, because you still aren't listening. You. Cannot. Always. Put. Your. Child. First.

usernc76482 do your step son's school fees come solely from his father's income, or does the provision rely on a financial contribution from your wages too?

If it's the latter you're in no way unreasonable to channel your income to funding your own child's education. If your DH and his ex want their son to continue in independent school it's up to them to pay for it, not you.

@OwMyNeck

For someone who has 0 experience of doing this, its strange that you think you know better

I do know better, because you still aren't listening. You. Cannot. Always. Put. Your. Child. First.

How do you know better when you have never been in this situation?

Go on, tell us.

I. do. always. put. my. child. first. because. i. only. have. one.

Sounds like champagne lifestyle on a Prosecco budget. Can you not try and reach an arrangement with Mum? It doesn’t sound like you’re in a position to commit to private schooling for your DD.