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.

I'm really shocked that you wrote this. Your husbands ex isn't your daughters step-mum, your dd presumably doesn't live with her some of the time, whereas your husbands child is your stepchild. I'm genuinely shocked that, as a step mother, you can't see the difference

what's shocking? he is my step child, but i am not his parent, and i have to put my own child first. Like most people do.

I dont completely ignore his needs, i havent "washed my hands of him" but i do put my own child first, i dont do it to his detriment but if something is to my childs detriment, then obviously i am going to step in.

I dont get what is so shocking about that. It is weird to me that people think that you absolutely should prioritize other peoples children over your own. In practice, very very few people do that.

But your husband is your SS’s parent @TrustTheGeneGenie, and your daughter’s so does he also agree with prioritising her over his son?

@TrustTheGeneGenie

I'm really shocked that you wrote this. Your husbands ex isn't your daughters step-mum, your dd presumably doesn't live with her some of the time, whereas your husbands child is your stepchild. I'm genuinely shocked that, as a step mother, you can't see the difference

what's shocking? he is my step child, but i am not his parent, and i have to put my own child first. Like most people do.

I dont completely ignore his needs, i havent "washed my hands of him" but i do put my own child first, i dont do it to his detriment but if something is to my childs detriment, then obviously i am going to step in.

I dont get what is so shocking about that. It is weird to me that people think that you absolutely should prioritize other peoples children over your own. In practice, very very few people do that.

I think the shocking part was where you equated your relationship to your DSS to your DH’s ex-wife’s relationship to your child - they are completely different situations and it makes no sense to compare them whatsoever.

@CoronaIsShit

But your husband is your SS’s parent *@TrustTheGeneGenie*, and your daughter’s so does he also agree with prioritising her over his son?

I have already explained this, which you would know if you had read my previous posts. You clearly havent because i dont have a daughter.

I think the shocking part was where you equated your relationship to your DSS to your DH’s ex-wife’s relationship to your child - they are completely different situations and it makes no sense to compare them whatsoever

They're not completely different in that we both only have one child, and prioritize that child, whereas DP has 2.

I did not say "i only care about my child" - fair enough you could say that was shocking, but that isnt what i said.

@funinthesun19 How is a child under the age of 10 having their life put on hold by not going to a private school?

That’s not what I said! I wasn’t referring to private school. I’m on about her childhood in general. By the time he leaves uni she will be around 9 or 10. She should be enjoying her childhood not plodding along until he finishes.

I suspect that a state school would ask your stepson to repeat a year as it's a 2 year course and the likelihood that the new school does the same exam boards and teaches material in the same order is slim to none.

I'm surprised that it's even a question for your dh. 17yo has one year to go while the 5 year old has plenty of time to switch into the private sector later.

@TrustTheGeneGenie you said: *
You wouldnt expect his ex to have consideration for my child, so why do you expect me to have consideration for his?*

you’ve got to see that those relationships aren’t actually comparable? Your DH’s ex is nothing to your child. You are your DH’s child’s stepmum. Feel quite sorry for them to be honest.

So because DH may do the decent thing and give his DS £3000 a year for 3 years at university, DD's childhood will consist of "plodding along"?
There are some majorly spoilt posters on this thread. You must thing that 99.5% of the UK population live lives not worth living.

I suspect that OP's marriage is close to over anyway, if her DH cares about his son at all. Not only does she care about her stepson so little she wants him thrown out of his school in the middle of his A'level course so that her daughter is not "suffering" alone, but she doesn't seem to give a fig about her DH's feelings towards his son. Marriage seems to be all about getting a private education paid for for her DD.

I think the shocking part was where you equated your relationship to your DSS to your DH’s ex-wife’s relationship to your child - they are completely different situations and it makes no sense to compare them whatsoever.

I wouldn't say they're completely different situations. They're both mothers of children who are siblings to each other. It's just that there's an expectation for Genie to be involved with day to day stuff for her child's sibling because he lives in her household some of the time (and she said she does indeed consider his needs), but there's no expectation for the ExW to build a relationship with her child's sibling too.

If Genie decides to live separately from her DH at any point then she'll have the exactly same connection (not relationship) with her DH's son as the Ex-wife currently has with Genie's DC. That's a pretty fragile link when you're considering whether to prioritise somebody else's child over your own.

There are some majorly spoilt posters on this thread.

Haha. You know nothing about my circumstances but I’m a long way from being spoilt

That’s probably why I feel it’s important that the op’s dd has the lifestyle she should have if her father has the money to do so. That’s not “spoilt”.

Going a bit on to a tangent here, but next time someone bangs on about X amount a month in maintenance not being enough because the child deserves a better lifestyle, I’ll make a point about how spoilt that attitude is.

[quote Tier500]**@TrustTheGeneGenie* you said:
You wouldnt expect his ex to have consideration for my child, so why do you expect me to have consideration for his?*

you’ve got to see that those relationships aren’t actually comparable? Your DH’s ex is nothing to your child. You are your DH’s child’s stepmum. Feel quite sorry for them to be honest.[/quote]
I'll be sure to tell him that. I mean i am sure that all the ways i have improved his life are just small change in comparison to how i put my own birth child first.

