A message to those who post ‘you knew what you were getting into’

[sassbott]

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4323771-Regret-having-children

Lovely brave thread here from parents, discussing whether anyone regrets having children. From what I’ve read so far, there is a real mixed bag of responses. But there generally seems to be some common consensus.

1. admitting publicly that you regret having children is unlikely to go down well and you have to be super careful where (and whom) you share those honest feelings
2. the pressure on women to have to want to ‘procreate’ continues.

So in much the same way SM’s are piled in on here for voicing those feelings - some parents in RL experience the same.
And the same pressure that we see Sm’s in particular facing regards how they should feel regards children is the same pressure women who have chosen to not have children feel.

So the next time someone says ‘you knew what you were getting into, why are you with someone who had children’ perhaps show them this thread.
Parents struggle too. It’s hard. So why should step parents be able to voice the exact same feelings?

did not know that parents could wilfully act this way and damage their own children. How could I? Who goes through life thinking that’s how it works?

This** is such a valid point. Arguably I should have known as I was from a step family and bore a lot of hassle of the back of it but I didn't know the inner workings because I only viewed it from a child's perspective.

I still also struggle to comprehend people who would willing inflict pain on their children. I saw it first hand so I had front row seat but often people say "oh I know there are people like this but truly how many mums would really do this". This phase is trotted out to any step parent speaks about any shit show the ex's maybe causing , and the SP ironically again has front row seat to the shit show.
However that same thought process is never attributable to step mums.

Do step dad's with no biological children get the same advice?? Or is it different. Just wondering as you don't hear many guys talking about it...

@Winecurestiredness

Do step dad's with no biological children get the same advice?? Or is it different. Just wondering as you don't hear many guys talking about it...

They don't as men are generally not viewed by society as the primary or even equal carers of children even if they are the children's father.

The shit some of my brothers, some of my male friends, some of my male colleagues and now my DP faced and still for actually being an equal parent in caring for their children is unbelievable. In my DP's case it is compounded by our child's ethnicity.

Oh and I forgot the shit that some of my friends at school and university talked about their fathers facing, and their fathers were them and their siblings primary carers from when they were below 10 as their mums had pissed off.

@Winecurestiredness when you say same advice? What do you mean specifically? Same advice as regards to what?

@candlelightsatdawn they don't think they are inflicting pain on their children, which is the issue.

I know from the people I grew up with with separated parents like I did - and I've talked to some of their parents who have let things slip - that it is part of a generational change of how children are thought about.

Not saying everything was hunky dory when I was a child and teen as it was more common for one parent to piss off completely, however when I started working I noticed I was coming across more and more separated parents where one or both were inflicting pain on the children as a means to get to the other parent.

Oh and people who say us step-parents don't see what is going on - it is forgotten that now people tend to use messages to communicate with their child(ren)'s other parent particularly when that other parent is causing conflict.

Magda72 What an amazing post. Thanks for taking the trouble to write all that, I found it eye opening.

I think your calm, no conflict household must be a very appealing place to bring his children as a good example of what harmonious family life can look like. Even if it's not quite their family, they can still feel a little bit part of it and learn that life doesn't actually have to be how it is at their mums.

None of that means it's OK to trample over your boundaries, and perhaps the relationship will have to end (you certainly shouldn't have to just suck up something that you don't want and don't feel is good for you own children), but I can imagine the draw of a healthy and happy family dynamic for him and his children to be part of.

It must be hard seeing what they go through whilst having an ideal but inaccessible divorced family setup at his finger tips - his kids don't get to experience how good people can function together even though he is involved in said family. I suppose it would be possible to broadly agree with you about having private time with your own kids but still find himself wanting to bring them to join him in being part of your much nicer family.

Not your fault though. I hope it can sorted.

@BunnyBerries

There is definitely some double standards involved - you're a woman for whom he has high expectations of family involvement. But I suspect you also have very low standards of what you expect him to do with your children, as you are their mother not him, so you'd also like him to reciprocate the low expectation?

