What Do You Do When ...
Robbin S.
in which you already have plans?
We have SD every other weekend, as well as other times we ask for her, even
if it doesn't fall on our weekend. BM is really good about accommodating any
requests we have for parties, special events, etc.
This coming weekend, BM is going away on business and wants to know if SD
can come here. I've already made plans with my sister to shop all day
Saturday *sans kids* and have also made tentative plans with my dad for that
evening.
My fiancé relayed the request from BM, and basically said it was up to me. I
asked him if I could think about it.
He's fine with that, but here's the rub: I'm not! I feel horrible. I know
that if I were an NCP, that I wouldn't think twice about my own kids coming
here for a weekend. I'd cancel plans in a New York minute to be with them.
Dad thinks BM is taking advantage ... that she's done this a lot lately. I
don't feel that way. I know that when she wants to make plans, that she'll
call us before a babysitter, and believe that's a good thing.
What do you guys do when this happens? Even if she *is* taking advantage,
does that really change anything?
----
Robbin
Deborah M Riel
I'm a little puzzled why having your SK come for an "off" weekend
changes *your* plans with your sister or dad. If anyone should be
changing plans to accomodate, it should be your SK's dad.
If that's not going to happen, then I guess I'd probably weigh in a
couple of factors--how important is the BM's reason for needing the
switch (a business trip qualifies as important, I'd think, but a fun
weekend just for the heck of it doesn't), how important is *your*
plan (can it be switched to another time without a hassle?), and how
important is it to maintain a relaxed give and take schedule regarding
parenting time with your SK?
I always try to be flexible regarding my plans (maybe too much so).
If I've made some definite arrangements that cannot be changed, such
as a trip, reservations, plans to be out of town, etc., then I make it
clear that I can't accomodate a switch. But I'm the CP, not the
fiance of the CP. I think it's pretty much up to him to take care of
extra time with his kid, not you.
Deb R.
The Watsons
"Robbin S." <rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:bsv1f5$1lg11$1...@ID-4846.news.uni-berlin.de...
exact same thing happened here one weekend-tim's first wife had to go outta
town on some kind of business last minute (she found out thursday afternoon
that she was leaving friday afternoon, and we're a hundred miles away from
tucson)...
we went and got her....extra time, and brownie points....:) i was able to
keep my plans because there's an aunt here that adores sunshine, so i was
able to drop sunshine off at her aunt's for the afternoon and go out for a
couple of hours...:)
Jess
Tracey
>it was up to me. I asked him if I could think about it.
I'm with Rebecca. How did this become *your* decision? Sounds
like a passing of the <guilt> buck to me.
>He's fine with that, but here's the rub: I'm not! I feel
>horrible. I know that if I were an NCP, that I wouldn't think
>twice about my own kids coming here for a weekend. I'd cancel
>plans in a New York minute to be with them.
But you're not the NCP and you don't *really* know that you'd
cancel your plans.
Tracey
Wendy
"Robbin S." <rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:bsv1f5$1lg11$1...@ID-4846.news.uni-berlin.de...
weekend
> in which you already have plans?
Generally, if my ex asks me to swap things round I will, so long as I don't
already have plans which can't be changed. I wouldn't expect Barclay to
change his plans though.
My ex and I try to keep to the existing schedule though, as changing would
mean that the weekends he and his girlfriend have their respective children
wouldn't coincide. He does tend to impose on us a lot during the week which
does eat into Barclay and my alone time which we really need. However, I
don't want the girls to ever feel they aren't welcome here which means that
often I end up accommodating more than I ought to.
Wendy
Robbin S.
> I'm a little puzzled why having your SK come for an "off" weekend
> changes *your* plans with your sister or dad. If anyone should be
> changing plans to accomodate, it should be your SK's dad.
Because my fiancé is GM for an auto dealership, Saturdays are a workday for
him. So, I have primary responsibility for her when she's here and he's at
work. Also, the plans with my dad are for both fiancé and me, so his
daughter being here definitely changes those plans.
> If that's not going to happen, then I guess I'd probably weigh in a
> couple of factors--
This makes total sense to me. She *is* going to be away for work reasons and
my plans can definitely be rescheduled and I can stress how important it is,
to me personally, to maintain a relaxed give and take.
Thanks :)
Robbin S.
> Your fiance did a shitty thing to you, making you responsible for the
> decision. It's not your guilt if he doesn't want to see his kid, that's
on
> him.
Hmroo? Who said anything about him not wanting to see his kid? And why is it
shitty that he asked me, knowing that I'm the one who has responsibility for
her while he's at work?
Robbin S.
news:3FF31A38...@aol.com...
> I'm with Rebecca. How did this become *your* decision? Sounds
> like a passing of the <guilt> buck to me.
Like I said earlier, he works on Saturdays, so when she's here on the
weekends, a good chunk of Saturday is spent solely with me.
> But you're not the NCP and you don't *really* know that you'd
> cancel your plans.
Oh, you're so wrong! I *absolutely* know that if I were I were an NCP, and
my kids dad called to offer me time with them, that I would cancel any
shopping or dinner plans to jump on it! (For that matter, if my daughter
were to call me up asking to come home from college next weekend, I'd leave
my shopping trip and dinner with my dad in the dust.)
But, when fiancé asked about this weekend, I asked him if I could think
about it. I'm just wondering how to handle the disconnect, that's all.
Robbin S.
> He does tend to impose on us a lot during the week which
> does eat into Barclay and my alone time which we really need. However, I
> don't want the girls to ever feel they aren't welcome here which means
that
> often I end up accommodating more than I ought to.
I would never want that either. Also, I would never want Russ to feel like
he has competing interests. He's a parent, his first responsibility is to
his daughter, and I do feel obligated to support that. I also think it's
reasonable for him to *want* a partner who supports that.
Maybe I'm looking to far into the future. (What if she starts asking this of
us on a regular basis? What if I say "no," will that cause huge problems?
What if, what if, what if?)
Deborah M Riel
Robbin S. <rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote:
>Maybe I'm looking to far into the future. (What if she starts asking this of
>us on a regular basis? What if I say "no," will that cause huge problems?
>What if, what if, what if?)
Well, what did he do before you came along? I assume he had to work
Saturdays then, too. You might want to consider using the
arrangements he had before, or coming up with an alternate solution
just in case the BM *does* have to go out of town on business more
than she expected to. Be prepared for the weekend that you can't
change your plans.
Deb R.
Karen
>
> But, when fiancé asked about this weekend, I asked him if I could think
> about it. I'm just wondering how to handle the disconnect, that's all.
I don't think you have to feel the same sense of responsibility about his DD
as you do to your daughter. It's okay to make different decisions for your
kids. She isn't yours.
Karen
rebecca
>
> Hmroo? Who said anything about him not wanting to see his kid? And why is
it
> shitty that he asked me, knowing that I'm the one who has responsibility
for
> her while he's at work?
Well, you didn't say that in your post. And honestly, even if you said you
didn't want to take care of her that day, he still has the option of making
other arrangements for her.
rebecca
Anne Robotti
<rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote:
>My fiancé relayed the request from BM, and basically said it was up to me. I
>asked him if I could think about it.
>
>He's fine with that, but here's the rub: I'm not! I feel horrible. I know
>that if I were an NCP, that I wouldn't think twice about my own kids coming
>here for a weekend. I'd cancel plans in a New York minute to be with them.
Robbin, you're going in two different directions here. On the one
hand, you *don't* want to cancel your plans and take care of this kid.
On the other hand, you're horrified by everybody's suggestions that
your DH should have just taken care of it and told BM, "Robbin has
plans, you'll have to figure something out for <insert time frame
here> but we can take her after that while you're out of town."
Personally, having been both NCP and CP, I think it's always easy to
say what you'd do in a New York minute if you were in the other
situation. It's easy to say what you'd do if it were your own kids
instead of a stepkid. But that takes the focus off the immediate issue
which is, you're a NCP to a *stepkid* and you have plans for the
weekend and really you'd rather she not interrupt them.
I've read enough of the thread to know that you've already decided to
move your plans around or cancel them, which is why I wanted to
respond to this. I used to do that kind of thing all the time.
Accommodate everybody, see DH's side, make the sacrifice. And I always
used to think it was somehow making the situation easier or better for
everybody. And I guess it was, for everybody but me. But you have to
make sure that before you do stuff like this, you're not just screwing
yourself for no reason, and that everybody else is making their own
contribution to the situation too.
For example, you have plans with your sister. DH presumably knows it.
So has he explored *every* option before he got to you cancelling your
plans? Making a play date for SD for the day? Taking her to work with
him (no he can't do it every weekend, but in an emergency he might be
able to get some leniency)? Having her stay with other family until
you can pick her up? Asking her Mom about other arrangements for the
time you'll be busy? Hiring a babysitter for the day? Or did he leap
right to, "Okay Robbin, this is on you, will you do it or not?"
Because if he did, that's a problem.
Another case in point, you and your fiancee have plans with your Dad.
What's he doing about making sure you can keep those plans, or did he
just assume that all the plans are off?
>
>Dad thinks BM is taking advantage ... that she's done this a lot lately. I
>don't feel that way. I know that when she wants to make plans, that she'll
>call us before a babysitter, and believe that's a good thing.
That's a fine thing, unless she's just moved *you* (not you and DH) to
the position of top babysitter. How many weekends in a row do you want
to cancel your plans? What's wrong with saying, "I appreciate your
calling us first, and we'd be glad to do it. I do have some plans for
Saturday, but I can pick her up from your regular babysitter on
Saturday night at six." ???
>
>What do you guys do when this happens? Even if she *is* taking advantage,
>does that really change anything?
>
>----
I think you'd better get a bead on who's really taking advantage. If
DH wants the warm fuzzy of getting his daughter for extra time, it has
to be with the proviso that there's a backup plan if you have plans.
If he doesn't want his daughter to come, and he's only doing it
because it's absolutely no extra trouble for him, that's an issue
between him and you, BM or her motives have nothing to do with it.
Anne
n...@impactwp.com
Well you're a better man than me, I wouldn't ever have my NC SD here if her
father wasn't here even once, let alone every time!
I think it's fine for you to say No for whatever reason, if you're usually
helpful to BM it shouldn't cause a problem with her to say No and fiancee
could find someone else to help out, or take a day off in an emergency.
And don't beat yourself up about how it would be different with your own
kid. Well duh!! that's the point of having your own and is *totally*
irrelevant to how you feel about your stepchildren - the two aren't even in
the same ballpark so comparisons are useless and nothing less than
guilt-inducing. You don't need that.
Nikki
Geri and sometimes Brian
>weekends, a good chunk of Saturday is spent solely with me.
Why does he bother with visitation on that day then?
~~Geri~~
~Veni, vidi, visa~
I came, I saw, I shopped!
Wendy
> I would never want that either. Also, I would never want Russ to feel like
> he has competing interests. He's a parent, his first responsibility is to
> his daughter, and I do feel obligated to support that. I also think it's
> reasonable for him to *want* a partner who supports that.
