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.

I honestly think the only fair way to do wills is to leave yours to your DC. That way all children have 2 parents to inherit from, not one having 2 and the other 3 (potentially 4 if the other parent is in a relationship too).
I agree with then when it comes to blended families. Unless circumstances are unusually complicated, it's much easier to draw things up that from the new relationship woman's half goes to her children (ncluding any she has from the new relationship) and the man's half goes to his children (including any from the new relationship). This could mean that one parent's half is a 2 way split, and the other parent's is a 5 way split, but each parent is accounting for their own children in an equitable way. Each child inherits according to their mother and father's estate.

My SD would definitely had shared more with us if her BM had been more easy going. So by default my child has probably had more of their fathers time and attention and created more memories etc. Sometimes it was just too hard to include her as there were always stipulations, complaints. Looking back I think my husband should have been firmer with her at the beginning and this may not have happened. My answer was too just close down. Uniform not good enough? Ok fine I won’t buy any anymore. Caravan holiday to the IOW not good enough? Ok I won’t invite you on holiday anymore. Bedroom is my workplace and a part time bedroom for four nights a month. Not good enough, oh ok, don’t stay over then. So things have never been equal between them both but they have been fair, unfortunately the opportunities for my SD were thwarted by her mother. But if you asked Ex W she would obviously say the opposite. She’s 19 now and she sees how uneven it’s been but she has also realised why. We purchased her a car last year and again her Mother tried to sabotage it. A laptop the year before, sabotaged. She would rather her daughter went without then have something that is not too her liking.

@Mumbo1234

Again though, I don’t think it’s just about presents or holidays.

In society, children with separated parents are constantly considered with regards to how it affects them, making them feel secure, etc..

Very rarely do people look at or consider how the children born of the new relationship are feeling. How the coming and going of their half sibling could potentially confuse them, how sharing their parents and only home might make them feel, how different cultures each child is being brought up in can affect their relationship, etc.

It’s predominantly about the step child and their feelings

I agree with this.

What we see is some idea that this child should somehow just be grateful they live with both parents and nothing else matters.

What we see is some idea that this child should somehow just be grateful they live with both parents and nothing else matters.

And yet obviously, from a child's perspective, what they have is still "other" than the traditional nuclear family their friends at school have, which we are told to consider is very upsetting when applied to the SC.

It’s difficult to be fair and equal to children, even when they’re biologically yours. I accept there will always be unfairness but I try to ensure it’s balanced out unfairness if that makes sense? The younger ones still want to spend time with us so we spend money on the days out, whereas the older ones would rather some cash for shopping and meals out with friends. I feel guilty, I question myself saying ‘you give money and time to younger DC but only money to older DC’. Parenting isn’t easy. It isn’t always possible to be equal when you have children of various ages with different needs.

I hate how people use the line “Well your child’s parents are still together.” as way to justify them having a half life. Because apparently having your parents together is all a child could ever want.

It really annoys me when people think second children automatically have the better life because their parents are together. It’s such a black and white and down right insulting way to view things. My children definitely didn’t have a better life than their older sibling (I’m no longer with my ex) In fact my children were the ones living a half life because their parents were together. Their older sibling has always had a great life with their mum, which is of course fine. Which is why it used to irritate me when people thought this child was hard done by and was owed everything by everybody - including me.

So in my example, DSC get a console from their mum and a tablet from their Dad but our DC are only allowed a tablet so it's not 'unequal' in our house. Why would it be unfair if I, as my child's mother, also bought them a console? My DSC got one from their Mum so how is it unfair?

I see no problem if you as your child's mother buys them a console as well. I'd say it should be clear to all, that you bought it and it's not from mum and dad.

I suppose it also depends on how finances are within the household though....because if in your example you're not working, then whilst you may physically purchase the console, in reality, if you don't earn anything, then their dad has bought it.

So ultimately dad has spent a lot more on one child than the other.

What isn't it ok is when you make the main hissy of the year, somewhere fun and exotic without them for 2 weeks, and then just take the SCs on a caravan park locally for 4 days aimed at youngest and tell the SCs they are ungrateful when they say they are bored.

I agree with this. Having the younger half siblings going on about the great vacation in the Seychelles or Orlando and the SC are renting a patch of grass with a tent from the Army and Navy store is just sh*t.

The parent knows fully well their child (given the choice) would prefer the other holiday...unless they've specifically said otherwise.

My only caveat to this, is where the stepparent is funding the big holiday and either doesn't want to, or can't afford to pay for the SC. I wouldn't expect the younger DC to miss out on a great holiday, because dad can't afford it. That's not fair on them.

If I was the NRP, I'd feel guilty that my older kids were missing out and would only go myself, if I could go away with just them at a later date. It wouldn't have to be the same great type of location.

I see posts where the SM says we're not allowed to do xyz until SC comes over.

