Going on holiday

[LuckyGrace]

We can never afford to go away during the school holidays all of us together. We have one DC under school age and my husband has 2 older DC.

Are we unreasonable to go away when DSC are away with their mother? The past few years we have done this, when we know when DSC go away, we will book something for the same week so contact isn't affected.

There are plenty of things that could be done with three children just as easily as one given the OP says they go away when the other DC do so school holidays. They could camp, holiday cottage, caravan etc. No need for it to be abroad or somewhere expensive. Those with three children go away without leaving some at home.

@vivainsomnia Or back to the youngest being prioritise year on year. What happens if the stepchildren mum takes them every year and dad can never afford a holiday for all. Does it mean the youngest gets to benefit from a holiday with his dad every year and the elder never again? Even when they might never have before (if they were too yung to even remember).

What like the eldest gets with their mum because she also foots them bill ?

If dad can't afford it it doesn't mean the SM is obligated to fill the financial hole (which many do and seemed to get hated on here 😵‍💫)

The problem lies with the dad not providing to the same standard financially or otherwise to all the kids. The mum doesn't have to foot the bill for any of them, but if she's footing the bill for DH to go on holiday that's her choice if she doesn't want to have to pretend she's single because she isn't. The SM finances are pretty moot point.

Ironically this debate his happening and it's two sides of the same coin 🥴

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

There are plenty of things that could be done with three children just as easily as one given the OP says they go away when the other DC do so school holidays. They could camp, holiday cottage, caravan etc. No need for it to be abroad or somewhere expensive. Those with three children go away without leaving some at home.

You're assuming the holiday isn't already camping/caravan etc.

Or back to the youngest being prioritise year on year. What happens if the stepchildren mum takes them every year and dad can never afford a holiday for all
You really don't see that having one child go without for three years so the the others can have double on the third is unfair?
The current arrangement prioritises reaching a compromise that is far from perfect, and not what anyone would say is ideal, but at least allows all the kids as close to the ideal as possible.
As PPs have said, the ideal for the elder children left the building when their parents relationship failed for whatever reason. Possibly failed before that if they had been unhappy for a long time.
Everything after that is a compromise.
What happens when the SM takes her kids away every year? What happens is that they get a holiday with mum, just like the other kids. Difference is reasons:- if dad doesn't go with one set because the others would get jealous - in my view that's a far less acceptable reason than the simple fact that he's split up with the mother of the other set.

I would ensure my DC got a holiday with me. I wouldn’t deny that time/ memories with them simply because it becomes about everyone going. When mine were younger I took my youngest away (outside if school holidays) for something they enjoyed. Family looked after the older ones who were told that if it became something we took everyone too, the prices would rocket. No one batted an eyelid. Children remain perfectly stable psychologically.

Anything could happen in 3 years that means the holiday with all the kids never happens. Best to do what you can when you can.

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

There are plenty of things that could be done with three children just as easily as one given the OP says they go away when the other DC do so school holidays. They could camp, holiday cottage, caravan etc. No need for it to be abroad or somewhere expensive. Those with three children go away without leaving some at home.

Not really though, if the issue is money? A lot of people hate camping and wouldn't consider it a holiday at all, especially with a toddler. Holiday cottages are expensive and even caravans come in at several hundred pounds before you've even factored in spending money. If you genuinely can't afford that it leaves you with little choice. Pre-COVID myself, DP and 2 SCs stayed in a caravan in Clacton, of all places, and it cost £400 just for the caravan for 3 nights.

Also intact families who have three children obviously have to go away with all three, they have no other options unless they want to try and leave all 3 with grandparents or whoever. They likely wouldn't have the option of the 2 eldest being away on another holiday so they could grab the chance to pay for just one.

@LittleMysSister have you read my post. When my family was intact I did exactly that. Numerous times.

[quote sassbott]@LittleMysSister have you read my post. When my family was intact I did exactly that. Numerous times.[/quote]
Not saying it's wrong! Just that for most it wouldn't be an option.

My mum and dad would not have been able to take either myself or my sister away without the other because there was nowhere to leave me/her for a week or more.

Just saying that it's a different scenario for children with separated parents as they would just be with their other parent, and in this case, on holiday with their other parent.

Totally agree that it doesn't damage children when properly explained and understood though.

Also we are similar ages so what suited one generally suited the other during our childhood. I can imagine that is very different if you've got one pre-schooler and 2 10+ children who don't really enjoy anything the same and means you and your husband have to spend the whole time separately doing things with one or the other set of children.