The problem here, I think, is the children's ages.

Of course, when anyone breaks up, with step children or their own children, you don't want the children to feel any blame over it. Children are often intuitive to feelings and can tend to feel that way anyway, if you don't address that with them.

His children appear to be very young? They are likely to feel rejection much more (in breaking up, but, also in family life).
I believe that's often why people go all-in-or-nothing when it comes to step-children. And when you get involved with someone with young children, you need to bear in mind their ages as you simply cannot be the most important person in your partner's life.

@Bunnieberries "I believe that's often why people go all-in-or-nothing when it comes to step-children. And when you get involved with someone with young children, you need to bear in mind their ages as you simply cannot be the most important person in your partner's life."

Sigh.. it is this mindset that is soul destroying to be honest. When I got married to my late husband, both childless, we didn't sit down and have the conversation - "so babe, just remember that you are my love and focus now, but you have to know that when the rugrats come along you will jump down the pecking order and they will always come first" Who would get married under those circumstances?? What marriage would last? So it is no different for us. And any person who says that we should accept being of lesser value is not only stupid, but lacks a healthy sense of their own self worth. I have never asked to be the most important, just an equal. The sage old advice is that regardless of kids, the couple have to remain each other's focus. Yes there has to be balance, sometimes the kids come first because in that moment their needs are important, but equally the couple and the individual also needs their spot in the sunshine, where their needs are met and are prioritised over the children. Taking time away from the kids is also vital, be it date nights or a couple of days away every couple of months, just to keep the relationship fresh and to reconnect with each other, to give the relationship some firm foundations to get through the times when the kids are taking more of the focus. This is true for Mothers and for Stepmothers. No one person is more important than the other.

Well said @katie9998

Yes there has to be balance, sometimes the kids come first because in that moment their needs are important, but equally the couple and the individual also needs their spot in the sunshine, where their needs are met and are prioritised over the children
Exactly. I've said just that on several threads and it's truly amazing how many posters get their knickers in a twist about the idea of allhuman beings in a family deserving consideration, not just one particular child or set of children.

@Youseethethingis

Yes there has to be balance, sometimes the kids come first because in that moment their needs are important, but equally the couple and the individual also needs their spot in the sunshine, where their needs are met and are prioritised over the children Exactly. I've said just that on several threads and it's truly amazing how many posters get their knickers in a twist about the idea of allhuman beings in a family deserving consideration, not just one particular child or set of children.

I know, there seems to be a ‘cult of the kid’ ideology going around and it’s actually tiring. I often think when I hear the words ‘oh but the kids must come firrrrrsssst’ that it’s not much more than than virtue signaling to be honest.

@SpaceshiptoMars apologies I've only just seen your @ me and the reply. What does your dh think about his dc and their attitude?

@katie9998 are you me I had almost the same conversation with my manager at work today!

[quote Starrynight468]@SpaceshiptoMars apologies I've only just seen your @ me and the reply. What does your dh think about his dc and their attitude?

@katie9998 are you me I had almost the same conversation with my manager at work today![/quote]
@Starrynight468, thank goodness there are more of us 😁 my faith in humanity was dwindling quite quickly

I know, there seems to be a ‘cult of the kid’ ideology going around and it’s actually tiring. I often think when I hear the words ‘oh but the kids must come firrrrrsssst’ that it’s not much more than than virtue signaling to be honest.

Really good to see I'm not the only one who thinks this, that line of thinking is so strong on MN.

@aSofaNearYou

I know, there seems to be a ‘cult of the kid’ ideology going around and it’s actually tiring. I often think when I hear the words ‘oh but the kids must come firrrrrsssst’ that it’s not much more than than virtue signaling to be honest.

Really good to see I'm not the only one who thinks this, that line of thinking is so strong on MN.

Oh Halle-fucking-lullah!

Thanks for saying what has been long overdue! The world seems a little less fucking batshit now

The cult of the kid will (and IS ruining kids)

@SpaceshiptoMars apologies I've only just seen your @ me and the reply. What does your dh think about his dc and their attitude?

