Should they pay to replace it?

[CamelotPudding]

I'm pretty furious right now.

It was my DD's birthday a couple of days ago. She's only 2. She got a ride on elephant toy thing which she was really excited about when she saw it.

It's specifically designed for young toddlers (up to 36 months) and is only small. There is a seat on it big enough for small children but definitely not designed for older children / adults.

My SS can play a bit roughly sometimes and was trying to joke around and sit in/climb over it when playing with DD. I repeatedly said to him to stop because it wasn't his and was not designed for older children (he's 11) and he would break it.

Anyway lo and behold he's done it again and the side of the seat has broken and now my daughter can't sit in it properly.

I am so pissed off. We don't have loads of spare money. This was £60 and her main present. It's been two fucking days for Godsake.

I've said to DH I think we should tell SS he has to pay to replace it with the money he got at Christmas (he got over £200 from relatives). I repeatedly told him, he is old enough to know better and I am sick of him just getting away with everything (DH is a pushover).

So AIBU? I'm really annoyed.

I wouldn't, personally. I would have been annoyed and told my child off for being so careless, but I wouldn't take his Christmas money to buy a replacement. I think that's too harsh for an 11yo boy (having had two of those).

I think I would have been more forceful about banning him from touching it after the first time he was silly though, which would have been easier for me as a parent than you as a stepparent. His father should have been the one to manage his son's behaviour and prevent this from happening (it could have been worse - someone could have been hurt!). So I think it's your DH's fault, and HE should pay for a replacement.

If you are the sort of parent who would take a child's Christmas money to replace a sibling's broken toy (I'm not) then I don't think the fact that he's a stepchild should make any difference.

@MooSakah

Then the ADULT should have stepped in and adulted and removed said toy if it was so apparent to her it was about to be broken. the ADULT was probably busy thinking about the million and one ADULT things they had to do and assumed the 11 year old would do what they are told.

And sometimes they don't do as they're told. And when you see that they're not doing as they're told, you remove them from the situation because you can see it escalating into a broken toy/argument/whatever. It's called parenting. And if they were too busy to supervise how did OP know to tell him to stop? She must've seen what he was doing to know the toy would get broken.

It's called parenting.

It's absolutely ridiculous that people keep trying to use this line to justify the logic that this it is the parent/step parent's fault for not removing an item if an 11 year old breaks it. No it isn't. She should not have had to remove it, he should have listened to her. This is his fault.

"You should have removed it" is not parenting. It's making weak excuses.

@aSofaNearYou

It's called parenting.

It's absolutely ridiculous that people keep trying to use this line to justify the logic that this it is the parent/step parent's fault for not removing an item if an 11 year old breaks it. No it isn't. She should not have had to remove it, he should have listened to her. This is his fault.

"You should have removed it" is not parenting. It's making weak excuses.

No, it absolutely isn't a 'weak excuse'. If your child was doing something dangerous and wouldn't stop when you told them to, would you not go stop them doing it then?

@MooSakah

Then the ADULT should have stepped in and adulted and removed said toy if it was so apparent to her it was about to be broken. the ADULT was probably busy thinking about the million and one ADULT things they had to do and assumed the 11 year old would do what they are told.

Then she's got a lot of learning to do about parenting hasn't she!

If she'd told him so many times, then she needed to make an adult decision about what to do next, time out, rneice toy etc. Wait until its broken and call wolf saying because he has Christmas money he should pay is absolute shite.

My 9 year old did this to his cornet this weekend.
He was sent to bed after dinner (it happened just before dinner) and told it would come out of his birthday/Christmas money. He cried of course, but he brought his money box down and handed over £80 that was in there, and went to bed without too much fuss.
A life lesson he has learned. He is gutted as he was saving the money for things I wouldn't buy, but he really wanted.
He had been repeatedly told about being careful with it. He chose to stick something down it that got stuck, didn't want to confess, so tried to bash it out. Thus crumpling it like this. Then he had to come and confess anyway.
I don't think he will do it again. If my SD did the same, I'd treat her exactly the same (or expect OH too, and I know he would as we are on the same page parenting wise).

No, it absolutely isn't a 'weak excuse'. If your child was doing something dangerous and wouldn't stop when you told them to, would you not go stop them doing it then?

Dangerous, yes, but this wasn't dangerous. And it still wouldn't be my fault if the item broke or that they were doing it. It would be the 11 year old's.

@aSofaNearYou

It's called parenting.

It's absolutely ridiculous that people keep trying to use this line to justify the logic that this it is the parent/step parent's fault for not removing an item if an 11 year old breaks it. No it isn't. She should not have had to remove it, he should have listened to her. This is his fault.

"You should have removed it" is not parenting. It's making weak excuses.

