AIBU to think that equal often ends up being unfair on resident DC not DSC?

[DuggyOnDown]

Another thread got me thinking...

We often see it trotted out on here that everything should be equal between DSC and resident DC.

However, I often find that that is actually unfair on resident DC, something which I think a lot of posters never think (or care) about.

My example on the other thread and the main one for posting is things like Christmas presents.

So according to lots of people here, DSC and DC should get exactly the same (in terms of cost obviously presents aren't always going to be identical) and it doesn't matter what my DSC then go and get at their mums house.

But why doesn't it matter? Especially as children get older, resident DC will be aware that their siblings also then go and get things at mum's house too so why is it totally unfair to expect DSC to understand that resident DC may get a little more at our house because they also get things from their Mum but it's expected of resident children not to care or be upset about it?

For example, my DSC got loads last year for Christmas from their Mum and her parents. Games consoles etc... And couldn't wait to come and tell us all about it, including their half sibling. It seems that our DC is just supposed to accept this and not be upset but that my DSC would be scarred for life if our DC got more spent on them at our house than they did.

Why is one unfair and the other not?

I always feel on this subject that people tie themselves in so many knots trying to be equal that they actually end up being unfair on the resident children.

I'm sure someone will come along and tell me it's fine because 'at least my child's parents are together' but I don't agree that children should have to be grateful for that. It's not how they think.

The other children move between homes, but those individual homes are much more consistent whenever they are there. They don’t know what it’s like the rest of the time. They are in their other home (where in many cases they are the only children in that home) and everything is as it usually is in that house for them
And I don't agree with that, most exes do, at some point, get into another relationship, so the SCs have to adjust in two households.

That's true too, but if joint, it's more dad knowing

I think my main point re the joint finances was even if they are completely mixed and no one has separate disposable income in a different account, those joint funds are still made up in part by the step parents money. Therefore it does still mean, imo, that they should be able to use some of it to buy things that they want to buy (within reason) which may be things for their DC.

If my funds were totally mixed with DHs, I wouldn't be expected to be told that any money I spent out of it could only be used to buy 'joint' things or things for everyone. Because it's still my money if you see what I mean?

I agree though, the simplest solution is to just have separate disposable income. But again, kids won't know that.

@funinthesun19 ref Haircut - I saw that post! It was hilarious.

I was just that people could be that ridiculous.
But it also just further confirmed to me that second children have to put up with a lot of shit that often gets shrugged off “because their parents are still together”.

@dontdisturbmenow

They’ve never had a time when their one and only home didn’t shift and change (often profoundly) with the coming and going of their half siblings. They have to continually make adjustments to changing routines and expectations. And priorities even But that's no different to what the SCs experience to a higher degree, in addition to the upheaval they experienced in the first place.

I don’t agree that the upheaval is greater for the NR children at all. I think we assume it is.

It will be different on different circumstances but for many NR children they move between houses that have stable routines and atmospheres whenever they are there. Plus the adults are desperate to smooth the transition for them and/or make it as fun as possible to compensate for the disruption.

For the resident child, the routine and atmosphere of the only place they ever live can shift from day to day according to who is currently there. As can their relationship with their parent. Tom is here today, so dad isn’t going to play with them or do bedtime. He’s busy with Tom. Sarah and Joe are here this weekend so we’re going on a nice day trip. Next weekend they’re not here do dad will go to the gym twice, do some DIY and visit a friend. The highlight will be a trip to tesco with mum.

I’m not saying one set objectively has it worse. But maybe we could consider that the NR children are not poor victims vs those lucky R children whose life is great because dad sleeps in the same house as them every night.

It will be different on different circumstances but for many NR children they move between houses that have stable routines and atmospheres whenever they are there. Plus the adults are desperate to smooth the transition for them and/or make it as fun as possible to compensate for the disruption

For the resident child, the routine and atmosphere of the only place they ever live can shift from day to day according to who is currently there. As can their relationship with their parent. Tom is here today, so dad isn’t going to play with them or do bedtime. He’s busy with Tom. Sarah and Joe are here this weekend so we’re going on a nice day trip. Next weekend they’re not here do dad will go to the gym twice, do some DIY and visit a friend. The highlight will be a trip to tesco with mum

I actually think this is a good point. We are so often concerned about the change for DSC going between homes that it's very rarely acknowledged that it's also a change for RDC when their half siblings (or step siblings) are there and when they aren't.

Agree it's likely to be different in different circumstances, as with DSC, but it's a valid point I think.

And I don't agree with that, most exes do, at some point, get into another relationship, so the SCs have to adjust in two households.

