 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Family Forum / Parenting / Step Parents / August 2004Help: My line in the sand
I've been looking for some answers or maybe at least some helpful tips for a couple of weeks. I thought I'd try to post some about this situation and perhaps there are folks out there that might have some good advice. I'm a divorced non-custodial mother of 1 boy (8 years old). My boyfriend and I have been living together for almost 6 years. BF is separated and has 2 sons (11 and 9) who are with us every other weekend. We also have a 1 year old daughter together. When BF and I decided to move in together he had been separated for a year and I truly thought that I could be understanding and fine with everything having gone through divorce myself. 6 years later nothing has changed in the divorce department because his ex-wife "isn't comfortable". (Another subject altogether). So here's my issue: His children, from the very beginning, have been difficult to deal with. At their mom's house they have full reign, they choose what they want to do, how they want to do it, etc. This is in everything. They don't like to take showers, they don't have to. They don't want their hair cut so it grows long (and unwashed). They want to go to the local games shop and play games (by themselves) until 10:00 any night of the week. They choose what they want for dinner, to wear the same clothes for days on end. You get the picture. I don't have a problem with what they do at their own house. In fact, for the first 2 years that my BF and I lived together I even managed to suck it up and keep my opinions to myself when entire family outings would be changed in the middle because the boys decided that they wanted to go somewhere else or when they would come to our house with plans already for the weekend that we were expected to accomodate. However, as time progressed I started to become less accomodating. I would make them clean up their room, just like my son would have to, and make them take a shower and put on clean clothes if we were going someplace together. This is when the issues really became a problem. Without fail, any attempt to "require" something of the boys that they didn't want to do would prompt huge screaming fits and demands to go home and everything stops to give them whatever attention they need. Their mother insists that this is because they're tramatized by their dad not living with them anymore. So there's a lot that I have to just take a deep breathe and let it go. Now things have changed, though. Our daughter had her 1 year birthday party and this was planned well in advance. The day before, their dad went to the gameshop where they were playing to remind them that we'd be picking them up for the party the next day. When we go to pick them up at 12:30 they're sleeping because they stayed out late the night before and needed some rest. Their mother wants us to go wake them. When we do there's a huge screaming fit because they don't want to go. They don't feel like it, they're tired, etc. In the end, we're an hour late for the party and the boys aren't with us. I'm furious that my daughter's birthday party has turned into a big event about the boys, as usual. What's more, she isn't old enough now to be hurt by this but next year and the year after...what then? It's just not fair to expect her to spend the rest of her life having to acquiesce to the lame excuse of her brothers' pain for everything. I should note that my son has no such issues and very happily makes the transition between houses and never uses my divorce as an excuse for bad behaviour. Later that evening I called to talk to the boys' mom. This is the first time that I've made a point of expressing my views to her. She basically told me that the boys made a choice and that she believes they have that right. I asked if there would be consequences and she told me that it was none of my business. So, I treated this the only way that I felt I could and told her that the boys would have to write an apology letter to their sister before returning, which my boyfriend backed me up on. To this she tells me that "she doesn't feel comfortable making them do that". She also tells me that this wasn't really the boys having bad manners or behaviour, they are great kids, that this incident is due to the fact that they are hurt by their dad leaving. I'm just at a loss. I don't really feel like being the understanding one that just puts up with it anymore. > When BF and I decided to move in together he had been separated for a > year and I truly thought that I could be understanding and fine with > everything having gone through divorce myself. 6 years later nothing > has changed in the divorce department because his ex-wife "isn't > comfortable". (Another subject altogether). So here's my issue: Your first issue is why he isn't progressing with the divorce-if her comfort is his main priority to the exclusion of everything else, then they need to be considering reconciliation. > I don't have a problem with what they do at their own house. > However, as time progressed I started to become less [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > didn't want to do would prompt huge screaming fits and demands to go > home and everything stops to give them whatever attention they need. My question is why you're requiring things of them, especially when you know it's going to result in screaming fits. I'd suggest handing it over to their father and letting them scream at him-you have a baby girl to worry about. > Now things have changed, though. Our daughter had her 1 year birthday > party and this was planned well in advance. The day before, their dad [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > They don't feel like it, they're tired, etc. In the end, we're an > hour late for the party and the boys aren't with us. Cool-you didn't have to worry about them pitching a fit at her party. :) > I'm furious that my daughter's birthday party has turned into a big > event about the boys, as usual. What's more, she isn't old enough now [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > transition between houses and never uses my divorce as an excuse for > bad behaviour. She doesn't have to acquiesce-she'll form whatever relationship they'll have when she's a bit older. > Later that evening I called to talk to the boys' mom. This is the > first time that I've made a point of expressing my views to her. Bad move-she could probably care less. >She > basically told me that the boys made a choice and that she believes > they have that right. I asked if there would be consequences and she > told me that it was none of my business. She's right-what goes on in her house is none of your business. >So, I treated this the only > way that I felt I could and told her that the boys would have to write [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I'm just at a loss. I don't