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.

Nothing prohibits the OP from taking her child on a trip.

So she should holiday without her partner so his other children can point score. Grow up.

Clearly, she thinks that a trip with just your mom is sufficient for some children

Exactly as their mother does. Or maybe, are adults who accept is the only option when parents aren't together any more.

so why would it not be sufficient for her child's family vacation?

Because it's not necessary. She shouldn't have to live her life as a single mother to replicate the mother of her SDC.

Do you even hear how ridiculous this is?

Dsc get a holiday for their needs with their dm. Your dc should too
What make holidays special is to as much where you go but who you go with to share the experience. Surely if that wasn't the case, OP could just go on her own, or with a friend. She, unsurprisingly want to go with her DH for her own joy, and that of their joint child.

So why it is that when it comes to SCs, they are supposed to be happy for going on holiday regularly, despite the fact that it is an experience that they never get to share with their other parent.

Is it so naive to think that SCs don't care. Even when they say they don't care, it is usually because they're over the hurt, and indeed, don't care because they are over the bond they use to have with their father.

I've heard it many times, fathers who go away with their youngest kids and leave the eldest behind. All the ones I know have no or very limited contact with their fathers as young adults. I've just planned a holiday with my adult daughter in October. She asked me. She comes back to visit every few months. She will come straight to me, go and see her friends, but will either not bother with her dad, or will just have a very quick visit. He cries that she has no time for him any longer, and just can't see that this is the result of the choices he made in the past.

Kid are not emotionally stupid as they are deemed to be here. They put two and two together very quickly. No money for them to spend a holiday with their dad, but plenty for him to go every year with his new family. It's not hard to conclude that his priority is not with them.

And totally agree that there is nothing wrong at all to go away without them, if indeed, he then take them away somewhere nice and for a decent time rather than a cheap quick break to alleviate his guilt, but I don't see that this is an option here if money is tight as ultimately, that would be more expensive anyway.

What they do with their other parent is irrelevant likewise what you do alone with your child. However their father should include all his children in his holidays or none to maintain fairness. Why do they get to miss out just because a new child has come along. Is a holiday with their dad not important? If it isn’t, then that should also apply to the younger child.

Oh, no, wait that's fine for them to go with just their mother
Funny how what happens when they are with their mum is supposed to be irrelevant when it suits. They get to stay up late at mum, they are entitled to be on their phone all day long, they get to eat what they want when they want, that's all irrelevant, when they are at their dad, they are expected to adapt to the rules the same as the resident children, even if they miss out from the fun.

The children get to go on holiday with mum? Oh, that's very relevant. They don't need to adjust to the dynamics at home with dad, ie. go on the family holiday. There is no requirement for integration when the SCs benefit from it!

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

What they do with their other parent is irrelevant likewise what you do alone with your child. However their father should include all his children in his holidays or none to maintain fairness. Why do they get to miss out just because a new child has come along. Is a holiday with their dad not important? If it isn’t, then that should also apply to the younger child.

I think in reality it's an awful lot more nuanced than this.

Is a holiday with their dad not important? If it isn’t, then that should also apply to the younger child

By that logic dad should be going away with his ex as well. Wouldn’t want the kids to have a holiday without their dad 🙄.

By that logic dad should be going away with his ex as well
Sadly that's something that the children from separated parents have no choice but to accept will never happen. I think many kids would love to go away with their dad only as they go with their mum, but would still be much happier to go with their siblings and SM then not at all.

I think in reality it's an awful lot more nuanced than this
Could you elaborate? What other nuances are involved?

The stepkids need to go on half the holidays at the very very least imo.

For a starters, blended families make large age gaps much more likely, and this is something that is often drawn out significantly specifically for the SCs benefit, to allow them time to adjust. That means not only that it's harder to find activities that suit both, and that things quickly become unaffordable. The younger children do still deserve to have those opportunities, that the elder likely had when they were young.

Then there's what a poster mentioned earlier, about dynamics when SC being around being far more focused on just them than they would likely be in a conventional family. This is something I definitely find with my DSS, and seems common with children raised in two different households with two different sets of values. In some cases it goes beyond just that, and the SC refuse to coexist with other members of the family, such as on the honeymoon thread that is currently going on here. If there is not harmony between the half siblings, or between SC and step parent, then it may be a bit much to expect them to never holiday without them. Again, this is just a part of the nuanced, complex dynamics that come up in blended families.

And finally, I would say some view holidays as just for the kids, whereas some view them as for the adults, too. I would say the reason dad goes along too is because it's also his holiday, and that of his partner. Certainly my DP knew when he chose to be in a relationship with me that I wouldn't be taking our future DC on holiday's alone if he couldn't afford for DSS to come. Sometimes compromise is just necessary.

These are just some of the reasons, not an exhaustive list, but the point is, step families often create unique issues and needs compared to conventional families, and all we can do is look at our own situations, the people involved, and make the best judgment we can as to how to meet everybody's individual needs.

