Would you be annoyed

[tellyou]

DSC arrived today, I was in the bedroom with my 2 month old baby and DH told me that DSC had been exposed to chicken pox by their 4yo nephew who developed spots when they were visiting yesterday.
The DSC told my DH in the car on the way to ours, so exw never told DH but he phoned her to confirm it was true
DSC has never had CP so I've had to decamp to my sisters house with my baby for three nights to protect my baby, would you be annoyed?

What do you mean? Did you not decamp because your stepson had been in a room with someone who had developed chickenpox? Why is it moronic to ask if you would have done the same if your DH had been in a room with someone who had developed chickenpox?

@Saggytrousers because my DH has had chicken pox before so can't get it, DSC has not had it, if they had I wouldn't have left.
I think I've got all the answers I need from the people who have read the post properly so if someone would kindly shut the post down? I'm not sure how to do it?

There isn't a way for you to shut the post (I think you mean thread?) down on mumsnet. If you report your op mumsnet might do it for you but they might not.

Ok I'll do that, thanks everyone

Why shut it down? It’s got some useful info re CP on it that may be helpful to other posters, and it’s come to a natural end anyway.

Wanging on about the probability of baby x contracting cp with health history y is immaterial.

It's basic respect. You make a telephone call and give people the information they need to risk assess, and then agree a reasonable way forward. What's so hard about treating people with common courtesy?

Totally understand your stance on this OP.

And ultimately, it’s not about the particular illness or the incubation period etc, it’s about an adult - the ex - doing the right thing. She didn’t and she should absolutely be called out on it.

This could easily be reversed - imagine if DSC’s mother was the one with a tiny baby and your DH sent the children back to her without mentioning contact with illness at your house.

The dsc is part of your household for a certain portion of each week. It is no different to your own older child catching it. Your dp can't not have the children in case they may catch it at a later date... the incubation period is a few days

@supersonicginandtonic

Good for you, finally someone who gets it! I wouldn't dream of treating dsd differently either. She lives with me full time

DS1 came down with chickenpox when DS2 was a couple of weeks old. I didn't decamp, but we strictly split the house - ex took DS1 and did everything for him, I obviously looked after the baby. Baby didn't catch it.

The baby is a baby, I don't think this is a big deal personally - surely with covid we all understand about isolation don't we?

You can say that all you want but it IS different because the child in question has a second household they could be in, which most older siblings do not. Putting babies in danger purely to uphold this principle is irresponsible and not at all morally commendable.

You don’t think the fact that she lives with you FT might be a relevant factor in anything?

My friend’s 6wk old DGD died because she developed lesions on her brain from chicken pox. My friend was hospitalized when her DS was two because he shared his infection with her. She had pox in her bits, up her nose, down her throat, etc. She couldn’t eat or sleep and was a total mess for several weeks. I can’t believe how many people minimize this. I’d be furious about this.

This could easily be reversed - imagine if DSC’s mother was the one with a tiny baby and your DH sent the children back to her without mentioning contact with illness at your house.

But she wouldn’t refuse to have her children come home.

The SC’s mum in this situation probably just didn’t want her children to miss out on their time with their Dad. New baby or not, chicken pox or not, they shouldn’t be let down because Dad has a new baby and a new priority. If she had known for certain that her children wouldn’t have been let down if she’d said something, she would probably have been more inclined to do so. Hopefully now she knows that in this situation, her children can still see their Dad because his new partner is willing to take the baby elsewhere, the problem won’t occur again.

She was acting in her children’s best interests just like OP was acting in her child’s best interests. That’s what all parents are supposed to do.

I’d be irate. Chicken pox can be horrific. People underestimate it. I’d vaccinate if I were you asap.

You’d give her the information and let her make her own choice. Wouldn’t you?

it’s not up to the ex to decide that her children seeing their dad is the only thing that matters and to leave out crucial information because she knows that he has another child whose well-being he needs to protect.

The SC are not the only children here. And not the only ones with needs.

The SC’s mum in this situation probably just didn’t want her children to miss out on their time with their Dad. New baby or not, chicken pox or not, they shouldn’t be let down because Dad has a new baby and a new priority.

Idiotic. The baby's health SHOULD be the priority over her DC "missing out". If she can't see that then she is an awful, selfish person.

You’d give her the information and let her make her own choice. Wouldn’t you?