As the elder half sibling, I have zero relationship with my father due to him always prioritising our half siblings to appease our step mother, instead of thinking of all his children as one. We never got holidays with him, but we're expected to view their photos on the walls of him making wonderful memories with his new family.
What they do with their mum is irrelevant to their relationship with their dad.

@peboh

As the elder half sibling, I have zero relationship with my father due to him always prioritising our half siblings to appease our step mother, instead of thinking of all his children as one. We never got holidays with him, but we're expected to view their photos on the walls of him making wonderful memories with his new family. What they do with their mum is irrelevant to their relationship with their dad.

Peboh, I'm sad for you, but you need to develop some resilience. It's a hard world out there, and holidays are a privilege for those with money. When I was a child, there were much more brutal choices to be made than who got taken on a holiday - there wasn't enough food, for starters.

@SpaceshiptoMars was that comment really needed?
Of course someone is entitled to be upset by their DP favouring his other DCs in such a blatant way. Things like that can cut very deeply.

Everything after that is a compromise Elder kids expected to compromise because their parents separated, and that's that. No younger children have to compromise because their dad already have older children, so that's that though!

Totally agree that it doesn't damage children when properly explained and understood though If only that was true. Sadly it isn't. Kids do get upset and emotionally affected by the decision their parents made, however explained and understood they are. Ultimately, once again, doesn't it apply to the younger children? Can they be explained that due to money, it's not possible to take everyone on holiday every year, so they will only go every other year so all can come? Surely if you believe that kids don't get damage as long as things re explained to them, younger kids won't be affected by having less total holidays then their siblings?

Peboh, I'm sad for you, but you need to develop some resilience. It's a hard world out there, and holidays are a privilege for those with money. When I was a child, there were much more brutal choices to be made than who got taken on a holiday - there wasn't enough food, for starters
And here we go once again, elder kids expected to build resilience and accept things so that the youngest ones get to have a good life.

I can totally get that SM would wish to prioritise the happiness of their won kids and as such, find reasons to justify that the onus in on the older kids to adapt, compromise, build resilience. What I don't get is the weak, selfish or unloving dads who agree to it, even more when they are the main or sole earner and therefore the main one paying for the holiday.

What happens when he says that he goes with all the kids or none?

[quote rookiemere]@SpaceshiptoMars was that comment really needed?
Of course someone is entitled to be upset by their DP favouring his other DCs in such a blatant way. Things like that can cut very deeply.[/quote]
I think the point of what spaceship was saying is that in the grand scheme of things, a holiday opposed to day food or emotional care or actual parenting there are worse things that happen because there are. It doesn't invalidate what PP emotions it's just if you have a wider view, you can look at a bigger picture .

It's about perspective and on the internet everyone's perspective is going to be different due to their upbringing. One persons bug deal is another's meh (and that's not a personal attack) Personally for me a holiday wouldn't be the end of the world since we were incredibly poor and playing the game of who eats tonight.

I would have guessed that actually it wasn't the holiday that kicked it for PP but from what sounds like a lacking it parental emotional responsibility from the dad.

The failings/blame for this impact however are always seemly put on the SM. It's not the SM failing for a dad that doesn't parent as he should have, he wasn't stolen away from the poster - he walked away emotionally or otherwise and she didn't hold a gun to his head.

The father in the situation mentioned could have made better choices and he didn't and I feel sorry for PP. He could have left, he could have said no he could have done a million and one things to stop the damage. He didn't. He's the one who should be set alight. The person who helped create the child has the ultimate responsibility to do what's best for the child.

Everything after that is a compromise Elder kids expected to compromise because their parents separated, and that's that. No younger children have to compromise because their dad already have older children, so that's that though
Younger kids mum and dad are together and able to take them on holiday. They shouldn't have to compromise by pretending this isn't true and missing out altogether on something their siblings aren't missing out on!
They will be compromising plenty in other ways. Hundreds of pounds in maintenance going to another household, having to work around dad's contact arrangements with his ex, grandparents overcompensating the older kids and forgetting the youngest exists, having to share the one bedroom they have, knowing the older siblings gets twice as much for Christmas... All happening on Threads Near You.
So no, I don't think they should then have to not have a holiday for three years to allow their siblings two the following year. Theres compromise then theres just jealously saying "you shouldn't benefit from your parents being together because your siblings parents have split up".

Personally I think it's fine op, contact isn't affected so I would do it.

Elder kids expected to compromise because their parents separated, and that's that. No younger children have to compromise because their dad already have older children, so that's that though!

The younger children DO have to compromise. As people have indicated in this thread, they are expected to be 'grateful' that their parents are even together?? What young child is ever grateful for that?