Actually, if there is one thing that I've revised my view point on it's
this. Barclay and my girls are an equal priority. Sometimes, because of
age or other reasons, the girls will be my first priority, but I can see
that there could be times when my first priority was to Barclay. I've
always said that they were equally important, but it's circumstance which
decides the focus and circumstances change all the time.
For example, Louise is currently preparing for two exams in January, which
she's re-taking to try and get a better grade. I've agreed to spend an hour
a day working on Research Methods with her and I schedule that in even on CF
weekends. It's making a difference, already, and whose weekend it is is
irrelevant to making sure that she sustains this revision until the exam.
> Maybe I'm looking to far into the future. (What if she starts asking this
of
> us on a regular basis? What if I say "no," will that cause huge problems?
> What if, what if, what if?)
I think being flexible can be worthwhile, but always be clear what you want
the other person to be flexible about in return.
Wendy
Robbin S.
> And don't beat yourself up about how it would be different with your own
> kid. Well duh!! that's the point of having your own and is *totally*
> irrelevant to how you feel about your stepchildren - the two aren't even
in
> the same ballpark so comparisons are useless and nothing less than
> guilt-inducing. You don't need that.
What I'm comparing isn't how I *feel* about my SD. I'm comparing how I would
behave in a similar situation with my own kids. Don't you ever ask yourself
whether it's a kids' right to get the same treatement, same consideration
from a stepparent, that the stepparent would give her own child? I do, all
the time.
Robbin
Robbin S.
> Robbin, you're going in two different directions here. On the one
> hand, you *don't* want to cancel your plans and take care of this kid.
> On the other hand, you're horrified by everybody's suggestions that
> your DH should have just taken care of it
((Thanks for taking the time to write a thoughful post.))
Just to clarify, I'm not at all horrified by anyone suggesting that SO
should have taken care of things himself. I might disagree, but I'm not
horrified. I *am* horrified though the way some people assume that SO is a
piece of shit hellbent on ditching his kid and pushing his responsibilities
off on me.
We are new to this, and working our way through it. He might not *think* all
the time, but that is correctable and not the same as being a selfish
asshole who just doesn't care.
> But that takes the focus off the immediate issue
> which is, you're a NCP to a *stepkid* and you have plans for the
> weekend and really you'd rather she not interrupt them.
See, this is THE core issue, to me. I *do* know what I do if it were my own
kid, and is it really fair (to SD) that I would give her any less
consideration than I would my own?
This is what I'm wrestling with. Not whether my SO is being mean and taking
advantage of me, because I already know that he is not. He doesn't have it
in him.
> But you have to
> make sure that before you do stuff like this, you're not just screwing
> yourself for no reason, and that everybody else is making their own
> contribution to the situation too.
This is very true. So is the part about my already moving my plans around
(eek! that transparent?) and I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that
I did that. We all make personal sacrifices for family.
Case in point: my 18yo went away to college this year and almost immediately
been fucking up -- partying all the time, not showing up to work, losing his
job and therefore his ability to pay his rent (I didn't want him living off
campus and wouldn't financially support him doing that, for this very
reason). I allowed him to move home while he went about straightening
himself up according to My Plan. This is something Russ didn't bargain for
when he moved in, except that he understands that by moving in with a
parent, you're bargaining for a bunch of stuff you might not expect.
> For example, you have plans with your sister. DH presumably knows it.
> So has he explored *every* option before he got to you cancelling your
> plans?
> Or did he leap
> right to, "Okay Robbin, this is on you, will you do it or not?"
> Because if he did, that's a problem.
In his defense, he didn't know that I had plans with my sister. Since he's
gone on Saturdays, I go off and do my own thing and we usually touch base at
some point during the day.
He didn't explore any other childcare possibilities as far as I know .. it
was pretty much, "Let me talk to Robbin," and he did. And I am honestly
having difficulty understanding why this is bad.
> Another case in point, you and your fiancee have plans with your Dad.
> What's he doing about making sure you can keep those plans, or did he
> just assume that all the plans are off?
I assume that he assumed those were off. I'm aware that this is Not Good.
> What's wrong with saying, "I appreciate your
> calling us first, and we'd be glad to do it. I do have some plans for
> Saturday, but I can pick her up from your regular babysitter on
> Saturday night at six." ???
This is, frankly, the option most preferable to me. I go off and live my
life and make my plans and never have to change them around for anyone.
Hell, I would have loved it if that were the case when my own kids were
nine!
> I think you'd better get a bead on who's really taking advantage. If
> DH wants the warm fuzzy of getting his daughter for extra time, it has
> to be with the proviso that there's a backup plan if you have plans.
This is reasonable, and SO would have absolutely no problem backing this up.
My problem with this situation is a personal one, internal. Not with SO or
BM at all.
Robbin
Robbin S.
> "Robbin S." <rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote in message
> > Hmroo? Who said anything about him not wanting to see his kid? And why
is
> > it shitty that he asked me, knowing that I'm the one who has
responsibility
> > for her while he's at work?
> Well, you didn't say that in your post.
I also didn't say that he didn't want to see his kid, but you had no problem
inferring that.
Robbin
n...@impactwp.com
Feel, act, do, whatever. I don't think it's a kid's right to expect the same
treatment from a stepparent as they do their bio parent. Sure, I use my
relationship with my bio daughter all the time as a yardstick to give me
perspective. I say 'what would I do, say, feel if this were my DD and not my
SS?' But as for giving myself a big guilt trip at not giving him the same
treatment or consideration that I do my bio child, I'm not going to go
there.
No offence meant Robbin, but you don't have your own yet. The second you do
you'll see you couldn't possibly ever give them the same treatment, love,
consideration, attention, interest, kindly feelings or anything, and you
might then stop giving yourself a hard time over it.
Also, you're not really talking about consideration and treatment of your
SK. Your example is one of not necessarily feeling inclined to cancel
existing plans you were looking forward to as your SD is now coming, and
that you know you'd cancel your plans for a bio child in a new york minute.
That's feeling in my book.
Nikki
n...@impactwp.com
already have their own kids!
Sorry about that.
In that case I double everything I said in my last post. I feel you're on a
hiding to nowhere setting yourself up to be supposed to be feeling/doing for
your stepkid that you do for your own.
Nikki
"Robbin S." <rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:bt47gc$335ev$1...@ID-4846.news.uni-berlin.de...
jane
>whether it's a kids' right to get the same treatement, same consideration
>from a stepparent, that the stepparent would give her own child? I do, all
>the time.
>
>Robbin
Oh, my. I don't think it's ever once flitted through my mind. World peace,
yes. Equal treatment, no. I mean, where would that come from? I'm Lee's
mother.
I can't see an emergency here. Without that, I wouldn't blow off my plans,
because that would be unfair to the other person. Beyond that, if it were Lee,
I'd hook her up. If it were my SKs, I'd expect DH to handle it.
jane
The Watsons
"Robbin S." <rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:bt47gc$335ev$1...@ID-4846.news.uni-berlin.de...
> should have taken care of things himself. I might disagree, but I'm not
> horrified. I *am* horrified though the way some people assume that SO is a
> piece of shit hellbent on ditching his kid and pushing his
responsibilities
> off on me.
so it's not just me...makes me feel better...:)
Jess
The Watsons
<n...@impactwp.com> wrote in message
news:10730631...@ananke.eclipse.net.uk...
> Feel, act, do, whatever. I don't think it's a kid's right to expect the
same
> treatment from a stepparent as they do their bio parent. Sure, I use my
> relationship with my bio daughter all the time as a yardstick to give me
> perspective. I say 'what would I do, say, feel if this were my DD and not
my
> SS?' But as for giving myself a big guilt trip at not giving him the same
> treatment or consideration that I do my bio child, I'm not going to go
> there.
>
> No offence meant Robbin, but you don't have your own yet. The second you
do
> you'll see you couldn't possibly ever give them the same treatment, love,
> consideration, attention, interest, kindly feelings or anything, and you
> might then stop giving yourself a hard time over it.
>
> Also, you're not really talking about consideration and treatment of your
> SK. Your example is one of not necessarily feeling inclined to cancel
> existing plans you were looking forward to as your SD is now coming, and
> that you know you'd cancel your plans for a bio child in a new york
minute.
> That's feeling in my book.
no offense nikki, but as far as i can tell, no parent ever gives their own
children the exact same feelings straight across the board-i know for a fact
i was my father's girl, and he treated me differently than he did my sister,
who is very similar to my mother, and that my mother was different with my
sister than she was with me...
i don't think that just because a stepchild is a stepchild should make them
one step lower than a biochild...you may feel differently, but that's normal
AFAICS, and that's also because the feelings are based on different
things-which is still normal, AFAICS...
i'm gonna dredge up that phrase that most of us despise-we knew our partners
had kids when we married 'em...by marrying them, we agreed to at least
support our partners with their children, and if that means having to spend
two days a month interacting with their child when we'd rather be out
shopping, well, that's what that means...if it means we've gotta find money
in a budget to support visitations and phone calls and court battles, well,
that's what we do....that phrase "well, it's your kid, so You do it" is a
cop out, and not fair to either the child or our partner...our partner has a
right to expect out support/assistance, and that child has a right to expect
that everyone will do what they need to to do what's best for that child...
(of course, the usual disclaimers against irresponsible parents that use
SP's to pass the buck apply)
Jess
Anne Robotti
<rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote:
>What I'm comparing isn't how I *feel* about my SD. I'm comparing how I would
>behave in a similar situation with my own kids. Don't you ever ask yourself
>whether it's a kids' right to get the same treatement, same consideration
>from a stepparent, that the stepparent would give her own child? I do, all
>the time.
I used to ask myself stuff like that all the time. Now I know the
answer. No, it's not their "right." Ugh. It is sometimes their
privilege, and it is often impossible.
Anne
Robbin S.
> I used to ask myself stuff like that all the time. Now I know the
> answer. No, it's not their "right." Ugh. It is sometimes their
> privilege, and it is often impossible.
It's possible that this is the answer for you ... for me, I don't know yet.
And maybe "rights" isn't the correct word to use, but I'm thinking that it
should more than a privelege for a stepchild to expect the same treatment
within a family that any other child would receive.
How did you come to the conclusion that your SD isn't entitled (for lack of
a better word - I realize kids aren't entitled to jack) to the same
treatment as your BD? I don't mean right down the line, but generally
speaking.
Robbin
WhansaMi
I've been staying out of this because my feelings on this are so complicated.
But, here goes.... I'm sure I'll leave tons of stuff out, but here are some
thoughts:
I think that, generally speaking, all the kids who LIV E with you should be
treated more or less equally (with allowances made for age differences and past
behavior -- for instance, a child who has a history of lying will be given less
freedom than a child than a child who has been honest and responsible in their
behavior).
