My DC will always be my priority

[MarkUp]

Does anyone else read things on here sometimes and feel like SPs are expected to prioritise their DSC over their own DC?

I feel it from my own husband sometimes too.

But I refuse. My DC will always, always be my priority, yes I love them more, yes I care more, and yes I want to treat them more.

I will take them on holiday if I can afford to whether or not DH can afford to take his DC. I'll not make them save all fun and days out for when their half siblings are here. I will not reduce any inheritance they receive so it can be split 'equally'. I will not tell my parents they can't buy more presents at Christmas and birthdays for their own grandchild. I will not stop treating them to nice things if I want to just because I can't afford 3 lots of it.

MarkUp I think that's fair, and dad can split his assets however he wants. Just need to make sure Will is drawn up clearly and I don't see why anyone would have an issue with it.

@ThatIsMyPotato

MarkUp I think that's fair, and dad can split his assets however he wants. Just need to make sure Will is drawn up clearly and I don't see why anyone would have an issue with it.

People do though amazingly.

You usually get 'its irrelevant what DSCs Mum plans to leave to them' and yet the same doesn't apply to what I intend to leave to my DC. Imo the only thing that should be relevant is what DH, the Dad to all children, plans to leave to anyone.

DSCs Mum could leave them a million quid or five quid, I've no idea, it's not my concern.

Really? To be it just makes sense. I mean if I'm ever in the position to pass on millions I will probably give them something just to help them out a bit but as that's unlikely I work for my DC's future only. I already pay for half the mortgage on a bigger house so they can have their own room so that is my financial contribution.

The contribution towards the larger family home is always overlooked, but they do benefit from SP’s contribution in that sense.

I don't think there is anything wrong in what you've said OP. I am an SM although don't have any children of my own yet, but I would not be OK with never doing anything with my children when my SCs aren't around, especially as they are not around most of the time.

I mean, I wouldn't take my child to Disneyland or something major like that without inviting SCs, but everything else is fair game as far as I'm concerned. I completely agree that SCs get experiences with their mum's side that our child won't share and it's just tough - my SCs will likely always get 'better' trips etc on that side as their mum only has 2 children, plus gets a lot of financial help from her own parents.

You forgot that they should simply be eternally grateful that daddy lives with them all the time. That means they don't need day trips, or treats, or even their own bedroom (they can just stare with their parents).

There is so much to be said for this ^^. I do feel like on here people expect younger children to settle for so much less just because their parents are together - but children don't think like that and it's really not fair at all.

The priority can't always be protecting SC from having any feelings at all about the fact that their younger sibling lives with their dad full-time and they don't - and what's worse is that it's absolutely OK and natural for them to have those feelings (if they do). It should be acknowledged and talked about with them, instead of everyone trying to tiptoe around something that is just a fact and the SCs themselves are well aware of.

Yes if we were talking millions I'm sure I would, although still not equally, but unfortunately we're not 🤣

@ThatIsMyPotato "I don't have the means."

sure. so if you have no means, and the DH is also not willing also to pay for DC, you and SC to have that experience together, thats a perfectly reasonable outcome then...i would just try to avoid talking about it next to the sc.

@MarkUp
"My Mum likes to do days out with my DC so say if she wanted to take my DC to Peppa Pig World, I wouldn't stop her just because I know DSC would like it too."

i'd agree with this too. assuming your mum doesnt have a relation with your SC, just like the mum of SC not having a relation with your DC. so why would she consider having SC out with them.

I actually do think it's important for DC to know that they are 'favoured' by their own parents in some ways too.

I'm thinking back to me as a step child, would I have been happy with my Mum always treating me the same as her husband's children? Never being made to feel special to her or 'more important' to her? No I don't think I would have.

I want my DC to know they are the most important thing to me, I think that's good for them personally.

@MarkUp

I actually do think it's important for DC to know that they are 'favoured' by their own parents in some ways too.

I'm thinking back to me as a step child, would I have been happy with my Mum always treating me the same as her husband's children? Never being made to feel special to her or 'more important' to her? No I don't think I would have.

I want my DC to know they are the most important thing to me, I think that's good for them personally.

I think the important thing for me is that there is no 'direct' obvious favouritism in front of the SCs, but that bio children don't lose out on things SCs do get to enjoy with their own mum in order to achieve this.

