I just want to be able to leave my house for a SIMPLE journey FFS!

[SimpleSimple]

My husband has a habit of basically anywhere we go, wanting to invite DSC. I get it for bigger things (although we do have them 50:50 and make sure to do things when they are here too) but it's even tiny silly things and everything then has to turn into a big thing of collecting, dropping off, waiting for them to finish X hobby before we can go or whatever. They live about a 10 minute drive away and providing they aren't out themselves doing something their mum is basically always fine for us to go and get them and take them out and drop them back off.

Anyway, we had a big of an argument last night because we went to collect our child from pre school at about 6pm and both agreed we'd not had the day for going home and cooking so we said how about a spontaneous McDonald's trip. We were just pulling out from preschool when he starts with the 'can I just ring ex and ask if DSC want to come' and I lost it (not shouting or anything) and said 'can we just go on a simple McDonalds trip without having to mess around picking up, dropping off, waiting for them to finish XYZ before we can go'. It's McDonald's for goodness sake, not a five star holiday.

It's not that we never go to McDonald's either, we do so it's not some massive treat that DSC never ever get.

I can't stand it. The feeling like we can't ever just nip out somewhere that might be considered even remotely good or fun or a treat without first ringing around, waiting, picking up, dropping off etc etc.

I want to be sympathetic because I know it must be hard not to see you children as much as you'd like but for goodness sake it just gets stupid. I'm then accused of not wanting to see them blah blah.

And before anyone asks, if my child was elsewhere for the night yes I absolutely would take my other child to McDonald's without waiting for or going to collect the other!

Plus the other arguments that are just part and parcel of living together!

Sorry, I should have typed "half-sibs" instead of step-sibs. The rest is still meant the way I wrote it.
To the PP who thinks the OP's DC will be fine because they get to sleep under the same roof as dear old dad. Pound salt. There is more to a child-parent relationship than sleeping under the same roof. Like feeling you aren't just an "add-on" for example that can't do anything fun or interesting without the half-sibs, yet dear old dad can take the older kids out to do stuff, leaving his youngest behind. Yeah, that will REALLY help the youngest feel loved and wanted.

@mummydoorgirl of course 50% isn't enough. Who only wants their children 50% of the time? I did start it with 'if' mum is happy for them to go...

Where did any of us say that? Op has stated that mum is happy, dad is happy to do it and dsc are happy to go along.

Ah this post really shows how shit it is to be a woman!

you can’t even go for a simple Big Mac without considering everyone else before yourself

such bullshit

Well in this scenario it’s actually the man who wants to consider everyone else and the Op that doesn’t

Exactly. Women don’t ever get to put their own wants and needs first.

@Tookeffort81

he is trying to put pressure on her and guilt her into it putting everyone before herself though isn’t he.

wait and faff about for ages for a McDonald’s or go home and cook from scratch. Bollocks to how tired you are OP! How dare you even think about making your life easier for yourself with a quick and easy dinner!?

yanbu op - I feel for you

But that’s exactly what Lucky’s point is… the man gets to decide whose considerations should always be prioritised, i.e. his own.

And before you say that the children’s wishes trump everything, then that should have applied to the parents’ decision to split up in the first place then shouldn’t it?

but I suspect he will want his siblings to jojn and the op will be in same position as before

No she wouldn’t in your hypothesised future. The reality would be that the half siblings would see each other when they’re at their dad’s. Why would she be doing anything other than setting sensible boundaries and managing her child’s expectations.

‘you’re going to dad’s on Saturday. You’ll see Harry and Oliver then’. Why on earth would she perpetuate the expectation that any vaguely interesting activity must incorporate the other children?

But often splitting up is in the interests of the children as well

or are you someone who thinks divorce is wrong for the children and you should stay together?

Only see each other if child arrangements work out to coincide

and if you’re an only child and adore your older half subs… I’d put money on him begging his mum to invite them

I don’t agree this is a man considering everyone else.

Is he considering his wife?
is he considering his youngest child?
is he considering his ex?
is he even really considering the children whose contact with their mum he feels entitled to interrupt?

Or is he, in fact, prioritising himself? His feelings and his self-image as super-dad.

And expecting everyone else to organise themselves around what works for him.

He’s thoughtless and selfish. No doubt about that

but fact that this happens so often indicates that

a) the mother isn’t too bothered about her 50%
b) the children, given their ages and ability to voice their opinions, want extra time with the father and brother

Not necessarily.

The child will learn and accept that they see the half siblings sometimes at dad’s. That’s how things are.

What if the child wants to see grandma? Should she have to invite an exMIL around?

Not necessarily.

It is not inevitable, agreed.

but only child and let’s say he adores his old sibs (he spent a heck of a lot of time with them!) - I would be pretty confident he will be asking OP to invite them, especially if his time with his dad doesn’t coincide regularly

I’m guessing he hasn’t lived with his grandma for more than 50% of his life

@Tookeffort81

and if he does op can say no to that sometimes.
it is ok for kids to hear the word no.

Or it could Indicate a whole family who know that they have to put his wants before their own.

Loads of children grow up knowing that they have to sacrifice stuff to meet their parents needs. They would feel bad if they ‘upset’ dad by saying no when he wants to see them.

Loads of women are still wary of upsetting their exes, so they find it easier to just change their plans to meet his demands.

this man is happy to try to emotionally manipulate his wife if she dares to question just doing what he wants.

Just because everyone is complying doesn’t mean they are happy about it. The kids might not even realise that saying no to dad is an option.

No, I had a miserable childhood and as an adult I really wish my own parents had got divorced. However if you’d asked me as a child I’d have wanted them to stay together because the disruption would have been unknown and scary.

The point I’m making is that if children’s wants (not needs) are the overriding factor in the parents’ day to day decision making processes, to the point where others are constantly inconvenienced and can’t even stop off for a bloody burger on the way home, then the parents in the OP’s situation should have sucked up their differences and stayed together for the children if what the kids want trumps everything else by default. Because in this case it’s not only a burger or a roast dinner (that the DSC won’t even know about!) - it’s a symptom of wider behaviour and attitudes that might culminate in the marriage ending.

For sure

I was just saying that the irony may be that the Op never escapes being asked to include them

In first families this just wouldn’t fly. The ex didn’t stick with him and I wonder why. Maybe they were arguing and she didn’t want her child being exposed to that? Everyone would agree she did the right thing for her child because no child should have to put up with living in a household like that.
But with second children it’s fair game. They’re lucky sods who get to see their mum and dad everyday and arguments between parents are no biggie.

And when the arguments in second families are about the difference in treatment of the children (ie dad disregarding his youngest) I can totally see why emotions will be high and the child will pick up on that. But yeah. They’re so damn lucky.

Well in that case - the two women involved in this scenario need to put on their big girl pants and pronto

It’s not really about “seeing” your dad every day. From pov of the child it’s the idea of being the child who was left. Some kids see it as having a bearing on them. This child will absolutely know that their father hasn’t left them. The OP hadn’t said what their child thinks about this or how they react to it. We only have her feelings. The child may not be as affected as she thinks. If her dh isn’t able to reassure dc in the way that he is reassuring dsc then she has a point, but I can see that he has a hard job to do trying to please everyone and with a wife who doesn’t seem to understand and makes the task even more difficult.

Tell us you don’t know anything (or possess a shred of empathy for) about dysfunctional emotional dynamics in families without telling us you haven’t got a clue.

‘put on their big girl pants’.