To clarify, I wouldn't advocate never taking the SC on holiday. Just that in some situations it may be ok to sometimes not include them.

Personally I think it's fine if some years you match your holiday to fit the time your SC are away with their mum. I don't, however, think it's acceptable to do it every year, so your DH never holidays with all of his children.

I know this thread though will descend into a "precious first born, can't be upset, let's upset the new children blah blah". The fact is, there are two sets of children, you can't really win, it's a pretty rubbish scenario for both sets of children.
You only ever go away with yours and the SC never have a holiday with their Dad (assuming he doesn't have a second holiday) - unacceptable - or Your little one only ever gets to go on very occasional holidays because you can't afford to take the SC ( who will likely go away with their Mum) - also unacceptable! So I think you have to meet in the middle, so try if you can to alternate years with holidays with all children with the next year a holiday with your little ones.

Is a holiday with their dad not important? If it isn’t, then that should also apply to the younger child

By that logic dad should be going away with his ex as well.

😂 That isn't any kind of logic at all.

Wouldn’t want the kids to have a holiday without their dad

The point is that they never get one.

I'm fairly sure XH times his holidays so that he is away when I take the kids away - all fine and perfectly sensible. However, they also get to go with him the following year.

No not right. If you want to take your dc away just you that's fine but you dh has 3 kids so should factor that it. Perhaps due to age difference he'll do a trip with just you and your joint dc but sometimes he should do a trip with just his dc to even it up. It's the reality of having more children, he has 3. What the older kids do with their mum isn't relevant

By that logic dad should be going away with his ex as well

That already happened. Don't discount the years the older children got to go on holiday with their Dad AND their Mum. Before Dad's salary had to stretch to 2 households and when everything was all new and shiny.

Of course @bogoffmda gets a raw deal, if her children lose out on dream holidays - but maybe they got one or two like that when she was married to their Dad?

@TwinsandTrifle

Of course not all the children should take up the same hobby but each child should have option to take up one hobby funded by their father - then their mothers can fund whatever extra they like because that isn't relevant.

Kid are not emotionally stupid as they are deemed to be here.

It's not about them being emotionally stupid. It's about them understanding the world doesn't revolve around them and no one else. Dear God, their father dared to have a child with a woman he is happy with, and that child is AS important as them. They might not have asked for their sibling to come along. Equally their sibling didn't ask to have pre existing children either. It's not the children's fault that the parents have split up. Or whether mum or dad have formed a happier adult family unit. With most marriages ending in divorce, and new relationships forming stepchildren are hardly an anomaly. New siblings are not inferior beings.

They put two and two together very quickly. No money for them to spend a holiday with their dad, but plenty for him to go every year with his new family. It's not hard to conclude that his priority is not with them.

The two and two being put together here is driven by the mother so the children conclude a certain way. Because the reality is "Listen kids, because you have to go to school now, you can only holiday in non term time and it's very expensive. I can only afford to take two children. Your dad can only afford to take two children. You can't go with Dad as they'd then be three of you. So I'm taking you, because your Dad can't take three of you. And your Dad is taking Fred. We'd love for you all to go away together, but now it has to be in non term time for you guys, it's not affordable for Dad. It's ok though, Fred will miss you guys on his holiday, but we'll have a great time and you can all catch up when we get back"

Which is twisted and fed to them as " Daddy's got no money for you, but loads for Fred and his wife, hasn't he"

There's "no money for them" because their ages mean holidaying at the most expensive times of the year only. Not at all because of Fred. Fred can go any time, at a fraction of the price.

How do you know they've already had that Space? We don't know the ages of the children or how early the separation happened do we?

The younger children do still deserve to have those opportunities, that the elder likely had when they were young.
I think this should be factored in when deciding to have more children. You need to balance your budget so that you can extend it, not find yourself having to decide whether to prioritise the younger children with the message to the other that they had their time, now it's the time of other children.

This is something I definitely find with my DSS, and seems common with children raised in two different households with two different sets of values
Again, that's something that should have been tackle earlier on. If values are so distinct that joint holidays are not a consideration, the budget should be stretched so that dad can take his older kids away on his own.

I would say the reason dad goes along too is because it's also his holiday, and that of his partner
But why should his holiday only be when he is with one set of children and partner?

It really comes back to the same thing. No issues going with partner and new children IF he can also take his kids away on his own. The holiday budget should be worked out accordingly, be it going only every other years, and/or to cheaper places.

Just so you're clear OP, if the your DC decides to take up rugby/archery/dancing, you must take all of the children to the same, and make them do it, lest your child has a penny or minute more spent on them than the others. It matters not that you've taken SDC to football the night before. That's just the bare minimum you should be doing for SDC. Again, it doesn't matter that they go to two other clubs with their own mother. They just have to come to everything your child might do

FFS. Why the hyperbole? Activities and holidays are not even nearly the same thing. And I am not sure I've ever seen anyone suggest step children should do the exact same activities as a resident child. You really do need to look at that chip on your shoulder.