Obviously we will spend more time with our own children, and likely have far more intimate relationships with them, we will share more with them and have more special, one-on-one time with them. I think our children would hopefully understand then that they are special and so important to us, but also appreciate that things will be fair when their half/step-siblings are around.

I actually think children process it all perfectly well - they understand who is parent to who and why certain people may do things together without them. It's when the adults start putting their own feelings of insecurity and beliefs about equality onto it that it causes issues.

I'm thinking back to me as a step child, would I have been happy with my Mum always treating me the same as her husband's children? Never being made to feel special to her or 'more important' to her? No I don't think I would have
That's interesting you should say that as a step child. I've often thought this but never quite known how to word it. It's definitely something that always seems to be overlooked.

That's interesting you should say that as a step child. I've often thought this but never quite known how to word it. It's definitely something that always seems to be overlooked.

It also goes back to my point about dads being told to spend as much time with just their children over their stepchildren. Because, the focus is on his child’s feelings. They need to know they are special to him and more important to him, and that’s right!

As soon as it’s the stepmum, all of a sudden her child’s feelings become secondary and it’s all about inclusion of the stepchildren because their feelings obviously matter more. Her children should be making lots of compromises and never have the feeling that they are indeed more important to their mum than the stepchildren are.

funinthesun19 you've summed it up perfectly in my opinion. My child deserves to be the centre of my world.

@funinthesun19

That's interesting you should say that as a step child. I've often thought this but never quite known how to word it. It's definitely something that always seems to be overlooked.

It also goes back to my point about dads being told to spend as much time with just their children over their stepchildren. Because, the focus is on his child’s feelings. They need to know they are special to him and more important to him, and that’s right!

As soon as it’s the stepmum, all of a sudden her child’s feelings become secondary and it’s all about inclusion of the stepchildren because their feelings obviously matter more. Her children should be making lots of compromises and never have the feeling that they are indeed more important to their mum than the stepchildren are.

God that's so true.

I just can't get on board with purposely hurting one child (or set of children's) feelings in order to boost the feelings of the other set. How come it's OK for dad to blatantly exclude his younger children in front of their eyes so that the older ones feel important, even though they are all his children, but not OK for an SM to do things with her own children (and their dad) when the SCs aren't even around to see it and the SCs have their own mum that they do things with?

How come it's OK for dad to blatantly exclude his younger children in front of their eyes so that the older ones feel important, even though they are all his children, but not OK for an SM to do things with her own children (and their dad) when the SCs aren't even around to see it and the SCs have their own mum that they do things with?

This is such a good point. Just shows that it’s always all one way.

I mean, if the dad has no younger children and just has stepchildren then of course he can spend as much time with his children as he wants and I doubt anyone would begrudge him that, but when he is father to all of the children then it’s not as simple as leaving his younger children out in favour of the older ones, but yet that’s what is encouraged time and time again on here!
Then you get a stepmum who is obviously only mum to some of the children. But yet she has to include all of them whereas the dad doesn’t. How does that work?! And I bet if she has children from a previous relationship and no younger ones, she still has to include the stepchildren.

Like I said, all one way all the time. And always in favour of the DAD’s children from his FIRST marriage. The children who the stepmum is mum to always have to come out at the bottom for it to be fair.

@janeapple111

I also know of another case. A woman had two children of her own, and married a man with three children of his own. His wife had died.

The woman did not like his children, and would only bring her own children on days out. She would leave the other three children at home on their own.

One of these three children told me this, when he had grown up into an adult. It made me cry.He said that the stepmother was so cold to them He said that the three children would cry at home when they were left behind. he said that it severely ruined his self esteem. All three of those children had very bad lives, when they grew up.

If you are not going to care for your partner's children, do not get with a man with children!Think about how you are damaging those children!

That's different though (and sounds awful ).

@Fondizone

"Why should I subsidise SC's Peppa Pig experiences when she might be going to Diggerland with her mum the next week."

To me this feels unbelievably prescriptive and financially oriented answer that lacks empathy and love towards the SC. As i said if you did love your SC you wouldnt be thinking about "subsidising". Unless you have severe cash constraints. Then sure. But if you have the means, I dont understand why excluding the SC. I can imagine it would hurt her feelings.

