It is all very hard. Sitting down and making a log is a good idea. Because he is not a good enough NRP.
Luckily the baby is still breastfed and often cosleeps. His father has never done any night feeds etc. I'm not sure he's ever actually made him a meal. If he has, it's been once or twice in the baby's entire life. He's settled him to sleep in the evening once (in nearly a year) and for a nap once. There's always an excuse why I should get up for the baby. If it's not him having work the next day, it's that he's sore or exhausted, or he's got something else to do (a big day trip with the SC) and needs his rest. There's literally always something.
And then there's the not looking after a baby at 5am. Coupled with his absolute insistence that my DS should walk to the pool on his own at 5am. It's not far and it's light. I'm 'pandering to' and 'babying' an 11 year old by taking him. Or the regular insistence that he can't take the baby with him when he walks to the shops to buy something he wants for breakfast. It'd take 30s to put him in the buggy at most. But that's too much to expect from him. He's got work that day, after all.
We are not talking about a good record of basic parenting here.
He's being normal at the moment. After getting an argument where he told me I was controlling and wrong and such like, he clearly decided he'd gotten what he wanted and decided to be normal. However the SC are being dropped off at about 6 today, so all bets are off. He wants to watch both football matches so I'm sure he'll be imagining himself a poor martyred man because I will not be looking after them and putting them to bed so he can watch football.
If he doesn't want to spend time with them and put them to bed, he should tell his ex that he's not having them til the morning. She'd hate it because she'll want her first Friday night off in a month. But the point of contact is for the SC to spend time with their father. Them just being in the same house doesn't count.
Of course, he claims that it's all terrible for him because I won't just 'do things all together'. What that means is I won't do all the work and try to manage their behaviour (not that I'm allowed to because anything I do is 'too harsh') while he's in the same room ignoring them and/or complaining that they are noisy etc. It's bad enough him doing that when it's just the baby (Fishy. Stop him messing with my amp. I'm trying to play guitar. Stop him messing with the sound bar. I'm trying to watch the football. Why is he so noisy?) but I'm not doing it with the SC under any circumstances.
I'm particularly fed up with the accusations that I'm being controlling because he can't just do what he wants with his children. But I'm not trying to control him. I'm putting boundaries in place for myself and my children and that means he can't just do what he likes with no consideration for the effects on everyone else. The fact is he needs to consider how his choices affect the household as a whole.
It's not controlling to say I won't cook for his children who don't eat what I make (and then their father gets annoyed with me rather than them). It's not controlling to tell him that he needs to organise his cooking for them around the schedule for everyone else in the house. He knows when I will be cooking and what time dinner will be. I'm accommodating him by doing that at a consistent time. His choices about his children mean they eat different food separately from everyone else (because them being at the table behaving as he allows them is actually harmful to the other members of the household in various different ways). It's not controlling to tell him that he'll need to work around the rest of the household.
We have a big kitchen, but the actual cooking area is not big enough for two people to cook two separate meals at the same time. Especially not when he's using 3 burners of the hob, the oven and the microwave. His children's noisy pissing about, attention seeking and complaining about food is distracting to the baby if they're eating at their table at the same time. So obviously he should consider the effects of his choices and recognise that he needs to cook earlier and feed them so they're finished before everyone else's meal time. That's just recognising consequences and being considerate. Am I supposed to wait til 7pm to start cooking dinner for the baby because he doesn't want to feed his children at 5.30 (incidentally the time they eat at their mum's house)? And just let the baby get more and more upset and hungry because his father's wants in relation to himself and his other children are more important than everyone else?
Nor is it controlling to be angry at him because he's taking the SC out to theme parks (and rewarding them for consistent poor behaviour so obviously they have no incentive to change anything) while everyone else stays at home and does nothing. He needs to consider the impact of his choices on everyone else. It's unfair to my DS who absolutely knows that the SC are being spoiled despite continual behaviour that disrupts the entire household and we have to find ways to manage the impact on the other kids. It's unfair to the baby who misses out. I don't care that my husband doesn't want to do nothing exciting all weekend. Nor do I care that he wants to be able to treat his children. He needs to think beyond his wants and recognise that taking the SC for treats all the time is negatively affecting the whole household and is encouraging their behaviour.