There can be less money in the younger child's household due to dad already having older kids, they often have to share a bedroom with SCs but SCs have their own at mum's, they have to see their half-sibling getting loads more presents at Christmas and birthday than them, lots spend every other weekend or more left behind while dad does things with his older children that are too old for them, or he just want to do with the SCs to spend dedicated time. They might have very little time with their dad during the week because he has changed his working hours to accommodate having the SCs, so they don't always get the glut of time with him that people imagine.

There have been threads on here where paternal grandparents don't even want to see their younger grandchildren if the SCs aren't there too, so they don't even get the relationship they could and should have with them.

Younger children definitely do compromise and parents do spend a lot of time explaining the above to them. If they get an advantage sometimes - like their dad being comfortable to take them away on holiday while the SCs are also away - then they should get to enjoy that.

If only that was true. Sadly it isn't. Kids do get upset and emotionally affected by the decision their parents made, however explained and understood they are. Ultimately, once again, doesn't it apply to the younger children? Can they be explained that due to money, it's not possible to take everyone on holiday every year, so they will only go every other year so all can come? Surely if you believe that kids don't get damage as long as things re explained to them, younger kids won't be affected by having less total holidays then their siblings?

People have said it lots of times, but holidays are not just about the kids. Part of the reason it makes more sense for the SC to compromise in this situation, is because "their way", ie hardly ever going on holiday to wait until they can all go or worse, never going on a non UK holiday because the family can never afford to take them all out of term time, negatively impacts the whole of the family besides them. The parents, too, deserve a holiday.

I think this is one of the core reasons why people disagree on this - a fundamental difference in what people see holidays as for. To me, the people that need the holiday most, are the adults. They are the primary recipients, the children are more just going along. Their lives are already more relaxing than their parents' are. And further to that, the primary motivation for taking them is for the experiences they gain, more than the family time, as they have family time all the time anyway. That's nice too but it's not the main thing, and many kids don't see it that way either. They care about the water slides, notes notes with mum and dad. So from that perspective, it simply is preferable for all children to get good experiences, even if with different parents, than for one set of children to not get those experiences.

You've mentioned the every other year scenario a few times, and to an extent I do think that's fair enough, but I think most of us are talking about situations that are a fair bit more financially stretched than that, where waiting for every other year wouldn't result in it being affordable.

Of course someone is entitled to be upset by their DP favouring his other DCs in such a blatant way. Things like that can cut very deeply.

The problem is the Dad walking out of their lives. The holidays are just a symptom - and yes, I thinking focusing on that is very much first world problems. In my early childhood, both parents were out of my life - my mother got sick and died, my Dad took several years getting back to a place where small children could feature - and I'm euphemising heavily here... I thought I'd had a rough time, until I talked to friends who worked for the UN. They were visiting an African village, and in one home there was a very still child curled up in the corner. They asked what the sickness was, and were told - just hunger. The parents were so poor, they'd decided they couldn't feed all their children, and were leaving this one to die of starvation.

Cross posted with youseethethingis but obviously totally agree with her!

@Youseethethingis I agree, having step siblings brings it's difficulties for the younger child too. Missing out on a holiday but knowing they've been on one with their mum is a pretty big one, and if it can be avoided by taking the younger one on holiday then go for it. It's about making sure all the kids have life experiences. It's not ideal to not take the DSC but we don't all live in an ideal money is no object world. Oldest DSC needs a laptop, youngest DSC needs money spent on equipment for her hobby and LO needs money spent on taking her out to learn about the world. Everyone in a family has different needs and it's all about muddling through.

@SpaceshiptoMars
The dying African child doesn't make your situation less horrific though?
In a hospital if you are in a lot of pain, do they give you medical treatment and pain relief or do they regale you with stories about how someone else is probably in more pain, in the hope that will make you feel better?

[quote aaaaah]@Youseethethingis I agree, having step siblings brings it's difficulties for the younger child too. Missing out on a holiday but knowing they've been on one with their mum is a pretty big one, and if it can be avoided by taking the younger one on holiday then go for it. It's about making sure all the kids have life experiences. It's not ideal to not take the DSC but we don't all live in an ideal money is no object world. Oldest DSC needs a laptop, youngest DSC needs money spent on equipment for her hobby and LO needs money spent on taking her out to learn about the world. Everyone in a family has different needs and it's all about muddling through.[/quote]
Exactly. It is not always or even primarily about the SCs over and above everyone else. Sometimes things just have to be managed and balanced.

I think it's very telling when people think younger children's lives are not compromised by the dad having older kids, as demonstrated by the last few comments.