However, in my family, there are differences between custodial and
non-custodial kids. Custodial kids probably get more "goodies", but they also
have more responsibility in the home, and have to put up with the day-to-day
grind of life. We function as a family, whereas, when my SKs were young, they
were more like visitors.
I'm not sure, though, I understand what these sentiments have to do with your
original problem. I don't see this as an issue of how kids are treated (i.e.,
what they can expect from you) as much as how a couple with responsibilities
choose to delegate their responsibilities in the marriage/relationship.
Since you are new, you don't really know me or my background. For my DH and I,
the situations differed with my kids and his kids. I am the primary custodian
of my kids (although my ex has very liberal visitation). Early on, it was
decided that my DH would take equal responsibility and equal authority with my
children. We don't see it as "mine" first, and his to decide whether or not he
wants to "help me out". For us, *we* have the responsibility for raising my
two children, along with their dad. My DH has stayed home more often than I
have when my kids are sick (primarily because he can work from home, whereas I
can't). When things need to be done WRT the kids, we function as if we were
the biological parents.
OTOH, WRT his kids, it worked differently. He didn't have the same level of
visitation. They were teens when we got together, and weren't going to see me
as a parental figure; moreover, his ex made it a point to reinforce the idea
that I was not an authority. Because of those factors, the dynamic was
different: they were clearly *his* kids -- not mine. Frankly, we both would
have preferred that it be different. We prefer, in our relationship, to
function as a couple -- as a unit -- so this was an area of dissatisfaction for
both of us, but, it was the only workable situation given the circumstances.
I guess what I am saying is, as long as the two of you map out what you want
your marriage -- the working partnership -- to be like, and you both agree, I
don't see a problem with either approach. Families can function differently
from one another, and still both be okay.
Sheila
rebecca
Let me ask you this. If he wants to see his kid, I mean really spend
day-to-day time parenting her, why does he work on the Saturdays you have
her? I'm not criticizing him, different parents work in different ways.
I'm also not attempting to start an argument here, but you've made it pretty
clear she's with you on Saturdays, not him. Which is fine, I don't have a
problem with that, I'm sure she enjoys being with you.
My original point, which you still don't seem to get, is that by making you
make the decision, he doesn't have to say "no, thanks, you'll have to make
other arrangements" to his ex/daughter. He can say "sorry, Robbin says no."
And that's not something I think a stepparent should have to bear the
responsibility of.
rebecca
rebecca
>
> Just to clarify, I'm not at all horrified by anyone suggesting that SO
> should have taken care of things himself. I might disagree, but I'm not
> horrified. I *am* horrified though the way some people assume that SO is a
> piece of shit hellbent on ditching his kid and pushing his
responsibilities
> off on me.
Sigh. I'm going to assume this is partly directed at me. And I said
NOTHING OF THE SORT. Why are you so defensive? I do think it's wrong of a
bioparent to put the responsibility for deciding visitation on a stepparent.
That's Not.Your.Job. Whether he intended to do it or not, what you've
posted comes across as it's your decision to make, not his.
>
> We are new to this, and working our way through it. He might not *think*
all
> the time, but that is correctable and not the same as being a selfish
> asshole who just doesn't care.
Again, I haven't seen anyone call him a selfish asshole. Totally understand
the new thing, we've all been there. Look, given your reaction to my
previous posts, I'm just going to stop there.
rebecca
badgirl
same
> treatment from a stepparent as they do their bio parent.
You may feel this way, but not everyone does. Personally I believe these
kids didn't have a choice as far as being brought into this world and they
have every right to depend on the adults around them to expect decent and
even equal (to other kids in the household they live in) treatment unless
their own behavior dictates otherwise. Being put one rung down from
someone's bio kids just because they're *the SK* is just plain shitty IMO
and I feel bad for kids that have to deal with it. It's not their fault
their parents had issues and didn't stay together and it already sucks that
they have to deal with *one more adult* in their lives especially if that
adult is going to make a neat little pecking order for them to not be first
in. Ever. because they're Step.
<snip>
> No offence meant Robbin, but you don't have your own yet. The second you
do
> you'll see you couldn't possibly ever give them the same treatment, love,
> consideration, attention, interest, kindly feelings or anything, and you
> might then stop giving yourself a hard time over it.
No offence meant Nikki but this is plain bullshit. She may very well find
that she feels just as strongly about her SK's as she does her bio kids. I
know I do. My daughter means the world to me. You notice I don't refer to
her as my SD. I made the choice to get involved with a guy with a child, I
decided that was ok to deal with and I've lived my life accordingly. What
other people do is judt fine and dandy, but please don't make a blanket
statement about how people should or will feel because you'll turn out to be
wrong every single time.
Jen
>
> Nikki
>
>
Anne Robotti
<chgob...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:
>
><n...@impactwp.com> wrote in message
>news:10730631...@ananke.eclipse.net.uk...
>> Feel, act, do, whatever. I don't think it's a kid's right to expect the
>same
>> treatment from a stepparent as they do their bio parent.
>
>You may feel this way, but not everyone does. Personally I believe these
>kids didn't have a choice as far as being brought into this world and they
>have every right to depend on the adults around them to expect decent and
>even equal (to other kids in the household they live in) treatment unless
>their own behavior dictates otherwise. Being put one rung down from
>someone's bio kids just because they're *the SK* is just plain shitty IMO
>and I feel bad for kids that have to deal with it. It's not their fault
>their parents had issues and didn't stay together and it already sucks that
>they have to deal with *one more adult* in their lives especially if that
>adult is going to make a neat little pecking order for them to not be first
>in. Ever. because they're Step.
Well, and that's fine, until you've physically and emotionally
exhausted yourself trying to fill the void that a kid's parents have
left them with, because neither one of them gives enough of a damn to
parent effectively or be involved with the kid.
I think it's a question of what exactly the SP is being expected to
provide for the kid.
Robbin's being asked to change plans, give up some weekends, whatever.
And she might be fine with that, so all's good.
I think where you get into a gray area is when you have children of
your own that live with you, and it's a *choice* between meeting the
SK's need and meeting the BK's need. And that's when I get to say to
myself, "Well, it really sucks rocks for SD that she has two such
lousy BPs. I wish I could change it. But my kids have one active and
involved parent, I'm already spread too thin, and what energy I have I
need to devote to my own kids." Now people are going to say, "Oh, it
never comes down to a choice, we just rearrange things so everybody's
needs get met." Well, I think that's crap. Call it whatever you want,
but parents make choices every day.
I've never apologized for the fact that my SD doesn't light up my
world the way my BKs do. Too much incredibly painful history there,
too much baggage, not enough of the instinctive and overpowering love
I have for my own kids. Now, if we're talking about taking all the
kids out for ice cream, no, SD doesn't stay home. But if she and BD
have piano recitals on the same day and neither of her parents can
"make it" because of their incredibly important lives, well that's too
bad. And it's not that I don't feel bad about it. I do. But at some
point you have to say to yourself, "This child is not solely my
responsibility. My children are my responsibility."
Badgirl called it a pecking order, and I think that's pretty accurate.
My children are always, ALWAYS at the top of my pecking order. Now, in
a perfect world, SD would have one or two parents whose pecking order
she would come first in. She doesn't, but I can't change that and all
I can do is do my best for her and try to help her deal with it.
Anne
Anne Robotti
<chgob...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:
>
><snip>
>> No offence meant Robbin, but you don't have your own yet. The second you
>do
>> you'll see you couldn't possibly ever give them the same treatment, love,
>> consideration, attention, interest, kindly feelings or anything, and you
>> might then stop giving yourself a hard time over it.
>
>No offence meant Nikki but this is plain bullshit. She may very well find
>that she feels just as strongly about her SK's as she does her bio kids. I
>know I do. My daughter means the world to me. You notice I don't refer to
>her as my SD. I made the choice to get involved with a guy with a child, I
>decided that was ok to deal with and I've lived my life accordingly. What
>other people do is judt fine and dandy, but please don't make a blanket
>statement about how people should or will feel because you'll turn out to be
>wrong every single time.
Well, no offence meant Jen (seems to be the trend), but yeah I've
noticed it. I mean, I've noticed you saying it like a million times,
and I've often wondered what that's about.
*Dealing* the being with a guy with a child is, to me, *so* different
from pretending to yourself that his child is yours. You can go ahead
and decide whatever you want, but you can't expect the rest of the
world to just go along with that. The kid might not, her mother might
not, just to name two people in the equation whose feelings you don't
have control over. I think your feelings about your SD are influenced
by the fact that you have to do so much protecting her from her
mother. I used to feel the same way, back when my SD was a defenseless
little girl and her mother was a wacko. That, and the fact that you
got her when she was so young, and that the mother really is absent in
every real way. I think stuff like that frees SPs up to feel more
motherly and to be more of a true mother.
I think that to me, it would take away from my feelings for my BKs if
I tried to pretend that I could ever feel the same way about somebody
else's child.
Anne
Lynn Randall
"badgirl" <chgob...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:vvoJb.35247$I07.103548@attbi_s53...
>
> <n...@impactwp.com> wrote in message
> news:10730631...@ananke.eclipse.net.uk...
> > Feel, act, do, whatever. I don't think it's a kid's right to expect the
> same
> > treatment from a stepparent as they do their bio parent.
>
I love my stepdaughter very much. I tell her I love her every time I speak
with her, just like I do with my own daughter and son. I don't have the
emotional bond with my SS that I have with my BD though.
When my SD came to live with us at age 15, I treated her the same as my BD
and BS. SO and I gave her every advantage that the 2 other kids that lived
with us got. When she was old enough to drive I gave her a car. When that
car died, I gave her my car, and bought myself a new one.
She's 26 now and always remembers me on my birthday, Mother's Day, other
holidays, etc., even though I know she is closer to her BM.
Maybe it's not a kid's right to expect the same treatment, but I think it
was the right thing for me to strive for as a step-parent. I know I fell far
short of this ideal goal, especially when the children were young and
emotions were running high, and I feel badly about it. I have no guilt over
how I have treated my step children in the more recent past though. But
that's just me and my .02.
Lynn
Lynn Randall
"jane" <janel...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040102131924...@mb-m04.aol.com...
I see DH and I as a team. His kids are important to me because they are
important to him. (And also at this point because I have developed a
personal relationship with them over the years.)
When my mom got sick, DH did everthing for her that he would have done for
his own mom. He still does. Lots of times I get too freaked out by her
continual medical crises that need my attention. He steps right in and does
whatever needs to be done. He does it for me. He never asks for anything in
return. I don't even have to ask him for help. He just does it. I would do
anything I possibly could do for his children, or for his family members.
What's important to him is important to me, and vice versa. Family is
family. Period.
Lynn
Melissa
>whatever needs to be done. He does it for me. He never asks for anything in
>return. I don't even have to ask him for help. He just does it. I would do
>anything I possibly could do for his children, or for his family members.
>What's important to him is important to me, and vice versa. Family is
>family. Period.
