Accused of not caring as much now we have "our" baby

[Pictur3Perfect]

By DHs ex 🙄

We have an arrangement re back to school buying where DHs ex buys shoes and stationary (pencil cases etc..) and we buy coats, bag and lunch boxes/bottles. Rest of uniform is split 50:50.

Some years if either of us are out shopping, the other will just send us the money they were going to spend on their stuff and we'll get it whilst out and send whatever we don't spend back.

Usually we'd spend about £120 on each of my DSC for the coats, bag and lunch boxes but we have never minded that they have chosen more expensive-ish ones.

This year DHs ex asked us if we wanted her to grab them as she was going out. We agreed but said we were on a tighter budget this year so were only planning on spending around £80 max per DC. This is perfectly doable, I have seen a few things whilst out and about but just not the more expensive stuff of previous years.

There are also a few other things like we haven't been away this year and we haven't really had the funds to do as much fun stuff in the holidays either.

The reason for this is me and DH have recently had a DD, I am on maternity leave so on stat mat pay at the moment so things are just a bit tighter that normal but are manageable and we are fine, just can't splash much at the moment!

Anyway, DHs ex has made a few comments now that we don't seem to care as much or are treating DSC differently now because we've had DD, all relating to money things.

We have DSC with us 50:50 there has never been any maintenance paid, that's the way its been since they split up so nothing to do with DD, he has never cancelled contact, never missed paying for anything like activities, still paying half the uniform as normal, school trips, hair cuts, clothes, anything they need we have continued to pay for. But our home is just on a little bit more of a stricter budget at the moment. Imo this is just one of those things that lots of families go through from time to time and is absolutely nothing to do with treating anyone differently or not caring. The kids are still getting everything they need, they might just have to have coats and bags from somewhere a bit cheaper this year and not have a holiday with us one year, hardly terrible stuff. It sounds like such a first world problem to me and I think ex is being really quite dramatic!

Her children will pick up on the negatively towards the baby and this is only going to hurt them. Why would she do that to her own kids? Much better to be neutral/positive about their half sibling.

On the face of it, the lower budget shouldn't be a problem. It's what you can afford.

Have you explained to the dc your reasons for this? Children sometimes draw funny conclusions. From their perspective, the new baby has meant no holiday with you, no fun trips out and no designer coat to go back to secondary school with. It sounds as though they've been rather spoilt so far!

We've done less fun stuff stuff these holidays, haven't been away It depends what this looks like. Adapting to a new sibling is often difficult for children anyway. If the time and attention given to the sdc has taken a big hit then that could be an issue.

It's best to keep things as constant as possible to avoid any resentment or jealousy building. It might have been better to explain the cut in spending earlier than the day they were going shopping? Just to avoid the mum having to tell her teens they can't get the North face (or insert trendy teen brand) coat and adidas bag they had their eye on and the mum having to deal with the moaning about that!

I hope you can move past this and maintain good relations with mum. It sounds as though you have had a good co parenting arrangement so far.

I think the issue is not what's been done, but the way it's been done. Suggesting it's because of the new baby could make the children feel that the baby is the cause of them missing out, whether or not that is the reason

But the thing is, there is nothing wrong with that. It's fine for them to know the budget is stretched due to the baby, that isn't something that's unacceptable for them to know. It's ridiculous to think you have to completely wrap your children in cotton wool against ANY impact of having a new baby. It's a fact of life and not something they should be indulged in being upset about. Less affection from their parents, certainly, but semi luxury items rather than the previous luxury ones? No. I would tell me child straight that the baby was the reason we had less money to spend on their coat, and I would not indulge them being upset about it.

YANBU

You're not saying you can't or won't buy what they need. Just that this year's budget is smaller. It's still sufficient.