Honestly, I don’t know what I’d do in this situation. It’s not one that I’m ever going to find myself in. If all the Mum knew was that her nephew developed a couple of spots, so no definite diagnosis of chicken pox, and was faced with two children that were already feeling a bit unsettled at the birth of a new half sibling, I can understand why she would be reluctant to upset them by saying that they might not be allowed to go and see their Daddy because their cousin got a couple of spots.

I’m not saying she was definitely right, just that I can understand her prioritising her own children’s emotional needs. It’s a shame that she didn’t feel secure in the knowledge that her ex would still want to take care of his children because then she could have been honest without worrying it would have negative consequences for them.

Considering so many people on here think it would be fine for the Dad in this situation to ditch his older children for this visit, I can see why she did what she did.

The SC’s mum in this situation probably just didn’t want her children to miss out on their time with their Dad. New baby or not, chicken pox or not, they shouldn’t be let down because Dad has a new baby and a new priority.

The point of the OP was about common courtesy and grown-up conversations. Do you really believe the ex had no responsibility at all to share this information?

No one has mentioned priorities - simply that a 2mo baby has different vulnerabilities and needs than older children. That's a fact, no matter how bitter anyone feels about a new baby.

I don't really get this tbh. My DSD mum doesn't believe in covid (her choice and I respect that) but she got the concept that a small baby is vulnerable and needs to be protected.

This isn't about dad ditching his parental duties (he could still have them) it's about allowing a new mum the respect to be able to go somewhere else to protect the most vulnerable.

As a Dm this thread is a lesson in how to behave if my ex and his partner have a baby. I of course would give a new mum a head up, that's just being a decent human being iMO.

The point of the OP was about common courtesy and grown-up conversations. Do you really believe the ex had no responsibility at all to share this information?

No, I don’t believe that. That’s why I’ve said it was a shame she didn’t have more confidence that her ex would still look after his children so that she would have felt able to tell him without it creating a fall out.

The ex had a responsibility to tell, but the Dad in this situation also had a responsibility to continue with his planned contact with his children. Surely you can understand that she might have been worried about her children being let down by their Dad?

The ex had a responsibility to tell, but the Dad in this situation also had a responsibility to continue with his planned contact with his children. Surely you can understand that she might have been worried about her children being let down by their Dad?

Why do you consider them seeing their dad worth infecting a vulnerable baby?

The two things are separate, and it would be a lot more clear cut if we were taking about one of the older children actually having chicken pox themselves. But they didn’t have chicken pox themselves, they were just in the same space as a cousin who developed a couple of spots.

The baby’s needs and the older children’s needs have equal importance.

The baby is not more important just because it’s a baby. It is up to the parent who has created the blended family to work out how he is going to juggle things when his children’s needs directly oppose each other. It is not up to either mother to prioritise the other’s children. They are both free to do what they think is best for their own children and the Dad has to find a way to live up to all of his responsibilities. He doesn’t get to absolve himself of responsibility for his older children just because their cousin got some spots and he decided to have another baby.

It is not ok for her to lie (by omission) and manipulate to ensure she gets the outcome she wants for her children.

She doesn’t get to decide that she is the parent who entirely determines what her children's needs are and how they are met. Their father gets to make his decisions too, and to make them in relation to his own life. Whether his ex agrees with that or not.

your attitude causes problems and almost weaponises contact. It becomes a test of whether the father loves his children (for her, and the message passes on to the children).

Whereas it’s perfectly possible for a mother to say something like ‘oh no. Timmy has chickenpox and you might have caught it from him. We need to protect little Arlo from it, since he’s such a little baby, so you’ll stay with me this week’. No need to attach anything about who live who or who is important to that. The child probably cares about their tiny half sibling and wouldn’t want them to catch CP from them.

Parents can set the emotional tone for their children. Sneakily hiding things and turning it all into the test will shape the child’s attitude.

I agree that there is some grey area because the children were not yet known to be infected.

But what you are essentially arguing is that even if they are infected it's fine for her to deliberately withhold this information because she considers her kids need to see their dad at that exact time to be more important than the baby's need to not be infected with something that could seriously harm them. The older kids needs in this scenario absolutely pale in comparison and it's incredibly dangerous and selfish for any parent to try and claim they don't.

It is the same logic as parents taking their infected children out to soft play etc around other young children and babies when they are seriously ill because to them their children "not missing out" is the most important thing. There are names for people like that, it's an awful thing to do.