We can't all go because of his unwillingness to parent the SC so that their behaviour is good enough for everyone to be around them. And also because of his unwillingness to make sure the day is not just geared around the SC with the rest of us simply acting as props to enable their fun.
I'm not telling him what he can and can't do with his children. I'm telling him that he needs to consider how what he does with them affects everyone else. And that I am extremely angry about the unfairnesses to my children (and me) and the fact that nothing will ever change because he is too selfish and lazy to do what he needs to. He can be lazy and selfish and not parent his kids in any meaningful way but he has a responsibility to balance his wants with the needs of everyone else.
Instead he sits there and thinks: Poor me. I work so hard all week. And it's so stressful. I just want to enjoy my weekend and do things I think are fun. I want to spoil my older children because that makes me feel better about being an NRP. Fishy is so mean and controlling. Why won't she just come to the theme park and look after my children so I can go on rides, or look after my son so I can take my daughter on rides I think look more fun than the little kid ones?
How dare she be angry at me for taking them to the theme park anyway while she sat at home with her son and the baby? It's not my fault that she's got not access to money because she's on maternity leave and not earning anything. I'm just doing what she said in keeping all my money to myself. It is my money after all. I make sure there's enough in the joint account to just cover the bills. She should be grateful for that.
Of course I resent her spending any money on her son. The maintenance she receives for him should go on her share of the bills. It would be ridiculous for her to claim child benefit too because that just gets taken out of my salary by HMRC. It's not fair. That's just taking my money from me.
She's so 'separatist' about everything. Life would be much better and easier if she would just cook meals for everyone all at once and do everything together. If she wants the kids to behave better, she needs to help me with it.
But equally she needs to understand that I hardly see my children and I want them to be happy. She needs to stop being horrible to them. It makes them feel sad if they're told off. She should just be more tolerant. It's just a bit of fussy eating. Sure SD ate the macaroni cheese last night when she thought I'd made it. But it was ever so slightly crispier on top after reheating so it's not really being naughty for her to utterly refuse to eat it after verifying that Fishy actually made it. It's not SD's fault she has a dietary requirement that meant that fishy had to cook a separate macaroni cheese for her. And of course I don't want the free from version myself. I work hard and pay for everything. Why shouldn't there be two versions?
If they aren't happy at every moment and it's not fun enough, then the SC might decide they don't want to come here any more. I think they don't really like coming here because they know Fishy isn't happy about their behaviour. That's abusive to them. They should always be happy, even if they've been naughty again and again.
And so on.
Also deeply annoying is that he's used his therapy session with the counsellor to pull over some psychology speak to use against me. I'm choosing how I react to things and I shouldn't have such extreme reactions. It's just a bit of noise and a bit of fussy eating. I need to get over myself and just do everything together/for them.
Except he doesn't realise that my individual session with the counsellor involved me explaining why I'm so angry with him and many of the awful things he's done. And her doing that trying to remain neutral thing, but having to check that he isn't violent and so on. He is always accusing me of being abusive towards him and his children, but I'm trying to hold on to important boundaries so that my children and I can try to not be harmed by the hostile situation he creates. Keeping as far away from his children as possible and minimising any interaction with them is not being abusive and excluding them. It's me trying to avoid the whole situation so I can leave him to it. His response to ramp up the Disney dad treats etc (while playing the martyr who has to take his poor children out of the house because evil old Fishy doesn't like their behaviour) is clearly part of being nasty to me. He's dressing it up as all sorts of things. But he is punishing me for objecting to football in the house, or nasty behaviour to each other, or a million awful behaviours around food by rewarding them with treats.
Threatening divorce won't work. He does it regularly (including yesterday) and adds an implied or overt threat that it'll be worse for me because then he'll just do whatever he likes with the baby. But apparently it's not a threat. I'm just childish for asking 'what is it then? A promise?'