really feel like being the understanding > one that just puts up with it anymore. Then don't-stop doing it all and let their father handle it. Jess > I don't have a problem with what they do at their own house. In fact, > for the first 2 years that my BF and I lived together I even managed [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > with plans already for the weekend that we were expected to > accomodate. This is a marital problem -- why isn't your boyfriend backing up already-made plans? > Without fail, any attempt to "require" something of the boys that they > didn't want to do would prompt huge screaming fits and demands to go > home and everything stops to give them whatever attention they need. > Their mother insists that this is because they're tramatized by their > dad not living with them anymore. So there's a lot that I have to > just take a deep breathe and let it go. What is your boyfriend doing when the fits are happening? > I'm furious that my daughter's birthday party has turned into a big > event about the boys, as usual. What's more, she isn't old enough now [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > transition between houses and never uses my divorce as an excuse for > bad behaviour. I'm hoping you guys have two cars -- I'd recommend you let the boys' father handle pickups and any subsequent fights, and you proceed to whatever your plans were, without him if that's how it ends up going. > Later that evening I called to talk to the boys' mom. Bad call, unless you've been routinely talking to her. Where is your boyfriend in all of this? > This is the > first time that I've made a point of expressing my views to her. She > basically told me that the boys made a choice and that she believes > they have that right. I asked if there would be consequences and she > told me that it was none of my business. It *is* none of your business what consequences will be imposed in her home. > So, I treated this the only > way that I felt I could and told her that the boys would have to write > an apology letter to their sister before returning, which my boyfriend > backed me up on. Did you gain his concurrence prior to the phone call, or did you declare it and go to him to back you up? Is your boyfriend prepared to take his visitation somewhere other than your shared home, when the boys totally refuse to write that letter? > To this she tells me that "she doesn't feel > comfortable making them do that". She also tells me that this wasn't > really the boys having bad manners or behaviour, they are great kids, > that this incident is due to the fact that they are hurt by their dad > leaving. I can see you seeing red on the blame on dad this many years down the road. However, you must consider the potential consequences of laying down an ultimatum *before you do so*. You had to have known, based on many years of knowing this woman, that there was no way in hell she'd back up a punishment coming from you. How were you planning to handle an outright refusal to comply? > I'm just at a loss. I don't really feel like being the understanding > one that just puts up with it anymore. I can understand your feelings, but I question how you're acting given those feelings. First of all, why are you taking lead on all of these interactions; this is their father's responsibility, not yours. Second, I'd be backing right off of the bratty crap from the kids and make their dad handle it -- no privileges in the absence of appropriate behavior. If that means you and the other two kids do fun things while dad sits on his boys while they're punished for being rude, that's what it means. Maybe that kind of discipline, rigorously and consistently applied, will start to bring their behavior around, at least in your home. > First of all, why are you taking lead on all of these > interactions; this is their father's responsibility, not yours. Good question. This is completely the father's responsibility. It sounds to me that the BF isn't bothered by the boys and their behavior. > Second, I'd be backing right off of the bratty crap from the kids and > make their dad handle it -- no privileges in the absence of > appropriate behavior. What if the father doesn't care to parent in that fashion? He's obviously gone a long time in allowing the type of behavior that is being described, so it can't be that huge of a deal to him. In a situation like this, who gets to decide what is or is not appropriate? What if they don't agree? Since the OP has been his GF for quite some time now, it seems that she saw how he parented, (had a baby with him in spite of that) and now wants to force the entire group (BF and his kids), to change their ways to suit her. >If that means you and the other two kids do fun > things while dad sits on his boys while they're punished for being > rude, that's what it means. This would be a fine bit of advice, if the BF was the one that wanted to affect change. It sounds like up until the GF started complaining and making an issue, the BF wasn't too bothered with the older boys behavior. If he's not totally behind this, he will start to resent the GF for trying to dictate to him. *Also*, I don't think the GF has a right to cut out the father from those fun things with their shared daughter, simply because she isn't happy with his other children or how they are parented. What right would she have, for instance, to say that he can't come to his daughter's party because he has to 'sit on his <other> children'? She is his daughter, too. This all seems like a recipe for a break-up. (Almost said divorce, but if I got the story straight, the OP is living with, and had a child with a man who is still married to someone else? ----Any wonder the kids are messed up, with a situation like that, and a BM that has no idea what it means to raise healthy, happy children, to boot?) >Maybe that kind of discipline, rigorously > and consistently applied, will start to bring their behavior around, > at least in your home. I've read this twice now and though I believe this is what it would take to make positive changes in the boys, it comes across (to me) that you are telling her to put both the father and his boys in a "time out" together, because she is unhappy with how the boys behave. It comes across (to me anyway), that you are telling her to dictate to the father that he has to parent in the way she deems appropriate, and in a way treating the BF like one of the children she is responsible for parenting. Regardless of whether I think the OP is correct in wanting to affect change, I don't think she has a right to dictate that a change be made. If the BF is on board for needing to improve the situation then that is a different kettle of fish; I don't get that feeling from the original post, however. I am *not* saying that she has to live with this and not affect changes. However, between calling the BM up and trying to dictate to the BM how she is to parent and