Im not sure i can cope

[Tricks]

This is my first post so i'll just briefly explain my situation.

I have been in a relationship with my partner for the last 15 months - when we meet he had seperated from his wife 6 months prior and from that marriage has a 6 year old son. Ive never been married, am 27 and dont have any children.

Now, i hate, hate myself for writing these next words........ but underneath i resent my partner's child being on the scene, im jealous of the fact that my partner has been married before and has shared the closeness of having a child with some one other than me.

I have not meet my partners child yet, which i think has further developed my negative feelings .. my partner rationalises this, by saying that he cant introduce me to his little boy until his divorce, and settlement is sorted out. So, at the moment i have to stay away whenever his son comes to visit - i feel like a spare part, some sort of little secret, and this reiterates the fact that i feel hes ex's feelings are more important than mine.

The prospect of meeting this child fears me with dread, im not a kiddie person - i dont know what to say or how to act and am so concerned hes son is going to hate me.

Despite all of this i deeply love my boyfriend, and keep saying that this love will see us through, i know i need to be supportive and compassionate (after all his child is still only little, and needs his daddy very much) but inside im full of jealously and resentment and i just dont know how to get rid of it.

Please help me because i dont what my 'irrational' feelings to ruin a wonderful relationship.

Message withdrawn

It's all very well saying yawn GA but if you're not interested, why come on the thread? Why not just answer the questions and points people are putting to you? Your stated worldview is mysogynist and your writing style is male. HMB has asked you why you think she quoted you out of context. HMo2 has asked you if you're a man. I've pointed out that if you were really a woman who split up with her husband, you would be unlikely to do what F4J would like, and meekly and submissively go along with his agenda if it were damaging to your children.

None of which points you have seriously engaged with. In fact, whenever it comes to direct questions and direct points, you deflect and avoid real debate.

If she can' t be arsed to answer it probably means that she can't IMHO. She crumbles against the 'stupid' minds of the women on MN.

If you can answer then do , if not, then I suggest you stop posting?

Go somewhere where you can keep up?

PS I don't usualy challenge people about their intelligence, bit I'll do so if you dare to call me stupid again. See if you can keep up with me, shall we?

Sorry to butt in, but I think this is turning into a classic mn session against someone with minority views!

I looked all the way down the thread to see what GA said that was so inflammatory, and um, cant really see it.

She acknowledged that it was her SD's behaviour that contributed to PND after her initial post, not SD herself. I find that quite credible. A stepmum told me once what poisonous things her 10 year old sd had done, and they were quite unbelievable. Let's repeat again, it WASNT the child's fault, she was being manipulated by her mother, the ex. Stepmum knew that too.

FWIW, I think GA was careful to generalise at first, she didnt pick on anyone in particular, though it was taken that way from the start.

GA's point of view about current / former families, I find very interesting, and not something to get het up about. Its basically pragmatic.

There IS room for more than one opinion about absent parents supporting the family, and there ARE grey areas, and people should be free to discuss them without being jumped on.

In the situation where both parents want custody, in many cases, only one parent gets it. Then, the absent parent ends up funding the family as well as missing their children. And the parent with the children is enjoying the children and being subsidised by their ex.

Yes, of course both parents should contribute to a growing child. But in practise, only one parent is getting the pleasure of seeing the child grow up. This factor seems to be completely unconsidered.

So now someone is going to blow their top and say "are you advocating that absent parents shouldnt pay maintenance then?"

No, Im not. I havent worked it all out myself yet. What Im getting at is that it isnt clearcut, and there is room for different viewpoints. Personally, I wouldnt chase for maintenance, but that's just me. Other people, with other exes, may feel differently.

At the end of the day, the children will know how much each parent loves them, by their behaviour.

NN her basic premise is that that it is 'normal' to kiss off a first family if you have a second one, vs the car analogy. as others have pointed ut that would mean that first children could reasonavly be expected to be pushed aside when a new child comes along. As we all know this is a lunatic idea. Her ideas are wildly offensive.

Fcuk me! That took ages to read!!!

GA, whichever of the 3 sexes you are you are definitely a polemicist! More Melanie Phillips that Germaine Greer though - less logic and more spleen - and that's never the strongest position.