I bet you wish you'd just said "Don't worry, we'll grab it ourselves at the weekend" 😉

My dc don't get new stuff just because it's September. Replace shoes and top up uniform if they need a few items. Bags only replaced when they wear out. New coat when it gets colder but only if they've grown out or will grow out in the winter period. Mine aren't getting new very warm coats this year as they got new ones last year that still fit. Will buy a mountain warehouse puffa for ds1 if I get chance because he wears that more than his nice winter coat.

Not sure why you needto spend much at all right now.

Just ignore her.

@aSofaNearYou

I think the issue is not what's been done, but the way it's been done. Suggesting it's because of the new baby could make the children feel that the baby is the cause of them missing out, whether or not that is the reason

But the thing is, there is nothing wrong with that. It's fine for them to know the budget is stretched due to the baby, that isn't something that's unacceptable for them to know. It's ridiculous to think you have to completely wrap your children in cotton wool against ANY impact of having a new baby. It's a fact of life and not something they should be indulged in being upset about. Less affection from their parents, certainly, but semi luxury items rather than the previous luxury ones? No. I would tell me child straight that the baby was the reason we had less money to spend on their coat, and I would not indulge them being upset about it.

Yes I don't see any harm in saying there's 3 of you children now and OP has stopped working for a bit so there's less money to go around.

I think it’s insane to spend £120 on stuff that might not even need replacing. I’ve spent £60 ish on a few new bits of uniform and some new shoes for ds. I’m sure I could have done it cheaper than that too if I really needed to. You’re not being unreasonable at all.

It's a good opportunity for the dc to learn about budgeting

Yanbu, things changed, finances change, it could be a baby, it could be redundancy, it could be a house move, any number of things can put additional strain on finances. His ex is being a dick, money spent isn't an indication on love. If that's the case do millionaires love their kids more than those earning minimum wage or sahp.

YANBU to spend less but I agree with the posters saying that children don't need a new bag, lunch box and water bottle every year. Waste of money and bad for the environment.

Perhaps you have created a rod for your own back here Op. It sounds as though you spent a lot on the step children up until now.. holidays, days out, letting then have trendy clothes, "not minding" if they wanted expensive items.

This has now changed quite dramatically. Not just the back to school budget but the holiday, the fun trips and so on.
You are actually having to say No to some things. That's fine, it's a good lesson in life but you have to expect some moaning about it being So unfair! They're at that age.

I don't think mum should add fuel to the fire. However, don't leave it to her to have to justify your budget if that's what has happened here.

@SmileyClare let's be frank £40 less on a still fairly healthy budget and not being able to go on holiday for a short period of time is called the kids need to cope. Sounds like the clothing budget is very much dictated to by the mum and the kids. Where it should be both sets of parents based on affordability. This isn't something that needs to be apologised for.

If they hadn't done all this stuff with them and had a smaller budget people would be saying oh your scrimping on them and being selfish.

OP hasn't made a rod for her own back because it sounds like that rod wasn't made by her but made by them. She's the only who's being made to suffer

I don't think oh I don't have enough money to by myself those lovely shoes because had a lot of expenses, what a awful time to be alive.Teenagers complain, making sure those conversations around gratitude and thankfulness are down to both parents, which OP is completely not responsible for.

As what is repeatedly told on this board. This isn't her monkey even if she lives at this circus.

@Bananarama21

I think yabu actually the fact your dh doesn't pay maintenance is key here £120per child shouldn't be that much of stretch when it comes to school supply's. It's always better to get better quality stuff that lasts longer rather than replacing further along the line at an additional expense. It's a regular once a year expense uniforms and it should have been budgeted for. 80 each towards uniform wouldnt make much of a dent especially if they go to senior school. Me and dh spend over 300 quid alone on uniform for ds.

This is mad.

Firstly, neither parent needs to pay maintenance when they have their child 50% as they are spending that money on the child themselves.

Secondly, £80 for a coat, bag and lunch box, per child!! That's loads. Bloody hell, the child could have a £50 coat and there is still £30 to spend on just a bag and lunchbox/bottle?!