What am I like? I just looked at OP and she said this
“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”
Obviously we still don’t have a full picture, but if she didn’t want this to continue for the rest of her DDs childhood so that her adult brother could be funded through uni, that’s wouldn’t make her “spoilt” at all.

So the DD deserves private school at 4 - regardless of whether that screws up her brother's prospects long term. Because - why? She's Wife Number 2's child, and not Wife Number 1's?
Once the son is at uni, he'll only cost £3K a year. I imagine the parents are paying at least £12K a year at the moment, plus some living costs.
It's all me, me, me (because this kind of behaviour is about "me", not your child).

For what it's worth I wouldn't be happy paying my SS education (uni) at the detriment of my bio child's education. I say keep him in 100% till he's at uni the. You and you're OH have fulfilled a great start in education for him and should then if you can give your daughter the same or age education through until university

This discussion is going around in circles because the people on the two different sides of the debate are talking about different things.

Hardly anyone is saying the 4 year old should go to private school instead of the 17 year old. All anyone is saying is the OP has a right to be unhappy with further sacrifices that were mentioned and that, as a separate issue, step mothers have every right to personally prioritise their own children. They are rejecting the implication that they personally have "given up" the luxury of prioritising their own children due to being with somebody with children. The people on the other side perhaps mean that their children cannot be put first by the family as a whole, as the DP has an obligation to equally consider both of his children. But that isn't what's being said, what's being said is "YOU cannot put your own children first". That is what is being disputed, because a step parent has every right to personally and financially prioritise her own child, whilst yes, the parent in question does not.

Better to say "you have given up the luxury of your partner being able to always prioritise your joint child" than "you have given up the right to always prioritise your own child". They mean different things.

I havent said i wouldnt give them "any money" but i wouldnt be paying him through uni at the detriment of my own child. He is an adult at that point, the child is, well a child.

No, parents are expected to contribute depending on their earnings which is why the loan the student receives is dependent on their parents earnings. The DH should therefore pay half of the expected contribution.

@Belladonna12

I havent said i wouldnt give them "any money" but i wouldnt be paying him through uni at the detriment of my own child. He is an adult at that point, the child is, well a child.

No, parents are expected to contribute depending on their earnings which is why the loan the student receives is dependent on their parents earnings. The DH should therefore pay half of the expected contribution.

It's dependant on their household earnings, and although it is "expected" it isn't mandatory. He has two children to consider not just one. If can afford to pay that and it not be of detriment to the younger child then fine, but it doesn't sound like he can.

Better to say "you have given up the luxury of your partner being able to always prioritise your joint child" than "you have given up the right to always prioritise your own child". They mean different things.

But if finances are shared with someone who has a child you have given up the rights to always prioritise your own child financially as in this case.

It's dependant on their household earnings, and although it is "expected" it isn't mandatory. He has two children to consider not just one. If can afford to pay that and it not be of detriment to the younger child then fine, but it doesn't sound like he can.

What you mean by detriment ? Not going to a private school ? Seriously ? I pay towards my older child's University costs and obviously that means I have less money to spend on my other child but that's what happens if you have more than one child. You may only have one child but if your spouse has two then you can't act like there is only one if you share finances . It isn't mandatory to contribute but it should be considering they take the parents income into account . Not paying towards your child's university costs because you want to send their younger sibling to a private school would be a shit to do and not something a decent father would consider.

@Belladonna12

It's dependant on their household earnings, and although it is "expected" it isn't mandatory. He has two children to consider not just one. If can afford to pay that and it not be of detriment to the younger child then fine, but it doesn't sound like he can.

What you mean by detriment ? Not going to a private school ? Seriously ? I pay towards my older child's University costs and obviously that means I have less money to spend on my other child but that's what happens if you have more than one child. You may only have one child but if your spouse has two then you can't act like there is only one if you share finances . It isn't mandatory to contribute but it should be considering they take the parents income into account . Not paying towards your child's university costs because you want to send their younger sibling to a private school would be a shit to do and not something a decent father would consider.

I said nothing about private school. But I wouldn't day someone who spent all their money on one child and not the other was a very good parent either.

Taking your DSS out of his school now would cause huge problems for him being in Yr 12, whereas moving your daughter to a state school/nursery would be far less traumatic - I know as I’ve had to switch from private primary to state with my children. Tbh if you can’t afford to send your daughter to private school then don’t. Your husband should speak to DDS’s school Bursar as they will help.

But if finances are shared with someone who has a child you have given up the rights to always prioritise your own child financially as in this case.

It depends.

If the stepmum has her own earnings she can choose to spend them on her child. Let’s face it, she doesn’t go out working to pay for her stepchildren’s costs does she?

If she receives child related benefits for her child e.g. child benefit or the UC element or DLA for children. That money is for her child so she can 100% prioritise her child with that money.

So you’re wrong.

But if finances are shared with someone who has a child you have given up the rights to always prioritise your own child financially as in this case.

What utter tripe.