That new relationship doesn’t necessarily or automatically include other children though. Many parents will make sure to avoid the additional children aspect.

Obviously some children will move between two homes and experience both constantly shifting atmospheres in mum’s house and EOW at dad’s. But not all.

I've often seen it too where people suggest DSC should still get to do fun one on one things with their bio parent (so the parent of both DSC and RDC) and not their half siblings.

Yet quite often it's seen as absolutely wrong for a half sibling to do something fun one on one with the parent they share with the DSC.

My dc were begrudged having a nice day out at the beach with me and my parents because it didn’t include dsc. But yet dsc was allowed to freely have a nice day out with their own mum (which dsc got loads of with mum)

This happens to me a lot and my kids aren’t even my SC’s siblings.

I had to work quite hard to get DH to see the point of n ot saving all nice things for when DSC were here.

If we ever wanted to do something spontaneous on a weekend where DSC weren't here it was lots of 'oh I feel bad, maybe I should ring their Mum and see if they can come, maybe we should wait until next weekend' etc...

Whilst I do understand, I had to point out that it comes across to DS that he just never wants to do anything fun with him and it's only okay when his brothers are here. I don't think that is fair. He deserves to have nice times even when they are with their Mum and yes, shock horror, that can include DH sometimes too.

It’s just weird, this focus on poor NR children. It doesn’t help anyone.

And so much of it is riddled with weird adults concerns that the children wouldn’t even think of (their other parent might though). All this crap about whether it’s a joint account and how much money each spouse pays into it in deciding if it’s fair for mum to buy something for just their child... Really? An 8 year old is going to see that this half siblings got a present from his or her mum and think, ‘hmm. But Annie is a SAHM. That means dad must have paid for it, so he’s didn’t more on Ella than me.’

It’s just ridiculous. It’s all about how you explain things to children. Sadly, you can’t stop a malicious or bitter other parent from encouraging them to see it in this weird way.

All the children in a blended family have needs and challenges. The NR children are not more special or disadvantaged. This means that equity in a particular family might look very different to another. And it might not be obvious to the external parties (exes, in-laws etc) why a particular decision is fair for that circumstance.

This happens to me a lot and my kids aren’t even my SC’s siblings.

But yet if you was a man I bet you’d be told how important it is to spend lots of quality one to one time with your children. But because you’re a woman you have to centre your life around your stepchildren instead. Funny that...

@funinthesun19 I know! The double standards are crazy!
Luckily it’s not my DP that feels I have to include his kids all the time, he fully supports me having a time doing nice things with my children alone.
It’s my SC’s mum that has the issue and then passes it on to his kids who then feel entitled to my time / and or money.

Luckily it’s not my DP that feels I have to include his kids all the time, he fully supports me having a time doing nice things with my children alone.
It’s my SC’s mum that has the issue and then passes it on to his kids who then feel entitled to my time / and or money.

I had the same problem! It wasn’t my ex who had the issue with it, it was his ex wife. And like you say, the entitlement then just passes on to the kids. There is just no need for the mum to indulge it if the child complains, especially because they know that they get time with their own mum.

The comments from people who were stepchildren also aren’t necessarily helpful because they probably didn’t and still don’t appreciate the full picture. Why would they?

For example, my dad moved in with my stepmum when I was 14. She lived in a one bedroom flat. There was no room for me. When I had contact, he’d drop my at my grandparents’ house and I’d stay there while he went home. I always thought this was shit and unfair and to some extent I blamed my stepmum. My mum certainly fuelled the ‘your dad doesn’t care about you’ feeling.

It’s only now, having experience of divorce that I have more understanding about what might have been happening. My parents divorced acrimoniously. They took 13 years to do it from splitting up. I was 25 when they finally got divorced. There was loads of bullshit about money and assets and everything else.

My stepmum owned her own flat. She let my dad move in. She wasn’t going to sell it and buy something different to house his child. Why should she? He couldn’t get a mortgage on his own because he was still on the mortgage of the marital home until I was 25. My stepmum wasn’t going to want to buy with him anyway while it could make her home and her equity into an asset to be fought over in my parents’ ridiculous divorce saga. Shortly after the divorce was finalised, they did buy a house together.

I didn’t know any of this as a teenager. Or even a young adult. Why would I? It was a much more complex situation than I could appreciate (or my mum wanted me to believe).

@LolaSmiles

TrustTheGeneGenie Anyone pulling the 'I'd like to hear what his ex says' card in relation to someone describing the share of domestic life in their household is just being an arse. I agree with you.