@PinkGinny

So, factually your DP has decided to add to his responsibilities and he has chosen to now spend less on the children he already had.

You & he feel that's okay as he needs to spend more to support his new child / make up the difference in his household income.

His older children's mother thinks he is being a dick as previously he spent £120 and due to his choice to expand his responsibilities, he needs to spend less. Now £80 is all he can spend. So a reduction of a third.

Due to a decision neither his ex nor his children, quite rightly, had a say or choice in this change impacts both. So regardless of whether you or other posters think £80 is enough / ridiculous / obscene the facts are, he's chosen to have another child and very quickly afterwards his other/first children have to accept 'less'.

God this is just unbelievable, I just can't get my head around attitudes like this.

Just because you spend X amount one year doesn't mean that's the only acceptable amount you can ever spend again!! If OP and her DH had taken the kids shopping instead of the ex offering, they would have spend the £80 each and ex would have been none the wiser because they're still getting everything they need.

Lives aren't frozen in time just because you've got kids with an ex, circumstances change in a number of ways which can impact available funds.

Tbh ex is lucky that OP's money contributes towards her children being able to have £120 each spent on them for just a coat, lunchbox and bag!! She doesn't need to pay towards any of this really, but she does.

Funny how if it’s a resident parent choosing to have another child this is never factored in, but the minute an NRP does everyone behaves as if he’s stolen from the poor to give to the rich.

Yep, imagine the outrage if OP had come on here complaining that she and DH weren't happy because ex was on maternity leave and so needed to buy her children a slightly cheaper coats this year . She obviously loves them less and doesn't care as much now she has her new baby.

It's madness.

Yes I agree the new budget is fine.

I can understand dc of that age having a bit of a strop, claiming it's "unfair" and so on. Perhaps the mum was a bit exasperated at having to talk to them about gratitude and finances when they were sitting in the car ready to go shopping in JD sports for a cool coat like they usually do.

It's completely out of line of her to accuse you of caring less now you have your own baby. I assume the sdc are very much part of your family and you want all the children treated fairly.

You could try to smooth things over by suggesting you and their dad will talk to them at the weekend about the new changes to all your lives. Children don't easily grasp or understand a change in finances but they will adapt.

It's more important that they still feel valued and an important part of your family.

They are quite brand focused (he can be as well)
Then it is going to upset them and your OH should understand if he is into brand things too.

This isn't an issue or a slight, though. It's perfectly normal and something theh will have to get used to. They are expected to have less. That is perfectly reasonable and acceptable
This is standard SM attitude in relation to SCs. It is very different when it's your own kid. I certainly aimed to ensure that my eldest didn't suddenly had less of what she was used to getting when I had my 2nd, because it would have been unfair to her. It certainly was a main factor for deciding not to have a third. So whereas it is none of OP's concern, it should be of their dad.

Sadly, it might indeed mean that there were no other alternative. When that is the case, a good parent bother to sit down with their kids, explain the situation, and look at compromises together. You don't wait until the last weekend to get them essentials, and then let their mum buy stuff they are going to be disappointed with.

It's the money itself that is the issues, it's his lack of involvement and interation with his kids about the matter. He didn't think, he didn't care to talk to them about it ahead of time.

@vivainsomnia

They are quite brand focused (he can be as well) Then it is going to upset them and your OH should understand if he is into brand things too.

This isn't an issue or a slight, though. It's perfectly normal and something theh will have to get used to. They are expected to have less. That is perfectly reasonable and acceptable
This is standard SM attitude in relation to SCs. It is very different when it's your own kid. I certainly aimed to ensure that my eldest didn't suddenly had less of what she was used to getting when I had my 2nd, because it would have been unfair to her. It certainly was a main factor for deciding not to have a third. So whereas it is none of OP's concern, it should be of their dad.