>
>Lynn
>
In terms of family crisis I'm right there with you, but not for every day kinds
of things. I'd resent being expected to watch my SS on a daily basis, though I
don't mind being asked to when my SO needs the help. Also, I don't expect SO
to participate in every day to day activity with my own family when we visit
them, though he often does.
Robin, could your SO take SD to work with him? My SO did this with both of his
SK's for summer visitation, but then that might be harder when you're in sales.
Love,
Melissa
"The old Tom didn't poison your fish either!"
-Carson Kressley, from Queer Eye
rebecca
"Lynn Randall" <ly...@aikidocenters.com> wrote in message
news:RoWcnbEiLda...@ptd.net...
>
> When my SD came to live with us at age 15, I treated her the same as my BD
> and BS. SO and I gave her every advantage that the 2 other kids that lived
> with us got. When she was old enough to drive I gave her a car. When that
> car died, I gave her my car, and bought myself a new one.
>
Aargh. Okay, let's see if I can do this without pissing anyone else off.
There's a difference between providing roughly equivalent treatment, rules
and possessions to birth and stepchildren and treating all children the
same. Absolutely, children of the household should have roughly equivalent
treatment vis-a-vis toys, rules, study expectations, etc. (with all the
usual allowances for the individual child's capabilities and behaviors).
But stepchildren vary in how much a member of the household they are. Some
stepchildren split time equally, which is different than the child who
visits every other weekend. Some stepchildren are completely residential,
and that's different too.
For example. The stepchild who is an EOW'er does not _need_ as many clothes
as the fully residential birth or stepchild. Riding the child who is rarely
present about doing homework is ineffective and uses up precious time in
discipline mode. Buying a full complement of electronics/video/sports toys
for a child who uses them twice a month is a financial commitment that some
(many?) NCPs may not be able to make _especially_ if that child has them at
their primary residence already.
As the life-long stepparent of a grade school child, I do feel I have
obligations to him. But on the pyramid of obligation - financial, moral,
religious, ethical, material, etc - my birth-son's priority order is
different and more weighty than my step-son's. Because my step-son has two
parents who have a far more serious obligation and responsibility to him
than I do. My birth-son also deserves two parents who feel that same
weight.
That doesn't mean that I don't love my stepson, or that I wouldn't go to
pretty extreme lengths in an effort to meet his needs. But I don't
automatically assume that it's my responsibility or obligation to do so.
With my son, I do feel that obligation.
rebecca
Melissa
>someone's bio kids just because they're *the SK* is just plain shitty IMO
>and I feel bad for kids that have to deal with it. It's not their fault
>their parents had issues and didn't stay together and it already sucks that
>they have to deal with *one more adult* in their lives especially if that
>adult is going to make a neat little pecking order for them to not be first
>in.
I don't see why being treated differently has to be a bad thing though. I was
in a blended family as a kid/teen. I love my SF, but he's not my Dad. He
loves me and my brother, but not like he does his BS. My mother loves my
stepbrother, but not like her own children. That doesn't mean that
step-relationships are any less valid. They're just different.
I love my SK's, and feel lucky to be in their lives. We have good
relationships, but I'm not there mom and they don't need another anyway.
badgirl
"Anne Robotti" <arob...@deletemelscomm.net> wrote in message
news:n98cvvk48lq67k8f7...@4ax.com...
What exactly do you think I DO for Stephanie? Her BM is a psycho piece of
crap that couldn't be bothered with her, her BD (my DH) spends ALL of his
time at home involved in a damned computer game every day all day from the
time he wakes up till he goes to bed or the time he gets home from work till
he goes to bed...*I* am the person that parents that child and it's been
like that for years.
I am physically and emotionally exhausted. Yes I am, and THEN some. That
doesn't mean Stephanie asked for this lot in life and it would surely be
royally shitty of me to give her less just because she isn't my bio kid.
Maybe it has to do with that I've been in her life since she was small,
maybe it has to do with the kind of person I am, maybe it has to do with the
fact that DH is the CP. I have no clue, but it isn't fair and it isn't right
to put her in a lesser citizen category just because I didn't birth her and
frankly I won't do it.
>
> I think it's a question of what exactly the SP is being expected to
> provide for the kid.
I'm expected to provide what I'm willing to. Frankly I'm willing to treat
her just as good as my sons. You teach people how to treat you, I guess I've
taught the people in my house to treat me like a parent, maybe I have a bit
more of the load than I wanted in the first place or bargained for when I
got into this but if I really didn't *want* this I have the option of
changing it, just like anyone else would.
>
> Robbin's being asked to change plans, give up some weekends, whatever.
> And she might be fine with that, so all's good.
That's my point though. If it's ok with her then there is no issue. If
that's not ok with you but you're expected to deal with it anyway then there
*is* an issue...in your house. Make sense?
>
> I think where you get into a gray area is when you have children of
> your own that live with you, and it's a *choice* between meeting the
> SK's need and meeting the BK's need. And that's when I get to say to
> myself, "Well, it really sucks rocks for SD that she has two such
> lousy BPs. I wish I could change it. But my kids have one active and
> involved parent, I'm already spread too thin, and what energy I have I
> need to devote to my own kids." Now people are going to say, "Oh, it
> never comes down to a choice, we just rearrange things so everybody's
> needs get met." Well, I think that's crap. Call it whatever you want,
> but parents make choices every day.
I do either arrange things so everyones needs get met, or everyone only gets
*some* of their needs met. Both my older kids are pretty self sufficient
though, so now that thewy're older they can meet some of their needs on
their own and I don't have to *spread so thin* anymore.
When they were little though they did both depend on me to make sure they
had what they needed and I ust managed to make sure I did it. There was no
*gee, Steph isn't technically my kid so I'll blow her off for Steven* even
when they had conflicting things, I just made arrangements...either deal
with both or deal with neither.
>
> I've never apologized for the fact that my SD doesn't light up my
> world the way my BKs do. Too much incredibly painful history there,
> too much baggage, not enough of the instinctive and overpowering love
> I have for my own kids.
Ok, but why would you need to apologize for that? You don't have to justify
your *feelings* for your kids or anyone elses....they're yours, you own
them.
Now, if we're talking about taking all the
> kids out for ice cream, no, SD doesn't stay home. But if she and BD
> have piano recitals on the same day and neither of her parents can
> "make it" because of their incredibly important lives, well that's too
> bad.
See if I'm in that situation I either make it a point to go to both and
explain to them that I can only be there for part of each or I go to neither
and call it happy. But that's just how *I* do things, that's what works *for
me*.
Jen
Amy Lou
"Robbin S." <rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote
> > But that takes the focus off the immediate issue
> > which is, you're a NCP to a *stepkid* and you have plans for the
> > weekend and really you'd rather she not interrupt them.
>
> See, this is THE core issue, to me. I *do* know what I do if it were my
own
> kid, and is it really fair (to SD) that I would give her any less
> consideration than I would my own?
She's nine right? Do you think *she* wants you to treat her as if she was
your own? I'm not saying you shouldn't. You gotta do what is right for you,
but I just know it wouldn't have worked for me and my SKs if I tried to be
more to them than I was.
Amy
badgirl
> noticed it. I mean, I've noticed you saying it like a million times,
> and I've often wondered what that's about.
It's about me being extremely close to her. It's about me wanting what's
best for her, it's about me being in the role of *mother* for her for YEARS.
>
> *Dealing* the being with a guy with a child is, to me, *so* different
> from pretending to yourself that his child is yours.
I don't *pretend* she is my bio child. I know damn well I didn't give birth
to her. But why is my situation any different from say...and adoptive
parent? Because she has a BM (who happens to be a psycho piece of shit that
proves incessantly that she doesn't give a half a shit about Steph BTW) I
still stepped into the role of mother for her, willingly with no
restrictions on my feelings or my actions. And it still IMO and in my house
wrong to treat her differently than my boys (except the girl/boy
differences)
You can go ahead
> and decide whatever you want, but you can't expect the rest of the
> world to just go along with that. The kid might not,
But what you're missing though is Stephanie DOES feel about me the way she
*should* her BM. I'm the one who has taken the time and effort to develope a
close relationship with Stephanie, not BM. As a result we are both on the
giving and recieving end of a great relationship as parent and child. I'm
not *taking* anything from Stephanie that isn't freely given.
her mother might
> not,
As far as *her* feelings go, frankly who gives a shit? Really? She never
made a real effort with Steph, she has consciously made the wrong choices in
her relationship with her over and over. Who frigging CARES what BM feels or
wants? I know I don't, neither does Steph or DH.
just to name two people in the equation whose feelings you don't
> have control over. I think your feelings about your SD are influenced
> by the fact that you have to do so much protecting her from her
> mother. I used to feel the same way, back when my SD was a defenseless
> little girl and her mother was a wacko. That, and the fact that you
> got her when she was so young, and that the mother really is absent in
> every real way. I think stuff like that frees SPs up to feel more
> motherly and to be more of a true mother.
>
Maybe, I don't know what it is. I just know that things here are the way
they are and I'm not going to make any *effort* to change them.
> I think that to me, it would take away from my feelings for my BKs if
> I tried to pretend that I could ever feel the same way about somebody
> else's child.
See here's where I think we are not on the same page. I have enough love for
all of them. Love isn't something IMO that has a limit to how much I can
store up and give out like rations. I see her for who she is, not with a
label on her forehead of *SK who has PITA BM and Avoiding Dad* I see her as
Stephanie, the child whom I've raised and nurtured and I love as much as the
sunshine itself. But I love my boys that much too ;)
Jen
>
> Anne
badgirl
> news:vvoJb.35247$I07.103548@attbi_s53...
> >
> > <n...@impactwp.com> wrote in message
> > news:10730631...@ananke.eclipse.net.uk...
> > > Feel, act, do, whatever. I don't think it's a kid's right to expect
the
> > same
> > > treatment from a stepparent as they do their bio parent.
> >
>
just for the record, I did NOT make the above quote. I included it in my
reply to Nikki because I was answering that specific statement.
Jen
Lynn Randall
>
great posting snipped
> Jen
>
Well said, Jen. I agree with everything you've said.
Lynn
Lynn Randall
Yes, I know. Sorry - I guess I snipped badly.
Lynn
WhansaMi
>I don't *pretend* she is my bio child. I know damn well I didn't give birth
>to her. But why is my situation any different from say...and adoptive
>parent?
I AM an adoptive mom, and a birthmom, and a stepmom. The fact is, I do not
love my (biological) son any more than my adopted daughter. In fact, in many
ways, I am closer to my daughter than my son, who lives in his head in a world
full of video games, computerese and silly movies that I don't understand. So,
I *know* deep down in my heart that my love is not about biology.
The sad fact is, I don't love my stepkids "like my own" -- which for me,
includes my adopted daughter -- because I never grew to even like them. I
firmly believe that if we'd ever had a decent relationship, I could have grown
to love them. I have proven it with my daughter.
