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 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?!
Of course being women they are also expected to simultaneously love and treat DSC as their own, whilst also having psychic abilities to 'be kind' by not implementing any boundaries that the mum might disagree with because the step mum should know her place.

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 agree, and then you contrast that with step dads, who are apparently the most perfect dad material because he does 'everything' for them, when I'd be willing to bet that doing everything means doing all the fun stuff so the kids like him, whilst mum continues doing the housework.

It's not hard to see how conflict arises when Dad is off with his new partner, her kids and their child, meanwhile his older children have to slot in
few days a month whenever it fits the new family. The step mum gets into a relationship where a NRD (typically) has limited involvement with his older children, and then finds herself upset and annoyed if people point out it's unreasonable to be annoyed about additional contact. The root of the situation is the dad not doing his fair share to start with, but it will too often get spun as mum vs step mum.

Slightly different viewpoint here.

I co parent with my ex and we coordinate to make sure the kids are not spoilt and don't get double because their parents are separated.

In that case it isn't an issue as they would get the same as resident DC.

But fairness isn't always about identical tit for tat. I agree. Your children have different lives and upbringings and experiences because of the situation however blended you are. Its about being loving and flexible and adapting. You sound as if you are all of these things!

@JustLyra

So many assumptions Indeed there is...

Also this board is mostly full of the ez wives club

Mostly assumptions like that tbh

It's not an assumption though it it.... It's entirely true.

@LolaSmiles

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.

But when you explain that they dont do very little at all, you just get sarcy comments like "that doesn't make him a saint" or "does he want a gold star"

You can't win.

Like op said, 50/50 isn't good, EOW is pathetic, but when you ask what is acceptable, nobody can give you an answer. I wonder why that is?

My H doesn’t pay half of school uniform, ah must be a “shit dad”.
He rarely had his daughter for holidays, a “neglectful dad”.
He didn’t attend parents evenings, “evil dad”.
Cue assumptions!

I agree with almost all of the last 10 posts or so.

What I find hard on this board in particular is that it assumes the SCs are damaged and that the poster’s children have their parents together and people base their views on that.

In my situation, and many others as I’ve seen recently, all the household children come from “broken homes” (I fucking hate that phrase) as they are all stepchildren.

However, much of the advice and general tone of the comments from the replies on here imply that somehow the NR stepchildren are more damaged / more deserving of special treatment than the R stepchildren. Oh they must be having a hard time, they must struggle with their dad living with other kids, they must be compensated for this etc.

It creates a weird divide that somehow the NR SCs feelings are more important than the children who predominantly live in the main home.

The advice on here always seems to focus on an old children / new children set up where they have one parent as a common denominator.

Yes, of course it’s a cunty thing to do to pick one of your own biological children over the other, to take some of your kids on an exotic holiday but exclude others.

However, my children are not my SCs half siblings, I am the only parent to them in this household. If I choose to take them on an exotic holiday and invite my partner I am not excluding my SCs, I am simply taking my own children on holiday.

My SCs go on holiday every year with their mum and her partner, my children do the same. It is at my expense, not joint account money and I alone save for it.

We also do a full family holiday with all the kids once a year, several little camping trips etc but I will not be guilted by either DP’s ex or my SCs into inviting them on my DC’s holiday.

This is where it is unfair. The view is because I live with their dad then everything I have or do with my own children should include them.

If I buy my kids new bikes, “why didn’t she buy SCs them too?”. If I take my family out for a meal (includes DP) on our non-contact time with SCs then I’m cruel and should have invited them.

It’s as if I’m not allowed to just be a normal mum to my children without DP’s ex being enraged about it, which is hypocritical because she does these things with her children.

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
The main difference is that the resident child will not know any different to that life. All of the above is their normality from birth.

What makes separation especially tough on children is the complete upheaval, changes to their normality and comfort, having to suddenly adjust to a new life.

Changes to your life that are not of your choice and that you have no control over is what is especially distressing for anyone.

It can therefore as hard for step siblings but not so much for the new children of the couple.

The main difference is that the resident child will not know any different to that life. All of the above is their normality from birth.
I see your point but SC whose parents split before they were even born seem to be included as “damaged by the split” as much as older kids, even though they have never known any different.