discipline in her home, and also trying to dictate to the BF how he is to parent, it sounds like this is a good way to end up in a shared parenting situation with an _Ex-BF_ to me. Cal~ > Regardless of whether I think the OP is correct in wanting to affect > change, I don't think she has a right to dictate that a change be made. > If the BF is on board for needing to improve the situation then that is > a different kettle of fish; I don't get that feeling from the original > post, however. No, but she does have the right to tell him he needs to parent his own kids because she can't or won't anymore. She absolutely has the right to insist on a change if this isn't working-bedamned if I'd have some kids in my house screaming at me just because I told them to get dressed. I'd be packing their suitcases and shipping them right back to their mother's and telling their father to deal, I wasn't. > I am *not* saying that she has to live with this and not affect changes. > However, between calling the BM up and trying to dictate to the BM how > she is to parent and discipline in her home, and also trying to dictate > to the BF how he is to parent, it sounds like this is a good way to end > up in a shared parenting situation with an _Ex-BF_ to me. I think her calling the BM was a mistake from the git-go, but the BF does need to stand up and start doing Something besides drinking milk, ya know? I don't see anyone suggesting she tell him *how* to parent, but that he simply *parent*, somehow. Jess >> Regardless of whether I think the OP is correct in wanting to affect >> change, I don't think she has a right to dictate that a change be [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > No, but she does have the right to tell him he needs to parent his > own kids Actually, I don't think she does have that right. >because she can't or won't anymore. She does have a right to refuse to take over his responsibility, however. >She absolutely has the > right to insist on a change if this isn't working I agree. She has a right to insist on a change of some sort, if the situation isn't working; but she doesn't have a right to make a unilateral decision on what that change will be, in regard to his 'parenting' of the boys. >-bedamned if I'd > have some kids in my house screaming at me just because I told them > to get dressed. Me either. Makes you wonder why anyone would add another child to this situation, if things were as bad as all this? > I'd be packing their suitcases and shipping them > right back to their mother's If anyone ever did that to my kids, I'd tell them to get their own a.ses the hell out. Of course, I would never choose anyone that would 'ship' my kids *anywhere* against my wishes. If someone said they were going to pack MY kids bags and ship them off to their father, I'd tell them to f.ck off. But that's me. Picture you and Mike, separated- and your new SO telling you that Robyn, age 12 has to go, because she's mouthy and doesn't pick up her stuff laying about the house. Yeah, I'm not seeing you letting that happen. >and telling their father to deal, I > wasn't. Ya know. This gets so tiresome. We adults f.ck up our kids so much, and then have little or no qualms with just tossing them off on the other parent, when the going gets tough. No matter how many times people have argued this issue, it *always* comes down to the fact that the kids are the ones that *always* have to just learn to deal with whatever situation we adults put our kids in and punished when they don't handle things well. Regardless of the fact that as adults, we take a lot of time to adjust to changes particularly if they're not of our choosing. We don't just roll with the punches many times, but we seem to expect the children that are thrust into these situations to do so. These particular kids have an angry "SM" and BM pushing and pulling at each other with their BF seemingly whistling in the wind about it all, and Wow.. wonder why they're being bratty? . Kids are rebellious by nature, and then when the "nurture" part is lacking all of their lives, what else does anyone expect? To expect them to adapt to the new rules laid down by their father's GF without any rebelliousness just smacks of craziness. Add that the GF is trying to not only control the BF's parenting, but the BM's parenting, and the BM pushing the GF right back and does anyone really wonder why the boys are acting so horridly? These kids in particular seemingly have two parents that, so far, have not given a rat's a.s how they behave, and a resentful SM that has held her tongue so long that resentments have grown and is now expecting everyone (including the BM!) to just jump on her bandwagon, because now it impacts HER daughter. >> I am *not* saying that she has to live with this and not affect >> changes. However, between calling the BM up and trying to dictate to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I think her calling the BM was a mistake from the git-go, Totally, a major mistake. > but the BF > does need to stand up and start doing Something Who says? I mean.... If the BF wants to stand up and do something to help his boys start behaving, which will only serve them well in the future, that's great. But who says the GF gets to dictate his parenting? I'm not getting there. I wouldn't *ever* allow my SO to _dictate_ to me how I have to parent or even that I *have* to parent. That would be the end of our relationship. I would also not dictate to him how or if he should parent, either. I don't see anything wrong with the GF telling her boyfriend that she won't do such and such and isn't going to live with such and such; try to find an agreeable solution to the family problems and an agreement on how to handle issues that come up in their home. But I don't think she gets to tell him how he must parent or even that he must if he's not interested in doing so. I can't see that flying very well. >besides drinking > milk, ya know? I don't see that. If he wants to stand there and drink milk, she can't stop him. She doesn't have to live with it, but she doesn't get to dictate that he do otherwise. >I don't see anyone suggesting she tell him *how* to > parent, but that he simply *parent*, somehow. Not her right to tell him that he has to. Or how. You guys have taught me that, you can't have it both ways, ya know? We either can or cannot control another person. Which is it? What she can do is let him know what she can and can't live with, and he can let her know what he can and can't live with and if they are in agreement- great. And if they aren't... then they better find a way to meet in the middle somehow or find a way to co-parent the new child they've brought into this messy situation, separately. What they can't expect is that the kids are going to fall in line without any rebellion at all, and they can't expect the BM to back them up in any way; the BM has made it clear she's not going to do this. The