So, I have a hard time when folks say, "Well, of COURSE you don't love them
like you do your BKs" like it is some foregone conclusion. It mocks what I
know to be true -- that a child needn't be biologically yours in order to love
them every much as those who are your biological children.
Sheila
Geri and sometimes Brian
>time at home involved in a damned computer game every day all day from the
>time he wakes up till he goes to bed or the time he gets home from work till
>he goes to bed...*I* am the person that parents that child and it's been
>like that for years.
>
>I am physically and emotionally exhausted. Yes I am, and THEN some.
Wow, do you find this acceptable?
That
>doesn't mean Stephanie asked for this lot in life and it would surely be
>royally shitty of me to give her less just because she isn't my bio kid.
>Maybe it has to do with that I've been in her life since she was small,
>maybe it has to do with the kind of person I am, maybe it has to do with the
>fact that DH is the CP. I have no clue, but it isn't fair and it isn't right
>to put her in a lesser citizen category just because I didn't birth her and
>frankly I won't do it.
>
Forget about the step-parent issue - I can't believe you put up with a
*marriage* like that, unless you like being a martyr. Why doesn't your husband
pull the plug on his computer and pay some attention to *his* child and also to
his wife?
~~Geri~~
~Veni, vidi, visa~
I came, I saw, I shopped!
n...@impactwp.com
> news:10730631...@ananke.eclipse.net.uk...
> > Feel, act, do, whatever. I don't think it's a kid's right to expect the
> same
> > treatment from a stepparent as they do their bio parent.
>
> You may feel this way, but not everyone does. Personally I believe these
> kids didn't have a choice as far as being brought into this world and they
> have every right to depend on the adults around them to expect decent and
> even equal (to other kids in the household they live in) treatment unless
> their own behavior dictates otherwise. Being put one rung down from
> someone's bio kids just because they're *the SK* is just plain shitty IMO
> and I feel bad for kids that have to deal with it. It's not their fault
> their parents had issues and didn't stay together and it already sucks
that
> they have to deal with *one more adult* in their lives especially if that
> adult is going to make a neat little pecking order for them to not be
first
> in. Ever. because they're Step.
Yeah thanks for the complete misinterpretation of my post and the
insinuation that I don't treat my SKs well.
>
>
> <snip>
> > No offence meant Robbin, but you don't have your own yet. The second you
> do
> > you'll see you couldn't possibly ever give them the same treatment,
love,
> > consideration, attention, interest, kindly feelings or anything, and you
> > might then stop giving yourself a hard time over it.
>
> No offence meant Nikki but this is plain bullshit. She may very well find
> that she feels just as strongly about her SK's as she does her bio kids. I
> know I do. My daughter means the world to me. You notice I don't refer to
> her as my SD. I made the choice to get involved with a guy with a child, I
> decided that was ok to deal with and I've lived my life accordingly. What
> other people do is judt fine and dandy, but please don't make a blanket
> statement about how people should or will feel because you'll turn out to
be
> wrong every single time.
Your daughter. Your only child? Assuming you don't have bio kids yet, this
is how it reads. So how can you know?
Nikki
>
>
> Jen
>
>
> >
> > Nikki
> >
> >
>
>
Lori
>
> "Anne Robotti" <arob...@deletemelscomm.net> wrote in message
> news:qr8cvvoe2o7ojd9l1...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 01:01:15 GMT, "badgirl"
> > <chgob...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> <snip>
> > Well, no offence meant Jen (seems to be the trend), but yeah I've
> > noticed it. I mean, I've noticed you saying it like a million times,
> > and I've often wondered what that's about.
>
> It's about me being extremely close to her. It's about me wanting what's
> best for her, it's about me being in the role of *mother* for her for
YEARS.
>
> >
> > *Dealing* the being with a guy with a child is, to me, *so* different
> > from pretending to yourself that his child is yours.
>
> I don't *pretend* she is my bio child. I know damn well I didn't give
birth
> to her. But why is my situation any different from say...and adoptive
> parent? Because she has a BM (who happens to be a psycho piece of shit
that
> proves incessantly that she doesn't give a half a shit about Steph BTW) I
> still stepped into the role of mother for her, willingly with no
> restrictions on my feelings or my actions. And it still IMO and in my
house
> wrong to treat her differently than my boys (except the girl/boy
> differences)
Well, I *am* an adoptive parent. I guess I can say that before, when SS
lived with his mom, as far as I was concerned our child came first. Always.
Of course, now he lives with us, and it's far easier to work things out so
that things are more equalized.
Lori
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.556 / Virus Database: 348 - Release Date: 12/26/03
Lori
> news:vvoJb.35247$I07.103548@attbi_s53...
> >
> > <n...@impactwp.com> wrote in message
> > news:10730631...@ananke.eclipse.net.uk...
> > > Feel, act, do, whatever. I don't think it's a kid's right to expect
the
> > same
> > > treatment from a stepparent as they do their bio parent.
> >
>
> I love my stepdaughter very much. I tell her I love her every time I speak
> with her, just like I do with my own daughter and son. I don't have the
> emotional bond with my SS that I have with my BD though.
>
> When my SD came to live with us at age 15, I treated her the same as my BD
> and BS. SO and I gave her every advantage that the 2 other kids that lived
> with us got. When she was old enough to drive I gave her a car. When that
> car died, I gave her my car, and bought myself a new one.
>
> She's 26 now and always remembers me on my birthday, Mother's Day, other
> holidays, etc., even though I know she is closer to her BM.
>
My SS know how much I love him, too, and I know he loves me. I also know
that regardless of how whacked his mother is, and what a poor mother she is,
his little face lights up for her in a way it will never do for me. This is
his mommy, and that's a bond that no matter what is never going to be there
between us. And that's OK. I have that same bond with my child. SS and I
have a close bond, but his mommy comes first with him. Now that he lives
with us, I do sometimes wonder, if it came down to a choice would i still
put our son first. I don't know. I do know that when he still lived with
his mother there were plenty of times I said no to taking him at a different
time if i had plans and DH had to work. If there was nothing going on,
though, it was never a problem, even though it would be me spending the
extra time with him.
Lori
"rebecca" <justre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1WpJb.31983$Pg1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Re-thinking it, this is pretty much how I have always been re: SS. When he
lived with his mother, while I loved him, and took care of him when he was
with us, our child was at the top of the pecking order when it came to
things like this.
Geri and sometimes Brian
>that regardless of how whacked his mother is, and what a poor mother she is,
>his little face lights up for her in a way it will never do for me. This is
>his mommy
We are going through an interesting time right now. My SD still has this same
deal with her mom that you describe, but you can kind of tell that it is
conflicting with the fact that she is starting to "get it" about her mom and
what she is like. (Especially when her mom slams her into walls.) I almost
wonder if that is the cause of her latest down-turn in behavior (worse on her
mom's weeks, as usual) at school.
(This past week when my parents were here, she was well-behaved even beyond my
wildest wishes. Needless to say, she got about a zillion compliments on her
good behavior!)
Lori
"Geri and sometimes Brian" <gple...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
news:20040103090456...@mb-m06.aol.com...
> >I also know
> >that regardless of how whacked his mother is, and what a poor mother she
is,
> >his little face lights up for her in a way it will never do for me. This
is
> >his mommy
>
> We are going through an interesting time right now. My SD still has this
same
> deal with her mom that you describe, but you can kind of tell that it is
> conflicting with the fact that she is starting to "get it" about her mom
and
> what she is like. (Especially when her mom slams her into walls.) I
almost
> wonder if that is the cause of her latest down-turn in behavior (worse on
her
> mom's weeks, as usual) at school.
Yeah. I think SS is beginning to get it too. In between visits, it's as if
we are his whole family, and he's happy and secure, but if she calls, or if
it's coming up to a visit, his behavior will change, and not for the better.
I really think that on some level he knows he's better off here, that his
life is better, but I think he also thinks he should not feel that way.
It's hard for him.
Anne Robotti
wrote:
>Yeah. I think SS is beginning to get it too. In between visits, it's as if
>we are his whole family, and he's happy and secure, but if she calls, or if
>it's coming up to a visit, his behavior will change, and not for the better.
>I really think that on some level he knows he's better off here, that his
>life is better, but I think he also thinks he should not feel that way.
>It's hard for him.
I think all the problems start after they get it. Before they get it,
it's just "things are this way at Mommy's house and this way at
Daddy's house" and all's well. When they wake up and realize, "Hey
wait a minute, my situation is totally fucked, this is what I should
be getting from my parents and I'm not," is when you need to get them
into therapy and fast. And the thing is, once that hits, there's a
limit (IMO) to what a SP can actually do for the kid. Because you can
exhaust yourself trying to give them everything a BP should, but if it
doesn't come from one of the BPs you're still just somebody doing it,
whatever you tell yourself. There's a chance the kid might grow up
grateful, you might get some warm fuzzies out of it, but I think we do
ourselves a disservice if we think that we can somehow take the place
of what kids should get from their parents.
With the realization that the BPs aren't stepping up to the plate,
there usually comes the realization that somebody who doesn't *have*
to is stepping up to the plate instead, and I think that creates a
certain amount of vulnerability for a child. That's why I'm such a big
proponent of therapy. My SD knows that she has to stay in therapy, and
that it's her only chance for a happy life, we've discussed it many
times.
I don't know, I always thought that some day SD would "realize the
truth" about BM and then things would get easier. But the resulting
hurt and anger made things harder. I remember her crying the day BM
told her she didn't want visitation anymore and SD should clean out
her room. SD was saying, "I understand she's mad at me, but how can
she not want to see me?" And she's saying that in the full knowledge
that no matter *what* they did, I'd walk on two broken legs to see my
kids for whatever time I could.
It's all just very complicated.
Anne
Geri and sometimes Brian
>there usually comes the realization that somebody who doesn't *have*
>to is stepping up to the plate instead, and I think that creates a
>certain amount of vulnerability for a child.
Do you think it is a little better when one of the BPs is stepping up to the
plate, even if the other isn't?
Anne Robotti
sometimes Brian) wrote:
>>With the realization that the BPs aren't stepping up to the plate,
>>there usually comes the realization that somebody who doesn't *have*
>>to is stepping up to the plate instead, and I think that creates a
>>certain amount of vulnerability for a child.
>
>Do you think it is a little better when one of the BPs is stepping up to the
>plate, even if the other isn't?
Well, yes I do. But I still think that if *either* one isn't, the kid
is always going to go inward with that. "Why doesn't Mommy love me,
what's wrong with me?" rather than "Why doesn't Mommy love me, what's
wrong with her?" if you see what I mean. I've seen a lot of kids and
heard a lot of stories, and what I've basically come up with is that
there's some core inside a kid that expects that they'll be the center
of their Mom and Dad's world. Even if they have to be separately the
center of Mom's and the center of Dad's. And when that doesn't happen,
I just think it creates a disconnect that is very difficult to heal.