So I don't agree that there is anything wrong with step mother buying her own DC additional presents from herself
Absolutely, anum should feel she can treat her kids as she wants to.

Whether finances are joint or not is sort of irrelevant imo, children will likely not know
That's true too, but if joint, it's more dad knowing. Again, it comes to reason. If a small extra present that the resident child really wants is paid out of joint money, it's no big deal. If it's something significant that means that the SCs get small gifts so the big one can be afforded, it's not ok.

That's why even in joint finances, it's usually best for each to have an equal share of disposable income for them to spend as they wish.

TrustTheGeneGenie
There's a difference between pointing out that your partner does his fair share, is an active and involved dad, and defending a guy who is far from involved because he might take his kids swimming once a month.

Take step parenting out of it as that gets emotive.
There's a difference between:

1. DH is good round the house. It's nice to have a man who does his fair share.

And

1. But he isn't lazy, he mows the lawn and washes his car (after a half a dozen posts that show he doesn't pull his weight, thinks the housework should fall to his wife)

The first is totally reasonable, the second is someone choosing to defend a man who does very little as if a man lifting a finger is amazing.

People can, and do, organise their blended families in different ways and there isn't one size fits all, but NRD get a free pass to do much less than mums do.

The main difference is that the resident child will not know any different to that life. All of the above is their normality from birth

See I’d agree with this, except I’ve seen several times on this board where the SC is the product of a short-fling or the parents split before they were born and the poster has been vehemently told “Just because they never had the nuclear family set up, doesn’t mean they long for it”.

Same applies here.

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
That's very true. I never envied my friends whose parents were together.

@Youseethethingis we cross posted the same point I totally agree with you

@LolaSmiles

TrustTheGeneGenie There's a difference between pointing out that your partner does his fair share, is an active and involved dad, and defending a guy who is far from involved because he might take his kids swimming once a month.

Take step parenting out of it as that gets emotive.
There's a difference between:

1. DH is good round the house. It's nice to have a man who does his fair share.

And

1. But he isn't lazy, he mows the lawn and washes his car (after a half a dozen posts that show he doesn't pull his weight, thinks the housework should fall to his wife)

The first is totally reasonable, the second is someone choosing to defend a man who does very little as if a man lifting a finger is amazing.

People can, and do, organise their blended families in different ways and there isn't one size fits all, but NRD get a free pass to do much less than mums do.

So why do both get sarcy comments and criticized then?

@dontdisturbmenow

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 The main difference is that the resident child will not know any different to that life. All of the above is their normality from birth.

What makes separation especially tough on children is the complete upheaval, changes to their normality and comfort, having to suddenly adjust to a new life.

Changes to your life that are not of your choice and that you have no control over is what is especially distressing for anyone.

It can therefore as hard for step siblings but not so much for the new children of the couple.

My parents split when I was three. I don't remember any of it so it clearly cannot have been that distressing. Yes, more so for older children but some children aren't emotionally scarred like society makes us all think they are.

I see your point but SC whose parents split before they were even born seem to be included as “damaged by the split” as much as older kids, even though they have never known any different
It's not very common for this to be the case but when it is, it comes with other issues resulting from the fact that the parents hardly knew each other, and things were bad enough not to even give it a try. Had that in this instance, dad rarely gets the chance to bond properly as the baby is likely to spend much time with dad, with dad taking on routine tasks, instead often only able to see the baby in mum's presence, as said, it's not different to resident children from a change perspective, but us from a bonding one more often than not.

My parents split when I was three. I don't remember any of it so it clearly cannot have been that distressing. Yes, more so for older children but some children aren't emotionally scarred like society makes us all think they are
I agree. Not all SCs fare badly at at all. Even within the same family. In my case, one fared great, might even have chosen that set up if given the choice. The other was indifferent, certainly not affected. The youngest was though for a number of reasons.

So why do both get sarcy comments and criticized then?
People criticise men who pull their weight around the house and do a fair share of the childcare?
I've not seen that.
I've seen people rightly point out that it doesn't warrant a medal because so many people on here seem to think a man picking a cloth up is worthy of a celebration. I don't see why adults need congratulating for being functioning adults in a household and active parents.