GF can't expect everyone to see things the same way she does. The GF can expect that it might take a good long time before any positive changes she might want to make start to materialize and that there will be a long, painful struggle with those kids trying to keep the status quo. Those positive changes can come, only if the BF wants them to happen. If he's not on board with this, with a BM that certainly isn't, I don't see any hope in getting them under control at this point. It's not in her sole circle of control. Cal~ > Jess Okay, so I get that calling the BM here was a bad idea and certainly I had already sworn that wasn't ever going to happen again. :-) I'd like to clarify a couple of things here: 1) the frustration with the inability to enforce the rules for these boys is not just my own. I seem to have left the impression that this is some sort of me-against-his-kids war which isn't really the case. Nor is their father completely oblivious to all of this. We are in agreement on the rules for our house, that's not the issue. To use more correct pronouns: "our" issue is that trying to enforce the rules that apply for everyone else gets pre-empted by this pattern of behaviour where the boys throw a fit and/or demand to go to their mom's house and then if the fit itself doesn't get them what they want they or their BM pull out this guilt card about the divorce. Honestly I understand that it takes time and certainly I wouldn't expect any of our children to just "get over it", I didn't say that. BUT, I don't believe that what is going on here is really so much about the kids being in pain so much as the boys and their mom pushing a well-known button get what they want. Also, the BM has felt free to call me in the past to let me know that "one of the boys feels like I'm too strict about his room and that I should probably not be so picky about that because he's not used to it and in a very fragile state right now" or to explain that she's sorry to be taking so long on the divorce all to which I've always been very courteous. 2) the whole divorce thing...I did skip right over that and I'm kind of going to again because not a whole lot of people understand our views on this. It's not our intention to get married and while there's a sense of irritation that the paperwork can't get done already it's not so much a sore point for us in our relationship with each other. My thanks to those who posted responses. This gives me a bit to mull over for a while. -Theresa > >> Regardless of whether I think the OP is correct in wanting to affect > >> change, I don't think she has a right to dictate that a change be [quoted text clipped - 144 lines] > > > > Jess > 1) the frustration with the inability to enforce the rules for these > boys is not just my own. I seem to have left the impression that this > is some sort of me-against-his-kids war which isn't really the case. > Nor is their father completely oblivious to all of this. We are in > agreement on the rules for our house, that's not the issue. That's good. > To use more correct pronouns: "our" issue is that trying to enforce > the rules that apply for everyone else gets pre-empted by this pattern > of behaviour where the boys throw a fit and/or demand to go to their > mom's house and then if the fit itself doesn't get them what they want > they or their BM pull out this guilt card about the divorce. Relentlessly ignore the guilt card from the kids' mom. And I would reject any demands to be taken back to mom's early. Dad doesn't get to ship the kids back from their time together, though you certainly don't have to put up with it. Are the boys spending time alone with their dad? Has he taken them to a movie recently? How does he converse with them when they say their behavior is how it is because he moved out? The fits are unacceptable in kids their age, I totally agree; what you're doing isn't working, so you do need to do something else. But the time that's scheduled to be with their dad should not be cut short because of their behavior -- it is the wrong message to send to the kids that they are disposable to their dad. > Also, the BM has felt free to call me in the past to let me know that > "one of the boys feels like I'm too strict about his room and that I > should probably not be so picky about that because he's not used to it > and in a very fragile state right now" or to explain that she's sorry > to be taking so long on the divorce all to which I've always been very > courteous. Okay, then it sounds less insane that you called her. It's still nuts to offer an ultimatum in the circumstances you described. It's a tough situation that many don't understand. I think people can be overly opinionated especially if the've never dealt with this kind of situation for themselves. There is nothing worse than feeling like you have no control over your own home when the step-kids are there. I'm going through this myself. My situation is somewhat similiar. I have a daughter(3) from a previous marriage and my husband has 2 boys (6&8) from a previous. We have a 1 year old daughter together and a baby on the way due in February. It has a been a long struggle because at first my husband would let his boys do whatever they wanted when they were at our house. I was much like you and said nothing at first. Finally I got sick of it. The rules were different for my daughter and she knew it. It took us some blow out fights and getting into a good church for him to realize that things had to change. I know exactly how you feel. You want to be respected by his kids and feel like you have a say in things. I can't stand it when all these people tell you "leave it to the bio-parent." That doesn't work and it doesn't make those kids respect you. They have to know that their dad backs you up and you are a team. Hon, if he can't and won't do that for you than seriosly consider whether you really should be with this guy. It will not get any better until he puts his foot down and sets their place. I am so thankful that my husband and I went to our pastor for counseling and my husband was told that I need to be involved with disclipline too. He also told us that my husband had to put me first before his kids or our marriage would crumble. I feel for you, it's not easy. My step-sons try everything. Now that they know they have to eat whatever I cook and obey my rules and that their dad backs me up they try different things to come between us. They will not let me get near him when they are hear, they have to be holding his hand so that he cannot hold mine. They make up lies that they tell their mom about me so that she runs to my husband and trys to get him mad at me. UGH! It's no use talking to their mother because she lives with rose colored classes and it could never be her kids. I'm not saying talking to her won't work but you have to have a good relationship with her and and honest one. My ex and I are finally starting to talk