I don't understand why a mother would accept her child not doing any fun activities because their half sibling isn't there. If your DH doesn't want to come, he can't stay home by himself.
You'll just be doing what
SC is doing with their mum. Your child doesn't have to miss out on these experiences.

@JustLyra
I think on here people are often so entrenched on being on a “side” they don’t actually comment on the issue. Just their side of the DC/DSC debate.

Thank you. I've wanted to say this for a while.

Some particular posters are unable to be objective and immediately jump to a side. More often the SM. If any other opinion is given than that agreeing with the SM, it must be a 'bitter Ex wife' or the 'first wives club'

I also remember a post where the SC didn't get a Christmas present from his dad, when it was his year to have Christmas with his mum, because it would mean SC got 2 gifts (one from mum and one from dad) and the half siblings got 1. The SC only got a gift when he spent Christmas with dad, because otherwise, he got more than the DC, as mum got him a Christmas present every year.

**Some particular posters are unable to be objective and immediately jump to a side. More often the SM. If any other opinion is given than that agreeing with the SM, it must be a 'bitter Ex wife' or the 'first wives club'
I see this too but the opposite way round.

@Witchymclovely

**Some particular posters are unable to be objective and immediately jump to a side. More often the SM. If any other opinion is given than that agreeing with the SM, it must be a 'bitter Ex wife' or the 'first wives club' I see this too but the opposite way round.

I sometimes think it depends on the first few replies.

I actually think that about AIBU in general. If the first five or six replies are supportive of the OP the thread seems to go that way. Likewise if they get their arse handed to them on a plate, more and more people do the same.

It’s almost as guaranteed as the “Well, contrary to what most seem to think...” that goes on to post something that shitloads of people have already actually said post.

This board can be insane. So many assumptions which is what kills things and often the exw causing issues which impact the children, all the children.
Why would I go out of my way for someone abusive? I used to be very helpful, the day my son was born I nearly died and was in extensive surgery and she refused to have her own children and my mom had to look after them. She also refused to acknowledge my ds was her children's half brother and their family. I blocked her on everything after this and no longer do favours. It isn't the children's fault but it sours relationships.
Also this board is mostly full of the ez wives club. I posted a similar issue on money matters as it related to housing/savings, as on here and the opinions were 100% agreeing with one point of view that I m not to pay for the dsc or fund a bigger house as it was not in my or my dsc interests.
The post on here was full of aggression about how dare I and I should pay for them as 'I knew he had children'. It's depressing and sadly an unsupportive space for sm's

Typo should read my or my dc interest.

So many assumptions
Indeed there is...

Also this board is mostly full of the ez wives club

Mostly assumptions like that tbh

Speak as I find. Based on expirence and fact a lot start with I am. Not a stepparnet but.... Well then you don't know.

Some particular posters are unable to be objective and immediately jump to a side. More often the SM. If any other opinion is given than that agreeing with the SM, it must be a 'bitter Ex wife' or the 'first wives club'
I do see this, on both sides, but what I see more is when people comment based on the situation in front of them and then immediately get dismissed by either:
A) Posters who would clearly defend the step parent at all costs, usually talking about how Mumsnet hates step parents, and telling the OP they'll get no support simply for being a step mum.
B) Posters who clearly think that mum, as resident parent, is always a saint and would never do anything to be unreasonable ever because no women ever use their children as ammunition to score points.

Annoyingly in many circumstances, there seems to be an acceptance that the non-resident father can be as useless or uninvolved as he likes because the blame for his uselessness lies either with his ex or his new partner. The expectations on here for non-resident fathers is worryingly low at times. There's posters acting like men deserve a gold star for having their children for some of the school holidays, or having them for dinner, or buying school uniform. It makes me roll my eyes that some women think this makes their partner wonder-dad of the century.

That is true isn't it its the nrp, be that father or mother, who seems to get away with murder. Sad really.
But there is also a presumption that all men are incompenttnt ay the minimum and don't get involved, so you can't win really

It makes me roll my eyes that some women think this makes their partner wonder-dad of the century
I agree with a lot of what you’ve said but on the last point I have to add that a lot of the time when you read this its in response to the “a separated dad can never ever ever do or pay enough, he is always a bastard” crowd.
There are active threads right now which broadly state
A) 50/50 is unsettling, not in best interests of the child, he would be a prick to enforce this
B) EOW and dinner twice a week is pathetic, i couldn’t be with a man who does do little for his children.
Either way, if your got a decent man you are going to want to defend him so it does look as if you think he’s the best dad ever for taking the kids to swimming on a Saturday but really your saying “he’s not actually the devil, calm the fuck down”.

@LolaSmiles I agree with most of your comments. But we can still make assumptions about NRD?