I think it's better to address it directly when the child is old
enough to understand, "Mommy is sick, and that's why she forgets that
she said she'd come and see you, it's not that she doesn't want to,"
if the Mom's on drugs, for example. But still, I think that if a kid
has a truly absent BP you have to watch them very carefully, build up
their self-esteem, make sure the other BP is active and involved and
making the point that the child has worth and value.
I mean, I think the SP can make a valuable contribution, especially if
there's nobody else there. But I just think that you can't fix
everything and shoudl realize that up front.
Anne
Anne Robotti
wrote:
>
>Well, I *am* an adoptive parent. I guess I can say that before, when SS
>lived with his mom, as far as I was concerned our child came first. Always.
>Of course, now he lives with us, and it's far easier to work things out so
>that things are more equalized.
>
>Lori
Lori, it's easier to work things out so that the nuts and bolts are
more equalized. But have your feelings changed?
Anne
Geri and sometimes Brian
>there's nobody else there. But I just think that you can't fix
>everything and shoudl realize that up front.
The longer I am doing this, the more right I think this is. :-)
I think ITLR it is probably better for the stepparent to develop his/her own
relationship witih the kid, rather than try to be a replacement parent.
Especially if the parent they are "replacing" is a toxic one. I think it might
be just as beneficial to the kid to be a bonus parent, as somebody (Louise?)
wrote a long time a go.
My SD and I tinker with our roles for each other every day. I am an
alpha-female parent, but not mom. OTOH, I have a great relationship with my SD
that is our own - part parent, part friend, part comedienne - you name it. I
hope that my SD and I end up still close family members, (at least after we
navigate the teen years) when all is said and done.
Robbin S.
> Sigh. I'm going to assume this is partly directed at me. And I said
> NOTHING OF THE SORT. Why are you so defensive?
You said, "Your fiance did a shitty thing to you, making you responsible for
the decision. It's not your guilt if he doesn't want to see his kid, that's
on him."
Sure I felt defensive, I'll cop to that. Why? Because I asked for opinions
on what others would do and one of the first responses I read is a personal
swipe toward SO. Maybe that's justified and maybe it's not, but there you
go.
> My original point, which you still don't seem to get, is that by making
you
> make the decision, he doesn't have to say "no, thanks, you'll have to make
> other arrangements" to his ex/daughter. He can say "sorry, Robbin says
no."
It's not that I don't "get it, it's that I'm just floored that this is the
only interpretation you could make. Since I am new here, it's possible that
you haven't read any of my posts, so maybe it bears repeating that We Are
New To This. We're working our way through it ... in his mind, knowing that
she spends 8 or so hrs with me on Saturdays, he needed to clear it with me
that she come on this weekend.
Why this has to be seen as some ploy to protect himself is beyond me.
Robbin
Melissa
>time at home involved in a damned computer game every day all day from the
>time he wakes up till he goes to bed or the time he gets home from work till
>he goes to bed...*I* am the person that parents that child and it's been
>like that for years.
This doesn't seem like an SK issue though. It's a marriage issue.
Robbin S.
> I guess what I am saying is, as long as the two of you map out what you
want
> your marriage -- the working partnership -- to be like, and you both
agree, I
> don't see a problem with either approach. Families can function
differently
> from one another, and still both be okay.
Sheila, thank you for sharing your background. A lot of this resonates with
me, and I need to mull it around in my brain for a bit. But I wanted you to
know how much I appreciate the thoughtful input while I do
Robbin
Melissa
>it's just "things are this way at Mommy's house and this way at
>Daddy's house" and all's well. When they wake up and realize, "Hey
>wait a minute, my situation is totally fucked, this is what I should
>be getting from my parents and I'm not," is when you need to get them
>into therapy and fast.
This is so freaking true.
Melissa
>relationship witih the kid, rather than try to be a replacement parent.
>Especially if the parent they are "replacing" is a toxic one. I think it
>might
>be just as beneficial to the kid to be a bonus parent, as somebody (Louise?)
>wrote a long time a go.
Hey Geri, we're agreeing again. :)
> My SD and I tinker with our roles for each other every day. I am an
>alpha-female parent, but not mom. OTOH, I have a great relationship with my
>SD
>that is our own - part parent, part friend, part comedienne - you name it. I
>hope that my SD and I end up still close family members, (at least after we
>navigate the teen years) when all is said and done.
>
I think being an SP can be very rewarding. There's not the same kind of
pressue, and you can define your role however you want to.
WhansaMi
Thank you. I think the process of working out these situations often involves
a bit of time-- and of course, like most other aspects of life, requires
tweaking every once in a while. Good luck to you!
Sheila
Geri and sometimes Brian
>
world.
:-)
Robbin S.
> When my mom got sick, DH did everthing for her that he would have done for
> his own mom. He still does. Lots of times I get too freaked out by her
> continual medical crises that need my attention. He steps right in and
does
> whatever needs to be done. He does it for me. He never asks for anything
in
> return. I don't even have to ask him for help. He just does it. I would do
> anything I possibly could do for his children, or for his family members.
> What's important to him is important to me, and vice versa. Family is
> family. Period.
I have to confess, that I am not there yet. In theory, I believe this is the
most healthy way for a stepfamily to operate. After reading so much here
though, I understand that in practice, a lot of people have to put up with a
lot of bullshit and that it's nearly impossible (for some) to get on board
with this philosophy.
For me, it wouldn't be possible to love another child like my own. I
wouldn't even want to try. I don't think it's necessary to try. What I'm
questioning for myself is, whether I should, as a steparent, behave
according to my own parenting philosophy, even the part that says sometimes
a kids needs you to be there for them and you give up your own stuff to do
it.
Robbin
Robbin S.
Robbin
n...@impactwp.com
news:bt6rhk$3td60$1...@ID-4846.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Big "duh." It just dawned on me that I could just Get a Freaking
Babysitter.
>
> Robbin
Yes, Your Fiancee could get a babysitter.
Nikki
Lori
On one of her fairly infrequent visits to see SS, his mom hauled along with
her every single scrap of his clothing. she emptied out his room and made
it into an office. He's six. The only thing I can figure is that she's run
into welfare reform time limits, because it was right around the time that
she said he no longer had medicaid that we began getting the phone calls
about behavior problems that she couldn't deal with.
badgirl
"Geri and sometimes Brian" <gple...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
> > her BD (my DH) spends ALL of his
> >time at home involved in a damned computer game every day all day from
the
> >time he wakes up till he goes to bed or the time he gets home from work
till
> >he goes to bed...*I* am the person that parents that child and it's been
> >like that for years.
> >
> >I am physically and emotionally exhausted. Yes I am, and THEN some.
>
> Wow, do you find this acceptable?
No. But acceptable or not that's the way it is here right now and I deal
with it. There's many reasons I stick around and 1 of the biggest ones is
the fact that I know *why* he does this. I'm not really prepared to discuss
it here though so that will just have to be enough.
>
> That
> >doesn't mean Stephanie asked for this lot in life and it would surely be
> >royally shitty of me to give her less just because she isn't my bio kid.
> >Maybe it has to do with that I've been in her life since she was small,
> >maybe it has to do with the kind of person I am, maybe it has to do with
the
> >fact that DH is the CP. I have no clue, but it isn't fair and it isn't
right
> >to put her in a lesser citizen category just because I didn't birth her
and
> >frankly I won't do it.
> >
> Forget about the step-parent issue - I can't believe you put up with a
> *marriage* like that, unless you like being a martyr. Why doesn't your
husband
> pull the plug on his computer and pay some attention to *his* child and
also to
> his wife?
>
>
>
> ~~Geri~~
>
Again, there's quite a few reasons, I just don't feel comfortable putting
all of them out here on USNET. It's really difficult and complicated and I
struggle with it constantly.
Jen
Kathleen
you are the better parent, or harping on it. My daughter's SM claims
to be the "REAL" parent, and it gives me hives. It doesn't matter who
is talking, or what their situation, I hear SM going on about how
awful a parent I am... and I know how she and other people can often
justify anything in her minds.
With hope and heart,
Kathleen
--
If you are humble nothing will touch you, neither praise nor disgrace,
because you know what you are.
~Mother Theresa
: >I mean, I think the SP can make a valuable contribution, especially
:
:
:
:
:
:
Lori
Well, I'm not entirely sure how you mean changed. I know I'd shove either
of them out of the way of a truck and let it hit me instead. I know that no
matter which kid has been hurt by someone else, that hurt tears at me, and
it isn't more with one or the other. When either of them runs into my arms
for a hug I melt. Doesn't matter which one it is. And other than here, I
don't refer to them as "our son" and my stepson". They are simply "our
kids". Does that answer what you're asking? If not, be more specific for
me, OK? :-)
Vicki Robinson
>
>Why this has to be seen as some ploy to protect himself is beyond me.
>
Because we have found, on this newsgroup, that this is frequently the
case. There are a lot of men out there who don't feel competent to
parent their kids, hands-on, or who feel that women do it better, or
who simply don't want to, aren't interested in spending long stretches
of unstructured time with their kids. There are a lot of them,
whether they act out of malice or fear or indifference. And many of
them want to protect their images by making the stepmom responsible
for saying no. "Hey, *I'd* have you here in a New York minute, you
know that, but Matilda said no, and, well, there's nothing I can do."
These aren't bad guys (ok, some of them are), they just don't gladly
interact with their children without backup for any number of a
thousand possible reasons. (I'm married to one too, and it's not that
he doesn't love them. He truly does. But I have to keep standing
back, saying "What are you going to do about your daughter?" instead
of letting him let me take care of it, which is his first impulse.
Again, not because he's a bad guy, but because he thinks I know how
and he doesn't.)
But taking the value judgement out of it, I have to agree that the
appropriate thing for him have said would have been "Let talk to
Robbin, and then I'll let you know what we decide." He really *has*
abdicated responsibility for the decision to you, and he's the parent.
You say you're feeling your way through this new situation, and maybe
it would be a good idea to establish that he is the primary parent to
his child, and that you will happily support him and back him up in
that endeavor. And to that end, you can say "sure!" to any and all
requests to be with his kid when he can't be, but *he* has to be the
first line. It's his privilege and responsibility to take care of his
child, and if he needs your help he can feel free to ask for it, but
you have to be able to toss the ball right back in his lap.
Does that make sense?
Vicki
--
Just to think I used to worry about things like that.
Used to worry 'bout rich and skinny
'til I wound up poor and fat.
-Delbert McClinton
Lori
> "Lynn Randall" <ly...@aikidocenters.com> wrote:
>
> > When my mom got sick, DH did everthing for her that he would have done
for
> > his own mom. He still does. Lots of times I get too freaked out by her
> > continual medical crises that need my attention. He steps right in and
> does
> > whatever needs to be done. He does it for me. He never asks for anything
> in
> > return. I don't even have to ask him for help. He just does it. I would
do
> > anything I possibly could do for his children, or for his family
members.