I now understand your tack on the F4J thread however. It's a shame you've allowed an unfortunate personal experience to cloud your judgement on a whole issue. Your dh's ex sounds very bitter, but seeing as she discovered her husband had been in love with someone else throughout their marriage, this would leave anyone a little embittered and with just cause, don?t you think? And to attempt to invalidate her experience of giving birth, as a mother, of the time they spent together as a family unit, I'd say she'd probably been lucky to keep her sanity and dignity - in fact it's very probable that she lost it at times, we're very delicate us humans as apposed to you Vulcans

I feel there is a little element of schadenfreude in this however. We're always up for a bit of vigorous debate on MN and you are one of the best at getting things whipped up. Do you play devils advocate in your everyday life? Bearing the weight of all that antagonism must be a bit exhausting. If you're so happy why can't you just rise above your dh's ex - you seem to have it all, a little generosity to those less fortunate wouldn't go amiss.

Just for Trick?s I?d say that it?s difficult but you have to get your head round the fact that the kids come first. Good parents I think realise this the moment their children are born, that their own lives are now subservient to their children?s. This is not a prescription for martyrdom however. It?s a self-evident fact that your own happiness is very important to your children?s happiness.

Looking at the bigger picture I think that the feelings you?re struggling with are rites of passage stuff. It takes us a long time to grow up these days. I didn?t do it until I was 31. You?re struggling to hold onto your autonomy because you feel something will be irrevocably lost if you acquiesce to the child and his ex. It may be, but maybe that?s no tragedy. Generosity of spirit is the hardest thing to grasp; especially these days when we?re all told ?we?re worth it?. No one asks what ?it? is. ?It? is nothing, - ?it? is a con. I?d recommend a short story by Tolstoy called Family Happiness ? you can read it free on the net. It?s about a woman finally understanding what?s important.

Hope that doesn?t sound too patronising but I recognise certain elements from personal experience. Good luck

hmb, I cant find the original car posting! sorry
I realise now theres more than just this thread, but I cant find it.

On a previous thread she said

''By Guardianangel on Wednesday, 15 June, 2005 8:19:38 PM

[This should liven it up a bit]
If you have an old car and a new car on the drive, which one do you take the most care and pride in? '

is the exact quote on the fathers 4 justice thread

yes, that is a stupid post, which GA later qualified with this:

"The old car, new car things was the xwife and new wife. I have never suggested that the kids are left hungry." (my bold type)

big deal, she thinks the kids should be fed. she also posted that first families should have no benefit if the fathers situation improves. 50 Pound a week will be enough.

sorry, but that sucks. a parents responsibility if for life,not just the lenth of a marriage

Message withdrawn

hmb,
I do think that an ex has no further call on their ex spouse for themselves (children apart) after the day of the divorce. Maybe you disagree, if they helped the ex in their career?

There are loads of different ways for a parent to pass on their money to their children, and actually, I have some sympathy with the reluctance to do it by subsidising the ex's lifestyle. The person who has the children already has a huge advantage, because they are seeing their children growing up. They also have responsibility for providing a better standard of living, its not the sole responsibility of the absent parent.

I am not saying that maintenance shouldnt be paid, just that there are many cases where absent parents are being shafted.

Even the term "absent parent" suggests someone who has run away to avoid responsibility, whereas it could be someone who lost their children against their will!

happymumof2
maybe its meant that way on the F4J website. but GA was posting it tongue in cheek (never a wise thing to do on Mumsnet!). I think its fair to take her retraction at face value, it doesnt detract from the other points she made, that she said were from her own experience.

here's the thread

Message withdrawn

Nn you focus an awful lot on the fact that the parent with care and control gets the pleasure of the kids. That's true. But she also gets the work, the responsibility, the restriction on earnings capability and career progression, the restriction on social and romantic life, the need to provide adequate housing... etc. etc. Many men walk away from this with relief. Which is why relatively few complain about "subsidising" the exes lifestyle - they know they're getting a real bargain.

And as to GA - you must have noticed that s/he simply doesn't engage in any serious debate. When the heat is on, s/he gets out of the kitchen.

Message withdrawn

in the last hread some thought she was a troll for that reason

Message withdrawn

naw, she doesn't cut and paste enough!

Message withdrawn

Can't be Judge Flounce either - not enough mention of whisky!

Caligula,
the duties you mention are normal ones for every parent.
Im not generalising on this issue, because every case is different, any there are, as you say, men who walk away from their responsibilities. But what is often overlooked is that there are also parents who desparately want to take on those responsibilities, but whose main contribution is merely financial.

Forgive me, but it is a rather insulting generalisation to say that those parents are getting a bargain.

I wasn't talking about those parents NN, I was talking about the ones who willingly walk away and breathe a sigh of relief and don't go to court for c&c - the majority. 90% of couples who split, do not go to court for care and control.

90%.