Sadly, it might indeed mean that there were no other alternative. When that is the case, a good parent bother to sit down with their kids, explain the situation, and look at compromises together. You don't wait until the last weekend to get them essentials, and then let their mum buy stuff they are going to be disappointed with.

It's the money itself that is the issues, it's his lack of involvement and interation with his kids about the matter. He didn't think, he didn't care to talk to them about it ahead of time.

I don't agree.

£80 per child is still enough to get branded stuff, if that's what they want. Children of this age are not silly, if they want an £80 coat they could choose to still use their bag and lunchbox from the previous year?! I am surprised secondary school kids are getting new lunchboxes anyway tbh, surely they're just plain tuppaware, not cartoons and characters etc.

Also, the children themselves might not even be aware of the budget even previously? Surely they just choose coats and either they are accepted or they are told they're too expensive? Would anybody really tell children "right, we have £120 to spend on each of you so make sure whatever you choose adds up to that". Surely the budget is for the adults to bare in mind when the children are considering options.

I would not be sitting down with the children to have an in-depth discussion about why they can only have a £60 coat instead of £80 this year . If there was NO coat, then fair enough! But they have still got loads of money to play with here and it's just making a big deal out of it when it doesn't need to be.

*bear in mind

This is standard SM attitude in relation to SCs. It is very different when it's your own kid. I certainly aimed to ensure that my eldest didn't suddenly had less of what she was used to getting when I had my 2nd, because it would have been unfair to her. It certainly was a main factor for deciding not to have a third. So whereas it is none of OP's concern, it should be of their dad.

No, it's a common parenting attitude. If you don't have enough money for your existing children to live comfortably if you had another, then this mentality would make sense. But I would think it absolute madness if the only thing holding you back from having another child was that the older one could no longer afford a coat that cost over £100. I would not want to raise a child that would notice and begrudge a £50 coat. If it got to that point, I would rather they were in Asda garb for the sake of their own development.

Eighty quid is plenty for a bag and coat!
Suggest that you will just get them instead.
It sounds like you have all been really amicable and sensible to this point. Don't let her comments derail that now.

This is standard SM attitude in relation to SCs. It is very different when it's your own kid. I certainly aimed to ensure that my eldest didn't suddenly had less of what she was used to getting when I had my 2nd, because it would have been unfair to her

So did you expect your second to have less so you could give the first more?

Did you buy the second all new stuff, or did the poor soul suffer with a second hand cot and pram, car seat, even handed down clothes?

Did you go in holiday with the first before the second was born? How does the first feel about sharing holidays? Do you feel the second has missed out, or is it ok for them to have fewer holidays over their childhood?

Are we really supposed to budget and not have more than one child unless we can give each child exactly the same?

It’s ridiculous.

Also, the children themselves might not even be aware of the budget even previously? Surely they just choose coats and either they are accepted or they are told they're too expensive? Would anybody really tell children "right, we have £120 to spend on each of you so make sure whatever you choose adds up to that". Surely the budget is for the adults to bare in mind when the children are considering options
The kids are secondary school. Their dad is into brand himself, so has probably encourage his kids to be too. I expect they used to go out, they would pick one, with the brand they like at the time, and dad just paid no question, or at least no question when under that price.

No, it's a common parenting attitude. If you don't have enough money for your existing children to live comfortably if you had another, then this mentality would make sense. But I would think it absolute madness if the only thing holding you back from having another child was that the older one could no longer afford a coat that cost over £100
Well yes obviously when this is the only issue. I was speaking more generally, when older kids have to make more significant sacrifices.

So did you expect your second to have less so you could give the first more?. I decide to have a second when I was in a position to continue to give the first the same, whilst being able to also give the second the same at the same age. As above it goes much further than just a coat, especially when I personally would never spend that much on a piece of clothing for my kids, nor myself!