He takes the blame! Thinks he was too busy working to pay them enough attention when they were young. We are virtually NC now, because each attempt to resolve issues made things far worse and had too much impact on our health.

@SpaceshiptoMars there is no other route to secure contact. It is only the jurisdiction of family courts. In terms of taking action outside of the family courts based on potentially criminal behaviour (committing perjury in court/ blackmail/ etc). Every barrister involved in family law will advise to not take any action against the primary carer as it will look like a parent is ‘inciting conflict and any conflict is not in the best interests of the children.’

My partner at one point had clear evidence that his ex had committed perjury within the family court. Black and white evidence. Family court judge was not interested.

Basically (and this I admit is my very biased view), the RP can flout the law, perjury themselves, blackmail and even be found to causing emotional harm to the children as a result of the behaviour. Courts do nothing and they get off Scott free.

It’s a deeply flawed system with not enough robust judges prepared to make examples of these parents. Throw a few of them in jail/ fine them/ and then make those findings public (as in not sealed) so that the parent can be shown for who they are.

Every barrister involved in family law will advise to not take any action against the primary carer as it will look like a parent is ‘inciting conflict and any conflict is not in the best interests of the children.’

If that statement had come out of China, nobody would be at all surprised.

Can you find robust judges prepared to go public with their views? At least to a parliamentary commission?

In the States , you do not have to appear before a judge if you can reach a private agreement . Usually those people who appear before judges are those who are unable to reach agreements.

I would expect that most judges have heard and witnessed enough acrimony and other party blaming such that they tend to view all testimony with skepticism. I would imagine that claims of suspected inappropriate sexual behavior towards the childvand claims of parental alienation are part and parcel of the daily testimony that they hear. I would imagine that rather than being biased, judges just have healthy amounts of skepticism and tend to see neither party as the victim or victimized party that they are holding themselves out to be.
I think that men do not always fare as well in Court because very few men bother to take their children with them when they leave a home or relationship.

In a situation where the father is recognized as the legal parent nothing prohibits him from taking his children. In the States, most law enforcement agencies will not take a child from 1 legal parent to return to another legal parent without an intervening Court Order in place. Consequently, it is generally the father who appears in Court having left his children in the custody of the mother. When the Court then gives custody to the mother, the judge is only doing in law that which the father has already done in action. Also rarely do many father's who leave take the time to ensure that they are leaving their children with adequate financial provisions until such time as they are able to appear before a judge.

The mothers may be no angels, but fewer women than men leave the household without taking their children. A father making provisions for himself but not his children may not make a favorable impression on a judge. The excuse of not being financially able to provide housing for himself and his children is not a justification. It simply further the image of irresponsible reproducing and selfishness ( I can make provision for myself but not for my children).

I think that very many judges might tend to be biased towards children as they are generally the only truly innocent victims of and in a divorce case, and the fact that the parties cannot reach an agreement in the best interest of their children speaks volumes to the judge.

@Tattler2 same in England. My ex and I never went to court. Child contact arrangements can be private and no judge needs to see them. The only part of a divorce that a court rubber stamps are the financials. But again we never had to appear, the court just signed our financials off as the split was equitable.

So the arrangements re contact I have with my exh are agreed between us. Those who appear in family court are ones (as you say) who cannot agree.

@SpaceshiptoMars doubtful. By the time some cases have gotten to this stage the allegations made are very serious (along the lines of what @Tattler2 has alluded to). Basically you have some of these RP making allegations whereby they or their children are victims / have been victims of DV. As soon as you are in that arena, whilst a judge can make findings (based on the evidence in front of them), that clears the other parent. It’s a very grey area as ultimately the only people who know what really happened are the applicant and respondent. But is a judge then going to throw the book at a person who has made these level of allegations? Doubtful. They basically work on what is in front of them and try and look at what is in the best interests of the children. (And parents litigating outside of the family court is not in the best interests of the children).