You keep going on about empathy and (equal) love to SC.

Thing is, you are assuming that tiptoeing around the SC is the only way to deal with the practical realities of their life. It's perfectly possible to be very honest about the situation and have them understand that things go on when they're with their mum/other children get to do fun things with their mum too.

They don't need to feel they're equally loved by everyone in the house. It's fine for them to know that their parents love them more than anyone else. In fact, it's sensible for them to know this. Because out there in the world, no one is going to love them like their parents and they shouldn't expect other adults to.

If dad can't (or won't) afford a trip to peppa pig world, then that's life. No one would see any issue with their mum taking them to peppa pig world. Nor would they ask them to keep that quiet from their half or stepsibling.

I always wonder at why love is reduced to trips and toys and other material things so often on MN stepparenting. It seems that DSC are somehow different to other children in that they can only see themselves as loved and valuable if it's expressed through holidays or bedrooms or the volume of toys at Christmas.

One of these three children told me this, when he had grown up into an adult. It made me cry.He said that the stepmother was so cold to them He said that the three children would cry at home when they were left behind. he said that it severely ruined his self esteem. All three of those children had very bad lives, when they grew up.

But why was it the stepmum's job to take the children out. Where was their father? What was he doing? Why do they remember it as their terrible stepmum and not their useless father?

There may have been all sorts of reasons that the stepmum took her children out. The fact the father just let them sit alone and cry is the issue. It doesn't sound like anyone prevented him from taking his children out or doing something with them.

"I'm thinking back to me as a step child, would I have been happy with my Mum always treating me the same as her husband's children? Never being made to feel special to her or 'more important' to her? No I don't think I would have"

i guess this depends on the setting, right? If the SC is living with their parent, and actually has a nice parent, or if SC is living with the SM then i can imagine it creating all sorts of emotional issues.

@funinthesun19

How come it's OK for dad to blatantly exclude his younger children in front of their eyes so that the older ones feel important, even though they are all his children, but not OK for an SM to do things with her own children (and their dad) when the SCs aren't even around to see it and the SCs have their own mum that they do things with?

This is such a good point. Just shows that it’s always all one way.

I mean, if the dad has no younger children and just has stepchildren then of course he can spend as much time with his children as he wants and I doubt anyone would begrudge him that, but when he is father to all of the children then it’s not as simple as leaving his younger children out in favour of the older ones, but yet that’s what is encouraged time and time again on here!
Then you get a stepmum who is obviously only mum to some of the children. But yet she has to include all of them whereas the dad doesn’t. How does that work?! And I bet if she has children from a previous relationship and no younger ones, she still has to include the stepchildren.

Like I said, all one way all the time. And always in favour of the DAD’s children from his FIRST marriage. The children who the stepmum is mum to always have to come out at the bottom for it to be fair.

Very true.

I think a lot of it is based on who spends more time with who, so SCs often get less time with their dad than resident children so emphasis is placed on them getting one-on-one time. Which logically I can see, but equally this doesn't help when you've got little ones sitting at home upset that they're not allowed to join in with their brothers/sisters on a day out with their dad.

And I also feel for children in situations where the man is the only father figure they have and even they are told (on here) that they should be left out in order for his bio children to know they're more important, just because this child happens to live there with his mum.

Don't get me wrong, I think all children should get to spend time with their parents, but not when it's almost showboated on purpose in the face of another child who it has the potential to hurt. Naturally there are times when older kids would want to do things that younger children wouldn't enjoy/it wouldn't be suitable for them, and that should be when the opportunity is seized to spend time with individual children separately.

Seems like on here it's all about "you're one family, treat them all the same, as your own" except when it comes to dads being encouraged and applauded for doing things with their older kids at the exclusion of the younger.

need to think about your other points @FishyFriday but a reply to this one

"I always wonder at why love is reduced to trips and toys and other material things so often on MN stepparenting. It seems that DSC are somehow different to other children in that they can only see themselves as loved and valuable if it's expressed through holidays or bedrooms or the volume of toys at Christmas."

that is definitely not my point, the peppa thing was just a good contextual example. of course love does not equal to any of those things, which are just sometimes in some contexts a tiny, temporary expression of of it. but it entails care, kindness, emotional expression and a whole host of other things i cannot put to words. and children do feel whether it exists or not regardless of the materialistic side of things...