Someone on here shared something a while ago and it really stuck with me. They essentially asked how often the women of this world get (or expect) lavish praise for getting on with housework and parenting. Then they asked how often we seem to hold men on a pedestal for doing anything. It was around that time that I changed my mind on men who 'help' around the home and 'help' with the children.

What makes separation especially tough on children is the complete upheaval, changes to their normality and comfort, having to suddenly adjust to a new life.

They may have known it from birth, but the shared child’s entire life is defined by upheaval. 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.

They might have a bedroom to themselves sometimes and have to share sometimes. The food and mealtime arrangements might shift in all sorts of ways to accommodate the incoming children and smooth their experience between homes. They may find themselves doing two sets of long car journeys for pick ups and drop offs (an hour or more each way). And so on.

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.

If you then consider that the arriving children often are treated as if they are disadvantaged and must be compensated. Suddenly dad is only interested in his other children and everything is geared towards them. It may be that all the fun is stored up for when they’re there, and there’s a sense that it’s not worth it or ok if it’s just the resident child. The rules and expectations for their half siblings might be radically different to those applied to them.

But, hey, their parents live together and that’s all that matters. Isn’t it?

And this is all they’ve ever known. Unlike the half siblings who very well may have had years of experience of a fairly standard nuclear family.

@LolaSmiles

So why do both get sarcy comments and criticized then? People criticise men who pull their weight around the house and do a fair share of the childcare? I've not seen that. I've seen people rightly point out that it doesn't warrant a medal because so many people on here seem to think a man picking a cloth up is worthy of a celebration. I don't see why adults need congratulating for being functioning adults in a household and active parents.

Someone on here shared something a while ago and it really stuck with me. They essentially asked how often the women of this world get (or expect) lavish praise for getting on with housework and parenting. Then they asked how often we seem to hold men on a pedestal for doing anything. It was around that time that I changed my mind on men who 'help' around the home and 'help' with the children.

Well I've been here a long time and I certainly have. Many, many times.

The thing is, people are usually defending their husband when they said he does xyz, they don't want a fucking medal, all they want is people on he thread to stop saying oh well he does nowt, he's lazy etc.

Nobody is asking for a celebration, and no one is not needed, but that is generally NOT why people bring up what their husband does.

You have to be defensive on this board, because the majority of posters just come here to say your husband's shit, I feel sorry for your kids and you're a terrible person.

Just recently I think step mother's including me have been much more vocal in calling out shitty behaviour but it hasn't made it stop.

My other half does not "help" me he just does his equal share and parents his kids, but if I explained that in defence of him for whatever reason, I'd get "does he want a medal doesn't make him a saint Id like to hear his exs side of the story"

The double standards are horrendous.

An nrp or stepmother is usually instantly disbelieved, ex wives can't be awful, they can't be psychos because that's a myth. But you on on the relationships board someone's saying their ex husband is a psycho, you don't see anyone question it and say well id like to hear what he's got to say, do you?

Which is to say: why don’t we stop automatically handing out gold medals in the sob story olympics to NR children, while declaring the resident children ineligible to compete entirely.

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".

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.

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.

Right... It’s not always a better quality of life being the resident child. Sometimes it’s bloody awful living with both parents. It was for my children who now just live with me.

Then in addition to the fact that living with both parents can be hard, they’re begrudged anything nice unless it includes the dsc or they’re begrudged ever having more of anything. My children usually ended up with more Easter eggs and Christmas presents in this household because of my side of the family and it’s the end of the world. But yet if you counted how much dsc got when you included their mum’s side of the family that’s all ok.

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).
I once saw a comment on these boards that a boy was begrudged a hair cut that he really needed, because dsc wasn’t there and could have gone along with them to have his hair cut too.
Resident children are begrudged going on a swan boat and living in the moment because dsc aren’t there. (Another comment I saw on here)

Everything always centres around non resident children, to the point where it really does disadvantage non resident children. They can’t even have a hair cut ffs.

disadvantages RESIDENT children