> > What's important to him is important to me, and vice versa. Family is
> > family. Period.
>
> I have to confess, that I am not there yet. In theory, I believe this is
the
> most healthy way for a stepfamily to operate. After reading so much here
> though, I understand that in practice, a lot of people have to put up with
a
> lot of bullshit and that it's nearly impossible (for some) to get on board
> with this philosophy.
>
> For me, it wouldn't be possible to love another child like my own. I
> wouldn't even want to try. I don't think it's necessary to try.
You never know, though, how things will turn out. I couldn't even tell you
how many people, when we were in the process of adopting, said "Oh, but
would you really be able to love someone else's child as if it were your
own?" I was asked "what if after you adopt, you have your own baby?" and I
answered first, this child *is* our own, and second, if we ended up having a
child after that, then our first child would have a little brother or
sister. BM was sure from the get go that SS would come first with DH,
because this is, after all, his bio child. Didn't turn out that way,
though. Our son, who came to us when he was two, is my husband's first
child, and genetics didn't change in any way his feelings for our son, or
make him treat his other child better because of biology.
The Watsons
"Geri and sometimes Brian" <gple...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
> I think ITLR it is probably better for the stepparent to develop his/her
own
> relationship witih the kid, rather than try to be a replacement parent.
> Especially if the parent they are "replacing" is a toxic one. I think it
might
> be just as beneficial to the kid to be a bonus parent, as somebody
(Louise?)
> wrote a long time a go.
*nods*
Jess
The Watsons
"Kathleen" <lovebi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bt6t1p$3scvv$1...@ID-108718.news.uni-berlin.de...
> And that seems so much healthier to me than constantly proving that
> you are the better parent, or harping on it. My daughter's SM claims
> to be the "REAL" parent, and it gives me hives. It doesn't matter who
> is talking, or what their situation, I hear SM going on about how
> awful a parent I am... and I know how she and other people can often
> justify anything in her minds.
*grr* i hate that...
Jess
The Watsons
"Lori" <real...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:MECJb.87$Fz1...@fe01.usenetserver.com...
> On one of her fairly infrequent visits to see SS, his mom hauled along
with
> her every single scrap of his clothing. she emptied out his room and made
> it into an office. He's six. The only thing I can figure is that she's
run
> into welfare reform time limits, because it was right around the time that
> she said he no longer had medicaid that we began getting the phone calls
> about behavior problems that she couldn't deal with.
> Lori
(just as a side note, if she doesn't have insurance, she should still be
able to get him on medicaid)
Jess
The Watsons
"Robbin S." <rmspoo...@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:bt6rao$3t9rl$1...@ID-4846.news.uni-berlin.de...
> wouldn't even want to try. I don't think it's necessary to try. What I'm
> questioning for myself is, whether I should, as a steparent, behave
> according to my own parenting philosophy, even the part that says
sometimes
> a kids needs you to be there for them and you give up your own stuff to do
> it.
if that's your comfort zone, go for it...that was mine, but i know a lot of
others have different ways that work for them...:) that's the neat thing
'bout here-you can see the whole smorgasboard and pick and choose from
it...:)
Jess
The Watsons
> Big "duh." It just dawned on me that I could just Get a Freaking
Babysitter.
*cheeky grins* well, i Tried the subtle hint with my post 'bout sunshine
spending the afternoon at her aunt's....:p you just need more coffee, is
all...;)
Jess
Kathleen
that
: > you are the better parent, or harping on it. My daughter's SM
claims
: > to be the "REAL" parent, and it gives me hives. It doesn't matter
who
: > is talking, or what their situation, I hear SM going on about how
: > awful a parent I am... and I know how she and other people can
often
: > justify anything in her minds.
:
: *grr* i hate that...
:
: Jess
Yes, I'm wondering how to *not* hear that in other people. Because I
do occasionally and it drives me nuts.
Lori
"The Watsons" <warped...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:38DJb.46045$m83.17418@fed1read01...
No, he had medicaid, up until about 3 months before he came to live here.
She said the state dropped him because according to them she makes too much
money. Only thing is, if she's as unemployed as she claims, this isn't
true. Either *she* dropped it because she didn't like the clinic they had
to use, or she really ran into time limits. I mentioned that the income
guidelines had been published in our local paper, and that if she made more
than that she should be doing just fine. She says the guidelines are lower
in her county. I have no idea. The only reason he needed the medicaid in
the first place was because for several years we couldn't afford medical
coverage through DH's former job, and BM would not put any effort into
getting the kind of job she could have with her education and experience.
Being underemployed has always worked for her, it kept her eligible for
welfare, and kept the lion's share of CS on the shoulders of the fathers of
her children.
The Watsons
> Yes, I'm wondering how to *not* hear that in other people. Because I
> do occasionally and it drives me nuts.
simple-you know you're not a bad parent, so try to let it slide off...:)
Jess
The Watsons
> No, he had medicaid, up until about 3 months before he came to live here.
> She said the state dropped him because according to them she makes too
much
> money. Only thing is, if she's as unemployed as she claims, this isn't
> true. Either *she* dropped it because she didn't like the clinic they had
> to use, or she really ran into time limits. I mentioned that the income
> guidelines had been published in our local paper, and that if she made
more
> than that she should be doing just fine. She says the guidelines are
lower
> in her county. I have no idea. The only reason he needed the medicaid in
> the first place was because for several years we couldn't afford medical
> coverage through DH's former job, and BM would not put any effort into
> getting the kind of job she could have with her education and experience.
> Being underemployed has always worked for her, it kept her eligible for
> welfare, and kept the lion's share of CS on the shoulders of the fathers
of
> her children.
> Lori
http://cms.hhs.gov/medicaid/whoiseligible.asp
try that, see if that helps some...:)
Jess
rebecca
> "rebecca" <justre...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> > Sigh. I'm going to assume this is partly directed at me. And I said
> > NOTHING OF THE SORT. Why are you so defensive?
>
> You said, "Your fiance did a shitty thing to you, making you responsible
for
> the decision. It's not your guilt if he doesn't want to see his kid,
that's
> on him."
>
> Sure I felt defensive, I'll cop to that. Why? Because I asked for opinions
> on what others would do and one of the first responses I read is a
personal
> swipe toward SO. Maybe that's justified and maybe it's not, but there you
> go.
Yep, that's what I said. I criticized his behavior. Which is a far cry
from calling him the names you put in your other post. I'll tell you
something, after 5 years of this, I think the majority of stepparents who
are at all involved with raising small stepchildren deserve a medal. It's
so much harder than you think it's going to be. And I think parents that
are smart enough to hook up with people who are interested enough to come to
a place like this and talk to other people about what the right thing to do
is are pretty okay, too. (Enough phrases for you in that sentence? Jeez.)
Okay, so yeah. Maybe your husband is the exception to the 'Me man, you
woman. Care for my child' attitude that is sooooo pervasive. But you're
like the hundredth new person to come here and talk about how you're
rearranging your life to care for a stepchild, while it's not clear what, if
any, rearranging your husband's doing. A lot of those same people are
baffled a couple years down the road when they start having stepchild
issues. Not saying your husband's not working hard, but I am guessing that
you know more/think more about the stepchild part of the situation than he
does. And things will go so much personally easier on you if the two of you
can sort through parenting tasks and decisions like this _before_ you fall
into a hunter/gatherer default.
All that being said, I'm certainly sorry if I hurt your feelings. I will
try harder to be gentle, warm and fuzzy like Jennifer and Sheila in the
future. (-:
rebecca
oh, and p.s. about the 'ploy' thing. I don't believe men do this as a
'ploy'. I think it's a very strong (mostly) unconscious desire to get along
and avoid conflict with someone they've conflicted with in the past, who
holds a great deal of power over their relationship with their children.
And I challenge you to find anyone on this board dealing with a birthparent
who does not at least occasionally act in a similar manner.
WhansaMi
>try harder to be gentle, warm and fuzzy like Jennifer and Sheila in the
>future. (-:
>
>rebecca
<heeee> better not. you might become invisible too! ;-))))
Sheila
Tracey
>I have to confess, that I am not there yet. In theory, I
>believe this is the most healthy way for a stepfamily to
>operate.
Depends on how you're going to classify 'healthy'. See,
here's my gripe. When you (generic) take a family dynamic
and classify it as 'the most healthy', what you're saying
is that any family dynamic that doesn't measure up to that
is more unhealthy and even lesser than the 'ideal' when,
IMO, there are too many differences in people to classify
one as 'healthier' than another.
>After reading so much here though, I understand that in
>practice, a lot of people have to put up with a lot of
>bullshit and that it's nearly impossible (for some) to
>get on board with this philosophy.
Or maybe some don't *want* to get on board with it.
>For me, it wouldn't be possible to love another child like
>my own. I wouldn't even want to try. I don't think it's
>necessary to try.
Okay. Then why the guilt feelings when your reaction to
being asked to change your plans? IME, reactions like this
come about for a few different reasons. One could be that
we actually *are* being unreasonably selfish. One could be
that we're letting other people's opinions about how we
should act influence us to feel guilty. That's why I don't
like the 'this is the way things should be to have the
most healthy <relationship/family dynamic/stepparent situ-
ation/etc.>' thing. Instead of looking at our situation and
saying 'this is the best it can be in our case' and being
at peace with it, we end up feeling/thinking 'this sucks
and I'm an awful person because it's not meeting the 'most
healthy' criteria.'
>What I'm questioning for myself is, whether I should, as a
>steparent, behave according to my own parenting philosophy,
>even the part that says sometimes a kids needs you to be
>there for them and you give up your own stuff to do it.
I don't know that anyone has suggested that you throw your
own parenting philosophy out the window here. But, IMO, what
you've been doing is mixing apples and oranges. You've men-
tioned that if your college-aged child had said they were
coming home this weekend, you would drop everything to spend
time with them and then equated it to your situation with
your SD. They're different. You spent time with your SD last
weekend (I'm assuming), you will spend time with your SD next
weekend (I'm assuming) so feeling guilty because you're not
immediately ready to change plans for your SD when you would
for your own child who you haven't seen all that recently isn't
the same thing. Do you see what I mean?
Tracey
Tracey
>doesn't measure up to that is more unhealthy and
>even lesser than the 'ideal' when, IMO, there are
>too many differences in people to classify one as
>'healthier' than another.
All right, when re-reading this, I can see the 'WTF
are you talking about, Tracey? Of course we can classify
family dynamics as being healthier than another.' What
I meant was that there are plenty of family dynamics
here that I consider healthy that aren't mirror images
of the one described by Lynn. To say that Lynn's is
'the most healthy' is to place anybody else's family
that doesn't meet that standard in a 'lesser than' slot
and will make people feel guilty when their family doesn't
measure up.
Tracey
Geri and sometimes Brian
>> awful a parent I am... and I know how she and other people can often
>> justify anything in her minds.