@Fondizone

"I'm thinking back to me as a step child, would I have been happy with my Mum always treating me the same as her husband's children? Never being made to feel special to her or 'more important' to her? No I don't think I would have"

i guess this depends on the setting, right? If the SC is living with their parent, and actually has a nice parent, or if SC is living with the SM then i can imagine it creating all sorts of emotional issues.

But generally the SC is with their parent when their sleeping in the same house as the SM.

Why on Earth should it be some big secret that Julie loves her children the most in the world. Just like mummy and daddy love the SC the most in the world?

I suspect trying to pretend otherwise is more likely to create emotional issues.

No one is being horrible to the SC. They just don't have to (pretend to) love them in the way they do their own DC.

And no one expects the SC to love the SM like their parents either. It's all totally fine. Everyone can have a totally functional relationship without having to behave in a parent-child way.

@FishyFriday
I think that’s a risky strategy and really depends on the child’s age, personality, etc

I’ve been in DSC life since they were very, very young. I love them to bits!

That said, our relationship is ever evolving as they get older. SC and mum are very, very close which is lovely and she knows I love her but I can tell she doesn’t quite get how I fit into the picture.

I think nurseries, schools, etc can help more in educating children in different family dynamics. SC has never had parents together yet all role play is still “mummy and daddy”. I try and encourage another dialogue but I feel it’s a bit pointed and blunt when I do it, like people will think it’s me trying to fit in

@Fondizone

need to think about your other points *@FishyFriday* but a reply to this one

"I always wonder at why love is reduced to trips and toys and other material things so often on MN stepparenting. It seems that DSC are somehow different to other children in that they can only see themselves as loved and valuable if it's expressed through holidays or bedrooms or the volume of toys at Christmas."

that is definitely not my point, the peppa thing was just a good contextual example. of course love does not equal to any of those things, which are just sometimes in some contexts a tiny, temporary expression of of it. but it entails care, kindness, emotional expression and a whole host of other things i cannot put to words. and children do feel whether it exists or not regardless of the materialistic side of things...

I do think you have a point Fondizone, I can see why it may hurt feelings if the SCs feel they haven't been considered, or worse that things have especially been planned to happen without them.

My argument though would be that when children have separated parents and therefore split their time between two households, there has to be some element of acceptance of that situation from all sides. It does come with practical and logistical differences that should be openly spoken about - for example, the fact that just as SCs continue doing things with their mum & family when they're not with their dad, their dad & family continue to do things when they are not around too. Most children over the age of about 7 can understand and rationalise things if they are properly explained to them, it doesn't need to be this big thing that everyone tries to hide and protect them from processing, as if the world stops turning until they come back again.

I especially don't think it's fair to make younger children whose parents have not split up live like they have by rationing nice things out to every other weekend (or whenever) just so the SCs don't feel like they are missing out. Especially if dad is then going to leave them out of things during that time as well in favour of doing things with the older children so they feel more important.

I feel like all of this is just passing the less pleasant bits of having separated parents from the older kids to the younger, even though the younger children aren't even in that situation at all.

I think nurseries, schools, etc can help more in educating children in different family dynamics. SC has never had parents together yet all role play is still “mummy and daddy”. I try and encourage another dialogue but I feel it’s a bit pointed and blunt when I do it, like people will think it’s me trying to fit in

I 100% agree with this. Loads of children will be living in all kinds of dynamics nowadays, but it still seems to be brushed under the carpet in favour of 'mum & dad' images. It would be nice if (nice!! not wicked) SPs were included as part of discussions/plays/storytelling etc to get children a little bit more familiar with the other shapes families can come in.

Although I'm sure some people are of the opinion 'DSC don't ever get to go out with both their parents' although imo, whilst maybe sad (I never really thought about it tbh), it doesn't mean another child should never be able to.

I agree with your latter point. In fact, I agree with many of the conclusions you've come to about step-parenting. But it's will that you've never even thought about the fact that your step-children won't get to go places with their family all together.

It's basic empathy, which is lacking overall in all of your posts. I don't think anyone is saying that you should love your step-children the same amount that you love your own. But the remarkable defensiveness of your replies has been so stark, and you sound like you deeply resent the fact that you have to think about your step-children when thinking about things like holidays, etc.