well and try and be consistant with our daughter. I hope this helps. Hang in there but please don't marry him unless he changes. You won't be able to change him though, he has to want to change himself. Start by talking to him in a way that is non-accusing, tell him how everything makes you feel. If you don't see any signs of change then please consider if you want a life of this. Hmmm...there's a couple of threads here that I really don't get. The idea that if the boys throw a fit that we, the parents, should split up and he should take them off to do whatever while I continue on with the other kids. How in the world can that be healthy in any sense? I don't really see how that can allow us to stay united on our efforts if the children (any of them) can see a sure-fire method to split us up. Also...I can see there's a lot of people who feel like ultimately my boyfriend's children are "none of my business". I'm not sure I agree with that. I mentioned that the 9 and 11 year old frequently spend time out by theirselves unsupervised which really concerns me. To me that is just neglectful and potentially dangerous. Even if I can't force change on the issue, these are children that I AM responsible for when they're in my home. These are children that I will be responsible for when they're 16 and 18 and much much more difficult to control. These are also the children that if something horrible ever did happen as a result of that neglect I don't think looking them in the eye and saying, "yeah, I saw what was going on but it wasn't my problem" will be enough to make it okay in anyone's eyes, least of all mine. > Hmmm...there's a couple of threads here that I really don't get. The > idea that if the boys throw a fit that we, the parents, should split [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > our efforts if the children (any of them) can see a sure-fire method > to split us up. It all comes down to whether you are united or not. If you weren't united on how to handle them, you would need to decide what you can and can't live with. If you two can't agree, then having him deal with them is ultimately his issue, not yours. At the same time, what would you suggest to do, if the boys need to be separated from the other two children due to unruly and unacceptable behavior and you have plans.. say for a party, or an outing to an amusement park?. Would you let the boys keep you from taking the other two kids, because they can't behave? Would you allow them to hold you, your son and your daughter hostage to their bad behavior? You've already allowed them to hold you hostage on your daughter's first birthday, will you allow something like that to continue happening, because you don't want the appearance of being separated? It would be one thing if the father took the boys on an alternate but fun activity. It is totally another to have the boys be stuck at home and not doing any fun activities at all. That is what is being suggested. Have them miss out on the fun stuff, if they can't pull it together to behave like civilized human beings. Certainly not for the father to go off and do something different and equally fun, but away from the rest of the family. > Also...I can see there's a lot of people who feel like ultimately my > boyfriend's children are "none of my business". I'm not sure I agree > with that. I'm not sure I would go so far as to say it is none of your business, but he has to want to make it yours, and if not, you then have to decide if you're willing to live like that. But first, he has to want you involved and active. You certainly do not have the right to be involved, insofar as what goes on at their mother's home *at all*, with the exception being if they are being abused and/or neglected. This one drove me crazy for a long time. Still does quite often, so I know how that is. >I mentioned that the 9 and 11 year old frequently spend > time out by theirselves unsupervised which really concerns me. To me [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > wasn't my problem" will be enough to make it okay in anyone's eyes, > least of all mine. If it is as bad as you say, then perhaps a call to CPS is in order. If they are frequently out and about unsupervised at all hours of the night, that could easily be verified by uninterested third parties.. Most places like that have surveillance video available if necessary. It if it so bad that you feel you can't look yourself in the eye, then what are you going to do about that? Seriously, if these boys live in your household only four days a month or so.. then any changes you make will take so much longer than if they lived in your home the majority of the time. If they are being abused and/or neglected, why isn't the father trying to get a larger share, if not sole custody of these two boys. Who is looking out for *their* best interests? Why is he allowing them to be treated with such neglect? Cal~ > Hmmm...there's a couple of threads here that I really don't get. The > idea that if the boys throw a fit that we, the parents, should split [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > with that. I mentioned that the 9 and 11 year old frequently spend > time out by theirselves unsupervised which really concerns me. Ok, you can't control what their BM allows them to do. At your own home, you have to have their dad backing you up to exert any control over them, otherwise they will just ignore you. To me > that is just neglectful and potentially dangerous. Even if I can't > force change on the issue, these are children that I AM responsible [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > wasn't my problem" will be enough to make it okay in anyone's eyes, > least of all mine. If you are left alone with these children so that you are, in effect, responsible for them, then you do have the right to demand that they do what you tell them while they are under your sole care. If the dad does not back you up on this, you have every right to refuse to care for them. I know I would. I am not a real good advisor on this type of problem, as I have not had to deal with it, but IMO if the bio and stepparent living in the same household are not on the same page as far as parenting, it seems to me to be a recipe for disaster. It amazes me that people do not iron these issues out before they become involved with each other's children, since they are the issues that can destroy a relationship.  