And highly hypocritical on a forum where the party line when it comes to stepmothers is "not your kid, you can't parent them,make decisions,get involved otherwise you're overstepping ".

If OP removed the toy she'd be shouted at for excluding SS, putting her DD first, being selfish ,being OTT and she obviously hates the kid.
If she gave him consequences right away she'd be shouted at for overstepping and parenting a child that's not hers, making a big deal out of nothing, being OTT and she obviously hates the kid.

The toy should've been removed from him before he had the chance to break it. You could see what would happen and let it continue. Why?

Even if hes had £200 off relatives in Christmas money that may be all the money he gets all year. In which case it is quite cruel to take £60 out of that. He doesn't have a job to get so is too young to be taught this kind of responsibility. Even if he did he would be entitled to less than minimum wage and £60 is a lot more to him than it is to you

SS is only 11. His dad should pay.

*Kids break stuff. You dd will break other kids stuff.

It's part of childhood/ parenting.

You obviously dont like SS. But you chose to marry someone with a DC and that DC will always come first.

This is one of the consequences of your decision.

I don't see your marriage lasting.*
*
wow, just wow. He's a child, you're an adult. You were responsible for this, not him, you should have taken it away if it was a causing a problem. I actually think it's a disgusting thing to do! You pay it snd be more responsible for the kids in your care in future*

I do love a good Mumsnet overreaction!!

I think he should pay £20-30 out of his Christmas money and I'd expect the same from my own ds. At 11 they're absolutely old enough to understand that breaking things has consequences.
That's not nasty as long as it's explained calmly to him.

He definitely should at least half it and be told the next time he breaks a gift by being stupid he will pay in full. I'm the meantime take something of just he loves away until the new elephant arrives.
11 is way to old to be breaking younger kids toys

Oh, and my then 5 year old had to use his birthday money to replace a brand new pair of trainers that be deliberately damaged. It was the 4th pair he had done it on.
He hasn't done it again since he had to use his own money. It's a good life lesson to take care of the things he has (or someone else's things in this case!)

Why on earth should a 2 year old have HER toy removed and be unable to play with it because an 11 year old child who absolutely should be able to listen when told to stop, is misbehaving?

I think he should contribute something but not the full amount and not from his Christmas money . I would withhold pocket money until it was paid off. Would you expect your DD to pay for any replacements in future is she breaks something of SS when she is older? If she broke an iPad or something ?

Very obvious who the first wives are on this thread.

@MrsSkylerWhite

Very obvious who the first wives are on this thread.

The ones absolving a perfectly old enough child of any responsibility whatsoever? It's ridiculous.

I do wonder if it were an older resident child breaking a step child's birthday present after being told not to do something repeatedly, how many people would be all "oh they are just a child it's not their fault whatsoever it's all your fault for not doing X Y Z". Imagine it would be a VERY different tune.

TheFrogAndHen

MrsSkylerWhite
Very obvious who the first wives are on this thread.
The ones absolving a perfectly old enough child of any responsibility whatsoever? It's ridiculous.“

Yes, it is.
(Say that as a first - and last , I hope, after 34 years wife.)
The spite is awful.

@Mintfullness

The toy should've been removed from him before he had the chance to break it. You could see what would happen and let it continue. Why?

Even if hes had £200 off relatives in Christmas money that may be all the money he gets all year. In which case it is quite cruel to take £60 out of that. He doesn't have a job to get so is too young to be taught this kind of responsibility. Even if he did he would be entitled to less than minimum wage and £60 is a lot more to him than it is to you

Lots of people have suggested he could do chores to earn the money back. This seems a sensible solution to me.

But what is really not sensible is trying to claim it's OPs fault for not removing the toy. He is well above the age where that should be necessary, it's infantilising him massively.

He should certainly make a contribution to it. He was told not to do it and warned it might break if he did that.
I wouldn't make him pay the whole amount but probably £30

My son is 8 and I made him replace something he broke through hitting it off the floor. It was only £4 but still.
Trying to teach him the difference between a genuine accident (which we would pay for) and not breaking something deliberately yet being reckless (that's not an accident and he has to pay)

Saw the title and the number of replies on this thread and knew it was going to be a shitshow. I was right and still disappointed.

Those saying it’s cruel to make him pay. Isn’t it equally cruel that OP’s daughter now doesn’t have her birthday present to play with after 2 days?

@SprayedWithDettol

Those saying it’s cruel to make him pay. Isn’t it equally cruel that OP’s daughter now doesn’t have her birthday present to play with after 2 days?

Yep. It sends a really powerful message if he's allowed to get away with this.

And as for people criticising OP's parenting. This is ridiculous, so often on here step parents are told NOT TO PARENT and not to overstep the mark. Know your place.

I think this is your husbands decision. Either he replaces it or asks his son for money, but it’s his call. Your only requirement is your husband ensures it’s replaced.