Not saying this is so in Kathleen's case, but many times the SP *is* the better
parent. The main thing is that actions speak louder than words, as my old band
director used to say.
heather m.
Heather
"Geri and sometimes Brian" <gple...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
news:20040103090456...@mb-m06.aol.com...
> >I also know
> >that regardless of how whacked his mother is, and what a poor mother she
is,
> >his little face lights up for her in a way it will never do for me. This
is
> >his mommy
>
> We are going through an interesting time right now. My SD still has this
same
> deal with her mom that you describe, but you can kind of tell that it is
> conflicting with the fact that she is starting to "get it" about her mom
and
> what she is like. (Especially when her mom slams her into walls.) I
almost
> wonder if that is the cause of her latest down-turn in behavior (worse on
her
> mom's weeks, as usual) at school.
>
> (This past week when my parents were here, she was well-behaved even
beyond my
> wildest wishes. Needless to say, she got about a zillion compliments on
her
> good behavior!)
heather m.
> I don't know, I always thought that some day SD would "realize the
> truth" about BM and then things would get easier. But the resulting
> hurt and anger made things harder. I remember her crying the day BM
> told her she didn't want visitation anymore and SD should clean out
> her room. SD was saying, "I understand she's mad at me, but how can
> she not want to see me?" And she's saying that in the full knowledge
> that no matter *what* they did, I'd walk on two broken legs to see my
> kids for whatever time I could.
>
> It's all just very complicated.
>
Oh Anne, I know you'll never feel the same about SD as you do your BK's, but
I do think you feel sympathy for her and are doing a great job with her.
She is so lucky to have you.
Heather
heather m.
Heather
"Geri and sometimes Brian" <gple...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
news:20040103103402...@mb-m06.aol.com...
> >I mean, I think the SP can make a valuable contribution, especially if
> >there's nobody else there. But I just think that you can't fix
> >everything and shoudl realize that up front.
>
> The longer I am doing this, the more right I think this is. :-)
>
> I think ITLR it is probably better for the stepparent to develop his/her
own
> relationship witih the kid, rather than try to be a replacement parent.
> Especially if the parent they are "replacing" is a toxic one. I think it
might
> be just as beneficial to the kid to be a bonus parent, as somebody
(Louise?)
> wrote a long time a go.
>
> My SD and I tinker with our roles for each other every day. I am an
> alpha-female parent, but not mom. OTOH, I have a great relationship with
my SD
> that is our own - part parent, part friend, part comedienne - you name it.
I
> hope that my SD and I end up still close family members, (at least after
we
> navigate the teen years) when all is said and done.
>
>
>
>
Geri and sometimes Brian
Well, her birthday is next Thursday. We get her back on Friday. For her
birthday we are going to paint her room pink (her "signature color"). So far I
have a pair of "mulberry" (pinkish-purple) corduroy overalls from L.L.Kids for
her, a pink "princess" canopy thing (like mosquito netting) for her bed that I
got at Limited Too, and we are getting her a really cute white wood vanity with
a filagree white metal stool that goes with it. (She will pee her pants over
this - she has wanted a vanity forever, but I wanted to get her something nicer
than those toy ones.) I am sure there will be other things, but this is the
list so far.
This is one area where I can't say that Brian has abdicated as far as SD, but I
have taken it over, and that would be picking out clothes and stuff for SD. As
I remind him, I was a little girl once, and therefore in a better position to
know what kinds of things little girls like.
Geri and sometimes Brian
Thanks! You know I was pondering this whole thread this AM (along with that
football coach situation) as I was getting ready for my Red Hat breakfast, and
I was thinking that at our house we do a couple of things that SD doesn't do
with BM, and I hope when she is older she looks back and remembers fondly. We
sing songs, especially funny songs. (For Brian's birthday Wednesday, SD, my
mom and me all sang "Happy Birthday" to him in bogus "opera" falsetto and
laughed our butts off.) We joke around. (On the occasions that we have done
funny stuff in front of BM, she has just looked perplexed. SD says her mom
never jokes around.) The other thing we do is play games as a family,
especially vicious, bloodthirsty games of Uno.
People have different ideas of what a "perfect" family should be and those are
perfect for them, but don't have to be the standard for everyone else. I grew
up in a Cleaver-esque kind of family and my siblings who are married all have
them with their kids. This is what I know as how to be a family. Obviously we
can't have that with SD, because she spends half her life with BM. However,
Brian and I try to create an atmosphere as much like that as possible during
the time we have her, so at least she has that experience for half her life.
Vicki Robinson
those disorders going? It sounds as though the meds and her
own self-control are doing pretty well if she managed to be pleasant
and polite while your parents were there.
And that list of stuff for her room sounds like heaven.
Vicki Robinson
>To say that Lynn's is
>'the most healthy' is to place anybody else's family
>that doesn't meet that standard in a 'lesser than' slot
>and will make people feel guilty when their family doesn't
>measure up.
I'm going to qualify it a little more and say that it isn't a question
of "measuring up," it's a question of "being the same as."
There are a jillion ways of constituting a healthy family. They don't
look the same, they all turn out mentally and emotionally healthy
people. There is no one right way, and there is no clear-cut
hierarchy.
Anne Robotti
wrote:
>Oh Anne, I know you'll never feel the same about SD as you do your BK's, but
>I do think you feel sympathy for her and are doing a great job with her.
>She is so lucky to have you.
Well, I appreciate that Heather. I think people get the impression
that I think my SD should sleep in the snow or something. But all I'm
saying is that if neither of her BPs is giong to get her what she
needs in a situation, I don't automatically jump to the conclusion
that I should do it.
Anne
Lynn Randall
"Tracey" <rbran...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:3FF7196F...@aol.com...
I agree with what you say Tracey. But I did feel guilty when I participating
in actions that contributed to negativity.
I was just speaking with my SO about this and how far I feel I have come. I
have been a step-parent for 23 years. For most of the earlier years (looking
back on it now), I think I behaved very poorly. I went through many of the
issues people here are going through, and I am not proud of how I handled
them.
It's much easier to act/react in a positive way when you don't feel that the
BM has any power over you and your life. For many years I allowed the fact
of her existence to make me miserable. And I did everything I could to make
her miserable back. And of course the SK's were in the middle and I took out
my frustrations and feelings of impotence on them. I justified it to myself
at the time, but deep inside I knew I was wrong.
When my SD came to live with us, and BM could no longer pull financial and
visitation strings, I felt freer and better, and my actions improved along
with my feelings.
I'm not trying to criticize or put down anyone for where they're at. Been
there, seen it, done it. Just want to put my own experiences out there.
Lynn
lilblakdog
> I mean, I think the SP can make a valuable contribution, especially if
> there's nobody else there. But I just think that you can't fix
> everything and shoudl realize that up front.
But that would mean admitting that I'm not Superwoman. If I admit I'm less
than Superwoman, then I'd accept less from myself than super things. If I
accepted less from myself than super things, that means I'm passing off less
than super things to SS. And if I pass off less than super things to SS,
then I'm fixing even *less* than I am believing that I'm Superwoman.
I defy anybody to suggest that I'm not on top of my situation! :-)
Seriously, though, can you really fix a person anyway? I mean, SS will
never be the person he would have been if his mother had never been hit by a
car. But if I can help him become an independent, educated person, with a
good heart and good friends, who celebrates the fact that his mother is with
him even if she's not here on this earth, is that really still broken? I
can *never* give SS his mom back. And whereas I would adopt him in a minute
if he ever asked me, I can never, will never, do-not-want-to ever be his
mother. He has one of those, and she loved him more than I ever could. But
I can be so many other things--things that will help him with the fact that
he doesn't have her any longer. I can be a strength of will that gets him
through school. I can be a buffer that helps him build a day-in-day-out
relationship with his father. I can be an educator, a friend, a guide, an
arbitrator, a spiritual teacher. I can help him celebrate his mom and
understand that her spirit is still with him. I have no guarantee in this
world that I can help him be the person I'd like to see him be, but I don't
have any hope at all if I don't at least believe I can.
And I think that's the same with a lot of these situations--you can take a
different set of parts and *still* build a working mousetrap. When it comes
down to it, what you can't fix is the other parent. You can do wonders with
a child if you believe you can.
lil
--
http://lilblakdog.tripod.com
lilblakdog
news:20040103103402...@mb-m06.aol.com...
> OTOH, I have a great relationship with my SD
> that is our own - part parent, part friend, part comedienne - you name it.
This is how I always felt. I was never one of those step-parents that
thought I was a mom, and I didn't like the term "stepmother" either. I
thought one forced a relationship on him that wasn't his chosing, and the
other was too distancing. I always told him I was his friend...still do,
actually, although ironically he sees the term stepmother as proof of our
bond. I'm a parent--not mom and not dad, but one of those people you don't
screw with all the same. And I always let him know that because I wasn't
mom and dad, I could see things and do things that they maybe weren't able
to...and one of those things was to help him understand why they maybe
couldn't.
> I
> hope that my SD and I end up still close family members, (at least after
we
> navigate the teen years) when all is said and done.
I have a dream that one day SS looks back on his childhood and understands
everything I've done for him. Not because I want the kudoes, but because I
want to know that he knows that he was worth the effort to somebody who
didn't have to make it. But mostly it's the little things that I hope he
takes with him. My singing in the car on camping trips. Splitting packs of
Twinkies whenever we stop for gas. The Halloween costumes.
I can live with not having him in my life if I have to. But I'd like to
think that I'm responsible for some of his happier memories, and maybe some
of his own family traditions.
lil
--
http://lilblakdog.tripod.com
Angie Reynolds
<snip>
> > > No offence meant Robbin, but you don't have your own yet. The second
you
> > do
> > > you'll see you couldn't possibly ever give them the same treatment,
> love,
> > > consideration, attention, interest, kindly feelings or anything, and
you
> > > might then stop giving yourself a hard time over it.
I don't agree with that one bit.
> >
> > No offence meant Nikki but this is plain bullshit. She may very well
find
> > that she feels just as strongly about her SK's as she does her bio kids.
I
> > know I do. My daughter means the world to me. You notice I don't refer
to
> > her as my SD.
I agree. I have 2 SS's, 6 and 8 and just recently had twins and I don't feel
any differently now that I have BK's. I also feel the same way about my SS's
as I felt for my bio daughter before she passed away. I refer to may SS's as
my sons, not my SS's. IMO, (and my experience) biologically or not, makes no
difference to me. I love them all the same and I don't favor one over the
other. You can have just a strong of a bond with your SK's as you do with
your BK's. In my opinion and experience anyway.....
Angie
<snip>
lilblakdog
> Not saying this is so in Kathleen's case, but many times the SP *is* the
better
> parent.
Thanks, Geri...I was trying to figure out a way to point that out without
being one of those bitch SMs who think that they can parent a kid better
than its own mother can. Essentially, yes, I do believe that I proved that
I was a more...um...effective parent than SS's mother was.
lil
--
http://lilblakdog.tripod.com