Signature**Geri** "Pigs Can Fly!" GO HUSKERS! > Hmmm...there's a couple of threads here that I really don't get. The > idea that if the boys throw a fit that we, the parents, should split up > and he should take them off to do whatever while I continue on with the > other kids. How in the world can that be healthy in any sense? I > don't really see how that can allow us to stay united on our efforts if > the children (any of them) can see a sure-fire method to split us up. I guess I would offer that "staying united" about children doesn't always translate into forcing a group of people to spend time together. Staying united means, to me, that you and your boyfriend decide as a unit what's important to you, what's working and not working, how you want to discipline, and what these 4 kids with 3 homes and at least 6 different parents can handle. When my SS was having issues with his mom's boyfriend and his son, they took separate vacations one year. I thought that was a good idea, and sensitive to what my SS needed at the time. If your stepsons are having trouble, and have become accustomed to calling all the shots with both their parents, shoving them into a rigorous new discipline program and forcing them to go where they don't want to be is probably not going to work. > Also...I can see there's a lot of people who feel like ultimately my > boyfriend's children are "none of my business". I'm not sure I agree > with that. They are your business, but you are not their parent. There's a critical difference there. Whatever responsibility you may personally feel for how they turn out, you _lack the ability/control/legal status_ to do _anything_ about it. Every bit of your authority derives from your boyfriend. I'm with the crowd that says calling BM was a bad idea, not because you shouldn't have contact, but because it so rarely has the desired effect. I've called my BM on occasion, I always convince myself it's important, or that I can talk to her better, or that she might listen to me and do something. I always, without fail, regret doing it. Now, when I feel the urge to call her, I come here and someone talks me off the ledge. You know, you never answered my other post. What, exactly, is your biggest problem here? Because in all your obvious frustration, it's not exactly clear to me what's bugging you the most. rebecca The big issue for the bio-dad and myself is how to deal with the obvious defiant actions with the boys in the face of guilt-inspiring excuses used by the boys and supported, even encouraged, by their bio-mom. > The big issue for the bio-dad and myself is how to deal with the > obvious defiant actions with the boys in the face of guilt-inspiring > excuses used by the boys and supported, even encouraged, by their > bio-mom. Okay. Let me take these backwards. 1. If bio-mom's set on doing whatever, it's out of your control. So, in respect to her, the trick is to minimize your reliance on her. I can't remember, do you have an explicit visitation schedule? Stick to it, don't schedule things you need the boys for outside of these time unless you absolutely have to. Don't ask her for assistance in discipline. If something happens that you need to discipline the kids for, don't do it in coordination with her. As much as possible, you want the children to understand that at your home, you and your SO (sig other) are the authority figures. Don't lay out punishments that require mom's enforcement. 2. Guilt-inspiring excuses? They make your SO feel guilty? He needs to work on his parenting skills, then. A visit or two to an adolescent psychologist to discuss the structures/disciplines this age of kid needs, and to kick around strategies for dealing with their behavior might be a really good investment at this stage. 3. Defiant actions? Clear and reasonable rules, that take into account the kids' ages, emotional states and your beliefs is about the best I can do here. I do think, perhaps, that you and your SO should revisit what you're trying to do, and whether you might be pushing the kids too hard into a family structure they aren't ready for/interested in. People take a lot of different approaches with their stepchildren, not everybody has a big, united family. Some of the best stepparents here are in situations where they've decided _not_ to meld their various kids into a single unit. rebecca > Hmmm...there's a couple of threads here that I really don't get. The > idea that if the boys throw a fit that we, the parents, should split up > and he should take them off to do whatever while I continue on with the > other kids. How in the world can that be healthy in any sense? I > don't really see how that can allow us to stay united on our efforts if > the children (any of them) can see a sure-fire method to split us up. Well, what I see is that some people are focusing on one thing (i.e., the comment that you don't want the bad behavior of the boys to ruin your children's fun times) but now you're throwing something else into the mix (i.e., not splitting up the kids/you and your husband.) At least one other person has responded and said that it's not you take your kids to do something fun, your husband take the boys to do something else fun. IF the boys cannot behave reasonably well, taking them out of the situation or not allowing them to come along to begin with IS, IMO, a healthy response to the bad behavior. > Also...I can see there's a lot of people who feel like ultimately my > boyfriend's children are "none of my business". I'm not sure I agree > with that. I don't see where anyone has said the kids are none of your business. What I have seen being said is that *you* are not in any position, legally, to do anything about the boys. And, from a practical stand- point, *you* can't do much of anything at all about the behavior in your home without your husband's complete and active support. >I mentioned that the 9 and 11 year old frequently spend > time out by theirselves unsupervised which really concerns me. To me [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > saying, "yeah, I saw what was going on but it wasn't my problem" will > be enough to make it okay in anyone's eyes, least of all mine. Okay. So, what are you going to *do* about it? Talking to the other parent isn't going to work. Neglectful parents who let their 9 and 11 year old stay at video arcades until 10pm aren't going to stop because their exes SO tell them it's a bad idea. Are you going to call whatever-the-department-that-deals-with-child-neglect-cases-is- called-in-your-area? Be aware that calls made by exes and SOs of exes are sometimes viewed with a jaundiced eye. Are you willing to do what it takes to try and get full custody of these kids? The point that most people have been trying to make is that, as the SO, you have very little *real* control over what happens with the children of two other people. If anything is to be done about this, it's going to *have* to be one of the parents. Tracey > Actually, I don't think she does have that right. > She does have a right to refuse to take over his responsibility, > however. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > unilateral decision on what that change will be, in regard to his > 'parenting' of the boys. I'm confused-she has the right to refuse to take over his responsibility, she has the right to insist on a change, but she doesn't have the right to tell him he needs to parent his own kids because she isn't doing it anymore? Your first comment disagrees with me, your last two don't; I'm confused. > Picture you and Mike, separated- and your new SO telling you that Robyn, > age 12 has to go, because she's mouthy and doesn't pick up her stuff > laying about the house. Yeah, I'm not seeing you letting that happen. Being mouthy is a big difference between a full blown screaming fit, and yes, if she's doing a full blown screaming fit, she's going to her father while my partner and I figure out new ways to deal with it, especially if there's a perceived lack of support somewhere. > Ya know. This gets so tiresome. We adults f.ck up our kids so much, > and then have little or no qualms with just tossing them off on the > other parent, when the going gets tough. Ya know, the other parent *is* there to be a parent, not just get the kids for disneyland. Parents hand off a responsibility when they're married, why not when they're divorced? I can't imagine how many times one of my parents (typically my mother, MOF) handed me off to my father because she was out of patience. > Regardless of the fact that as adults, we take a lot of time to adjust > to changes particularly if they're not of our choosing. We don't just > roll with the punches many times, but we seem to expect the children > that are thrust into these situations to do so. Can't speak for everyone else, but I don't expect kids to just "deal with it", I expect that my job is to teach them the coping skills and the socialization skills to get through it. But I'm not doing that in the middle of a screaming match. > These particular kids have an angry "SM" and BM pushing and pulling at > each other with their BF seemingly whistling in the wind about it all, > and Wow.. wonder why they're being bratty? . I'm seeing something different-kids are seeing that dad is living with another woman (who had just had a baby with), but he's not divorcing their mother: "wait a minute, you don't love mom enough to live with her, but you won't divorce her and you're screwing with someone else?!" > Kids are rebellious by nature, and then when the "nurture" part is > lacking all of their lives, what else does anyone expect? To expect > them to adapt to the new rules laid down by their father's GF without > any rebelliousness just smacks of craziness. But I don't see these as new rules. > Who says? I mean.... If the BF wants to stand up and do something to > help his boys start behaving, which will only serve them well in the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That would be the end of our relationship. I would also not dictate to > him how or if he should parent, either. No, she doesn't dictate his parenting, she does tell him it's his turn because she quits. > I don't see that. If he wants to stand there and drink milk, she can't > stop him. She doesn't have to live with it, but she doesn't get to > dictate that he do otherwise. She absolutely can stop it, and I can think of any number of ways. :) > Not her right to tell him that he has to. Or how. You guys have taught > me that, you can't have it both ways, ya know? We either can or cannot > control another person. Which is it? Not a control trip-she can tell him he needs to parent because she's not doing it anymore, and then she spends time with her baby and leaves him to the boys and doesn't worry about what he does from there. > What she can do is let him know what she can and can't live with, and he > can let her know what he can and can't live with and if they are in > agreement- great. And if they aren't... then they better find a way to > meet in the middle somehow or find a way to co-parent the new child > they've brought into this messy situation, separately. That's exactly it. > The GF can expect that it might take a good long time before any > positive changes she might want to make start to materialize and that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > certainly isn't, I don't see any hope in getting them under control at > this point. It's not in her sole circle of control. Right now, the only thing that's in her circle is their daughter. Jess In a previous article, "The Watsons" <warpedsystems@earthlink.net> said: >Not a control trip-she can tell him he needs to parent because she's not >doing it anymore, and then she spends time with her baby and leaves him to >the boys and doesn't worry about what he does from there. But he *is* parenting, just not the way she wants him to. If she tells him that he has to change one tiny little iota of his parenting style, then he *is* telling him how to parent. His style of parenting lets the kids out-scream him. His style of parenting allows the biomom to pull the guilt card. His style of parenting is what's happening now. I think the OP should stop accepting the responsibility for these boys, but she has to realize that nothing's going to change. I think that's Cal's point. She can hand over the reins to her SO, but she knows what he's going to do, because he's been doing it for 6 years. >Right now, the only thing that's in her circle is their daughter. Right. Vicki SignaturePower may be justly compared to a great river; while kept within its bounds it is both beautiful and useful, but when it overflows its banks, it is then too impetuous to be stemmed; it bears down all before it, and brings destruction and desolation wherever it goes." -- Alexander Hamilton. >> Actually, I don't think she does have that right. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > because she isn't doing it anymore? Your first comment disagrees with > me, your last two don't; I'm confused. Yes, she has a right to tell him she isn't doing it. She does not have a right to tell him he must. I don't understand your confusion. She doesn't have to do it, and she doesn't have to live with it, but she can't force him to do what she wants him to do. It's a choice to live with a situation or not. He has the choice to acquiesce to her demands, or the choice to negotiate some other solution, or to tell her to bugger off. >> Picture you and Mike, separated- and your new SO telling you that >> Robyn, age 12 has to go, because she's mouthy and doesn't pick up [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > her father while my partner and I figure out new ways to deal with > it, especially if there's a perceived lack of support somewhere. I don't consider my kids throw aways, and I perceive this attitude to be just that. You don't have the right to toss them off on the other parent, because you can't deal. >> Ya know. This gets so tiresome. We adults f.ck up our kids so much, >> and then have little or no qualms with just tossing them off on the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > kids for disneyland. Parents hand off a responsibility when they're > married, why not when they're divorced? Because you ARE divorced, you don't have that right to do that, IMO. You don't have a right to impact the other household