I would not be sitting down with the children to have an in-depth discussion about why they can only have a £60 coat instead of £80 this year It doesn't have to be in-depth, but it was fair to let them know that as OP is on maternity leave and not getting as much, their dad will have to pay more towards joint bills for a while and that will mean not having the same budget for back to school clothing. If the kids had time to process this before going shopping, they might not be bothered. Expecting their mum to tell them as they are about to go shopping, at the last minute, is quite shit, especially if it was something they were really looking forward to.

This is standard SM attitude in relation to SCs. It is very different when it's your own kid. I certainly aimed to ensure that my eldest didn't suddenly had less of what she was used to getting when I had my 2nd, because it would have been unfair to her. It certainly was a main factor for deciding not to have a third. So whereas it is none of OP's concern, it should be of their dad.

You do know your post is bonkers right?

It also shows you spoilt your eldest child. You don't just give children material things.

@vivainsomnia

Also, the children themselves might not even be aware of the budget even previously? Surely they just choose coats and either they are accepted or they are told they're too expensive? Would anybody really tell children "right, we have £120 to spend on each of you so make sure whatever you choose adds up to that". Surely the budget is for the adults to bare in mind when the children are considering options The kids are secondary school. Their dad is into brand himself, so has probably encourage his kids to be too. I expect they used to go out, they would pick one, with the brand they like at the time, and dad just paid no question, or at least no question when under that price.

No, it's a common parenting attitude. If you don't have enough money for your existing children to live comfortably if you had another, then this mentality would make sense. But I would think it absolute madness if the only thing holding you back from having another child was that the older one could no longer afford a coat that cost over £100
Well yes obviously when this is the only issue. I was speaking more generally, when older kids have to make more significant sacrifices.

So did you expect your second to have less so you could give the first more?. I decide to have a second when I was in a position to continue to give the first the same, whilst being able to also give the second the same at the same age. As above it goes much further than just a coat, especially when I personally would never spend that much on a piece of clothing for my kids, nor myself!

I would not be sitting down with the children to have an in-depth discussion about why they can only have a £60 coat instead of £80 this year It doesn't have to be in-depth, but it was fair to let them know that as OP is on maternity leave and not getting as much, their dad will have to pay more towards joint bills for a while and that will mean not having the same budget for back to school clothing. If the kids had time to process this before going shopping, they might not be bothered. Expecting their mum to tell them as they are about to go shopping, at the last minute, is quite shit, especially if it was something they were really looking forward to.

First of all, the kids might not be bothered anyway. This has all come from mum.

Also, again re the budget:

The kids are secondary school. Their dad is into brand himself, so has probably encourage his kids to be too. I expect they used to go out, they would pick one, with the brand they like at the time, and dad just paid no question, or at least no question when under that price.

There is no reason for them to know exactly what price they're allowed up to. I bet that previously no one has said to them "You have £120 to spend each". They probably look at coats they like, try on a few, dad looks at the price tag and says yes or no. This exact thing can still happen except he's saying no to a few more.

Sitting them down and impressing upon them that OP is on maternity so things are tighter this year is just making a huge deal out of something that should be a non-issue, because a £50+ coat is still an expensive coat!

I'd get it if it was pocket money they were being given and they were used to getting a certain amount every year, but it isn't. It's a budget set between the adults for spend, and presumably comes out of the adult's pocket so not like the kids have got less cash in their hands to see. If I agreed a budget with my DP, that doesn't mean I'd share it openly with the children.

Standard sm attitude

I sort of understand what was being explained there.

I've no idea if this is relevant to the Op, but it could be that all the cuts in the budget affect the step children.

It would seem unfair if no one else in the family were making any sacrifices; if their father was still driving round in a new Merc, buying himself designer clothes, the baby was treated to the top of the range travel system and baby clothes, parents eating out at nice restaurants.
That would indicate that any cuts would be what was spent on the step children. Their budget is the least important now rather than everyone in the family having less.

Obviously that is all supposition and an extreme example.