I've acknowledged there's some posters with entrenched positions where they will either defend the step parent (regardless of who is unreasonable) or defend the ex/mum (regardless of who is unreasonable), but too often those with entrenched positions will view anything other than their view as proof that MN hates step parents, or MN hates ex wives.

There's quite a lot of threads where I think the step mum has been unreasonable (lots where she is reasonable too btw), and it's really telling how quick some posters are to decide that any criticism or challenge to a step mum is because of bitter ex wives, step mum haters etc. It seems like they are so bogged down in their tribal lines that they refuse to consider that the NRP/step mum can still be unreasonable.

Or, a situation is posted where the NRD/step mum are being unreasonable, AND the ex is being a PITA, and some posters will refuse to consider that all the adults are being childish because "mumsnet hates step mums".

There are posters who pull that line out on every thread regardless. God forbid the ex doesn't work and nobody believes you.

There are a minority who will say sp are always right but I am certainly not one of them. I'm happy to call out bad behaviour and I'm honest but try and be helpful rather than just tell people I feel sorry for their children, because that helps nobody.

@funinthesun19

This happens to me a lot and my kids aren’t even my SC’s siblings.

But yet if you was a man I bet you’d be told how important it is to spend lots of quality one to one time with your children. But because you’re a woman you have to centre your life around your stepchildren instead. Funny that...

That is an incredibly good point.

Divorce/separation is considered an ACE (adverse childhood experience). However, many children have protective factors; loving parents, stable finances, able to remain in the family home and at the same school etc. I think it’s divorces where there are changes, upheaval and instability that causes the harm. Obviously children in homes with 2 parents are not immune to the bad things that happen in life like job loss, illness and disability etc. Step parents may know the story of the divorce but not actually the impact on the child. That said, having an extra PlayStation game for Christmas won’t level it out. We just make sure we show everyone they’re loved, valued and important as individuals, no matter their biological parents and how many homes they have.

I think this thread shows that the issue is finding the right balance. Be it financially it in terms of time and attention.

If either side us going to count every minute of the time the nrp spends with one child rather than the other, every pound spent, it's quickly going to be unbearable as much too stressful to ensure absolute equity.

The problem is each parent is going to care more about their own kids needs and from there, it's easy to get a disturbed perception of who gets more.

It should really be an issue when disparities are significant but again, differences in perception of what is fair and what isn't get in the way.

Let's not forget that many if not the majority of blended famies are very happy and bring up emotionally stable children with all the ups and downs that the cast majority of parents experience in the lifespan of childhood.

Because it’s shit being a step kid and there has to be some perks to it?
It’s a much better quality of life being the resident child. Yeah it’s unfair the resident kids get less presents but then they don’t have to constantly pack up their lives and move between 2 parents, 2 households, 2 sets of step parents and varying rules and expectations and the feeling of being ‘less than’ in both houses.

If you have parents that handle the split maturely and priotise the wellbeing of their DC, it isn't necessarily shit

Many of the difficulties a stepchild faces are caused by their own parents, either rushing into a new relationship before their kids have adjusted to the separation or just point scoring to look like the better parent.

I do agree that different rules are challenging, but are received better when they come from the bio parent, rather than SM/SD.

My dc were begrudged having a nice day out at the beach with me and my parents because it didn’t include dsc

Who begrudged it? As this is the kind of nonsense that would actually make me do even more with my DC in this situation.

Are you expected to watch paint dry in their absence.

I very much doubt that the SCs grandparents are expected to take your kids out.

My dc were begrudged having a nice day out at the beach with me and my parents because it didn’t include dsc

My DP wouldn't let me buy tickets just for him, me and DD..... to a party for toddlers.

He made me buy tickets for his older DC as it would be 'nice to take them'. The eldest is currently choosing his GCSE options and obviously was NOT impressed and did not go...

Who begrudged it? As this is the kind of nonsense that would actually make me do even more with my DC in this situation.

My ex’s ex wife 🙄 It’s not as if her child never got to go anywhere with anybody, otherwise I would have arranged it so that her child came with us. My ex’s family heavily favoured dsc and took them to many nice places and holidays (same father btw so not stepsiblings) but my children never got a look in. And dsc of course got to do lots of lovely things with their mum.

My children had a rare big day out with me their mum (At the time I didn’t have a car so the only time we got to go further afield was when someone took us) and my family and suddenly dsc was really hard done by. It really irritated me how the only way my children were allowed to enjoy anything was if consideration was given to dsc too, but never the other way around.

My ex in laws didn’t say anything about it thankfully. Not to me anyway. But ex’s ex wife was very angry about it. It’s like she enjoyed my children getting less and the day out came as a big shock to her. Ridiculous.