It's very easy to forget that the children concerned have 2 different sets of parents (albeit with some overlap) and circumstances and that sometimes that means that some kids will have more/do more/go more places than the others. That shouldn't mean that the better off children are left out as a means of making things 'fair'. If it's a family activity like a holiday then really, the whole family should be going at least some of the time. There are lots of step child perspectives on this - as adults, some say they felt left out and it caused problems with their relationships with their parent, others are pragmatic and enjoyed the holiday they did have rather than worried about the one they didn't. Much depends, I guess, on individual personality and how the situation is managed at the time. Leaving teens out of a trip to Peppa Pig World is probably neither here nor there for the majority (some might enjoy spending time with their younger sibling and really want to go) but leaving teens out of a beach trip to Florida is perhaps more problematic, for example.

At the end of the day, it's up to dad how he treats his children. They'll either accept it or they won't. It's not wrong either way.

@howtodealwithit

How do you know they've already had that Space? We don't know the ages of the children or how early the separation happened do we?

We don't know any of it! But it's fairly likely they used to have holidays together as the original family.

You won't blend the 2/3 sets of children any better if the younger ones know they'll never get the good times the elder ones were treated to. It's too much to expect of human nature to expect the elder ones to stay schtum if they were the ones who used to holiday in grand places - and now make do with Dad and Bonus Mum in a tent on a wet windy hillside!

Completely agree. DS has been to most of the Caribbean, pretty much all of Europe. Lapland. So many places.

DTwins have been nowhere (covid forced) and now they will be over 2 when we need to fly, and DS is classed as an adult in most places. DS won't be coming on our next family holiday. We're waiting to see if/when his residential school trip is this year, and we'll be going away then.

It is far from "oh I've got loads of money for DTwins and none for you". DS has been on more holidays than I can count. Plus he goes skiing with grandparents. So no, he doesn't need to come on this one. And yes it makes a lot of sense to go when he's away elsewhere so doesn't feel like he's missing out.

What has happened previously is very relevant. If I'd never taken DS on holiday, my first wouldn't be one that excluded him. Whereas this is deliberately going when he's away, to benefit from going in term time (no thousands of kids everywhere! DTwins are enough!)

So the options are

• all the children get a holiday each year
• some of the children get a holiday each year and others don't

There's not a debate to be had. In an ideal world, yes, everyone would go together and budgets would stretch as if some children didn't need to be provided for in two households while others get provided for in one. Meanwhile, back in the real world, you need to find a way to make the best of things.

Because the reality is "Listen kids, because you have to go to school now, you can only holiday in non term time and it's very expensive. I can only afford to take two children. Your dad can only afford to take two children. You can't go with Dad as they'd then be three of you. So I'm taking you, because your Dad can't take three of you. And your Dad is taking Fred. We'd love for you all to go away together, but now it has to be in non term time for you guys, it's not affordable for Dad. It's ok though, Fred will miss you guys on his holiday, but we'll have a great time and you can all catch up when we get back

I don't understand why you consider it mum's responsibility to explain dad's reasoning to their children? Why should she take responsibility for his decisions?

I don't understand why you consider it mum's responsibility to explain dad's reasoning to their children? Why should she take responsibility for his decisions?
Dad not going to say "i just don't want to spend money on you" is he?
So if the children think that then it will have come from somewhere else. And that somewhere else is very possibly their mother.
So she can either help make them feel ok about things, or not.

@Getawaywithit

Because the reality is "Listen kids, because you have to go to school now, you can only holiday in non term time and it's very expensive. I can only afford to take two children. Your dad can only afford to take two children. You can't go with Dad as they'd then be three of you. So I'm taking you, because your Dad can't take three of you. And your Dad is taking Fred. We'd love for you all to go away together, but now it has to be in non term time for you guys, it's not affordable for Dad. It's ok though, Fred will miss you guys on his holiday, but we'll have a great time and you can all catch up when we get back

I don't understand why you consider it mum's responsibility to explain dad's reasoning to their children? Why should she take responsibility for his decisions?

I certainly wouldn’t be covering or making excuses if the other parent left my children out of a holiday. The children will realise for themselves they are being excluded and as they grow up will realise the adults made choices which impacted on finances and how that in turn impacted them.

So she can either help make them feel ok about things, or not

But again, why is that mum's responsibility? Dad is making those decisions which have an impact on his family. If she's not supposed to say 'he's got plenty of money for his new family but not for you', why should she say anything at all? As @IceCreamAndCandyfloss says, it's not for mum to cover up or make excuses for him. He needs to take responsibility for his own decisions and (in)actions.