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.
As a step kid i would have happily given up al my pressies for a normal life with my actual mum and dad. You always know that your step parents like you but don’t really love you and it’s hard growing up like that because you can never fully relax in either house. So yeah, if I got 2 Care Bears and my half sis only got 1 I knew it was compensation for having the lesser more complex life than she had.

@2021isalsorubbish The struggles of beings. Step child are well documented. You’ve just proved OPs point that often that’s to the exclusion of any difficulties encountered by younger half siblings in the blended set up, because they have both parents under one roof there are no negatives for them.

A) Posters who would clearly defend the step parent at all costs, usually talking about how Mumsnet hates step parents, and telling the OP they'll get no support simply for being a step mum
B) Posters who clearly think that mum, as resident parent, is always a saint and would never do anything to be unreasonable ever because no women ever use their children as ammunition to score points.

Yes I definitely see this. There are people who will defend no matter what.

I personally think there is more unreasonable-ness toward step parents here than from them, definitely in terms of what people expect from them in terms of both actions and feelings, but I think people see more of what they are sensitive to. I can name lots of threads that just seemed absolutely batshit to me.

Like the one where the SM apparently couldn't leave her own parents inheritance to her DC when her parents barely knew her step children and they were much older. Or the one where apparently OP was totally wrong to spend a (small) compensation she'd received to treat her child who was being bullied at school when her step children weren't even there without splitting it between all of them.

I do think some posters need to get over the fact that not all step parents will see DSC as or feel toward them, the same as their own kids. It's natural really. It's also natural to want to go out of your way to do or get nice things for, or spend time doing nice things with your own children more than others.

I personally cherish one on one time with my DC. Even without DH. I don't feel the devil incarnate because I actively enjoy spending time with my DC without my DSC there. I enjoy both but I don't always want to feel like I can't enjoy or buy X without also getting the same for DSC. Sometimes I just want my child to feel like they are special to me. Surely it's nice as a RDC to know that you are the most important thing to your Mum and can be spoilt a bit by her. It must be strange too to share your Mum with half siblings but knowing she isn't actually their Mum iyswim? I feel like I'd want to know that I was the most special thing to her.

Witchymclovely
Some NRD are great.
It was more when there's threads with people saying it's reasonable for a dad to see his kids more than a few days a month and they're met with but he's a brilliant dad! He always does everything for my kids (eye roll at the ready for dad who plays daddy to his new partner's kids whilst having little time for his own), or i feel I have to defend DP. He takes his kids swimming / to football on his weekends AND he goes to parents' evenings (like well done, grown adult does things most parents do on a few occasions, get the man a beer).

It reminds me of men who think they're husband of the century because they pick a hoover up once a week and other women are quick to point out how amazing it is to have a man who 'helps' around the house.

I digress, but I do think a lot of conflict regarding mums and step mums starts from an assumption that it's normal and reasonable to accept men doing very little.

@2021isalsorubbish

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. As a step kid i would have happily given up al my pressies for a normal life with my actual mum and dad. You always know that your step parents like you but don’t really love you and it’s hard growing up like that because you can never fully relax in either house. So yeah, if I got 2 Care Bears and my half sis only got 1 I knew it was compensation for having the lesser more complex life than she had.

So I totally see where you are coming from, I am a step child as I've said already. I do get the moving between two homes thing I did it myself.

But that's exactly my point you've said yourself it can be unfair on resident DC because the DSC need to be compensated all the time, which is what I was saying. And which I was saying no one ever considers.

I digress, but I do think a lot of conflict regarding mums and step mums starts from an assumption that it's normal and reasonable to accept men doing very little

Oh definitely agree with this.

I do also believe that a lot of the expectations on step mothers come from the fact that she is a woman and women are supposed to be just oh so loving and nurturing and just want to smother any child they see in love and care right?!

In reality even most women don't really care much for other people's children I imagine. Certainly not to the extent that they want to jump in a mother role the minute they meet because it's just 'what women do'.

I don't think its really as simple, when we're talking about children, to say 'well at least their parents are together' because children don't think like that.

I as a child may have looked at my school's friends for example and thought how lucky they were that their parents were together. They on the other hand may have looked at me and thought how lucky I was that I got two holidays, two Christmases, more days out, one on one time with each parent or whatever.

In addition to the fact, and more importantly really, that together doesn't always equal happy.

My parents divorced and remarried, my husband's stayed and are still together. I actually think he has far more issues than I do surrounding his upbringing precisely because his parents stayed together when they probably shouldn't have. It sounds like a not very nice household to grow up in. I, whilst yes I had to move between homes, at least no longer had to deal with my parents yelling and arguing all the time anymore or the tension that my husband grew up with.

So there are reasons why children may not (and adults too) may not agree that parents being together is always the huge bonus it's made out to be.

Obviously this is situation dependant, I understand that the 'ideal' is seen as two parents together who love each other and are happy but we don't usually see what goes on behind closed doors so it's too much of a blanket statement imo.