and their schedules etc because you can't deal with your child. IMO, unless there is a damn good reason for it, parents who divorce *should* have 50/50 custody, and IMO one parent does not have the right to throw a kid back to the other parent simply because parenting became too hard. When my ex and I shared parenting 50/50, I did not have the right to force him to take the kids when it wasn't his scheduled time to parent and vise versa. You just don't. And it's a horrible message to send to a child that they are so easily tossed aside. And to be perfectly frank, I hate that he ended up doing just that. Not because parenting was too hard, but because it interfered with his new lifestyle which was an even worse reason. Regardless of the reasons, IMO, once you are divorced, you don't have the right to toss a kid off on the other parent, if it is your scheduled custody time. >I can't imagine how many > times one of my parents (typically my mother, MOF) handed me off to > my father because she was out of patience. And how does that make you feel, that your mother saw you as a throw away for someone else to deal with? How do you think this relates to your relationship to her now? >> Regardless of the fact that as adults, we take a lot of time to >> adjust to changes particularly if they're not of our choosing. We [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the socialization skills to get through it. But I'm not doing that in > the middle of a screaming match. Nope, but you also don't do that by throwing them out the door, either. How do you teach them anything by sending them away? >> These particular kids have an angry "SM" and BM pushing and pulling >> at each other with their BF seemingly whistling in the wind about it [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > her, but you won't divorce her and you're screwing with someone > else?!" I see it as "you love your girlfriend and your new baby more than us". And to not allow them back into the home will only exacerbate this issue with them, IMO. I see it as kids who have, up to this point not had any boundaries rebelling against the adult in their lives and needing so much more than what they've been getting up to this point in their lives. Boundaries but with love and understanding. Having their father and his girlfriend storm into their room at their BM's house, trying to haul them off to their baby sister's birthday party, when they most probably resent that little girl for what she has- two parents who live together and love each other.. yooza.. what a bloody recipe for disaster there. >> Kids are rebellious by nature, and then when the "nurture" part is >> lacking all of their lives, what else does anyone expect? To expect >> them to adapt to the new rules laid down by their father's GF without >> any rebelliousness just smacks of craziness. > > But I don't see these as new rules. The GF says they are new. She admits that she's sucked things up for years and kept quiet and now that the straw has broken the camel's back, she is trying to affect change. She has now come back and clarified that the BF is with her on this, so it is now up to them together to teach these kids the boundaries but not with rejection and anger (which is how I view a parent sending the kids away), but boundaries with love and patience. >> Who says? I mean.... If the BF wants to stand up and do something to >> help his boys start behaving, which will only serve them well in the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > No, she doesn't dictate his parenting, she does tell him it's his turn > because she quits. She doesn't even get to tell him it's his turn. She gets to tell him she quits and that is that. If he chooses to parent then fine, but she doesn't get to tell him he has to parent. If he decides he doesn't want to change anything, then she needs to decide what she can and can't live with. But she doesn't get to control him or his actions. >> I don't see that. If he wants to stand there and drink milk, she >> can't stop him. She doesn't have to live with it, but she doesn't >> get to dictate that he do otherwise. > > She absolutely can stop it, and I can think of any number of ways. :) Not really. She can stop him to a point, but she can't force him to drink something else against his will. He can choose to drink something else, or not and she can decide if she can live with his choice or not. From her clarification, he's decided to drink something else. That's good, but if he hadn't, it wouldn't be up to her to order his beverage from the menu ;) >> Not her right to tell him that he has to. Or how. You guys have >> taught me that, you can't have it both ways, ya know? We either can [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > leaves him to the boys and doesn't worry about what he does from > there. You're right.. She can tell him "he needs to" and she'd be 100% correct, IMO from the sound of it. But if he disagrees or decides he doesn't want to, she will then have to decide if she can live with that. >> What she can do is let him know what she can and can't live with, >> and he can let her know what he can and can't live with and if they [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > That's exactly it. Then I don't get your confusion. This is what I've been saying all along. >> The GF can expect that it might take a good long time before any >> positive changes she might want to make start to materialize and that [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Right now, the only thing that's in her circle is their daughter. However, even that, she doesn't have 'sole' control of that circle. The BF that has allowed his boys to become little juvenile delinquents has part 'ownership' of that circle right now. Cal~ > Jess >I'm seeing something different-kids are seeing that dad is living with >another woman (who had just had a baby with), but he's not divorcing their >mother: "wait a minute, you don't love mom enough to live with her, but you >won't divorce her and you're screwing with someone else?!" Y'know, this isn't *necessarily* a problem with anyone, kids or adults. A lot of people stay separated for years and don't get divorced. My SO has been separated for 10 or 11 years, and no one (not me, not his ex, not his kids, not him) care at all. I've been to his ex's house many times, and we get along fine. I've been to his ex's *daughter's* (his former SD) house, and she's put us up overnight, we all went to brunch, and had a great time. Also, courts don't really care about this type of scenario either. When I was going through my divorce, but it wasn't final yet, I asked my lawyer if dating was a problem since I wasn't legally divorced. She told me that it didn't matter to the courts one bit. Divorce is expensive and a huge PITA. If there's really no reason to proceed with one, what's the hurry? Same with marriage. If you don't have a really good reason to do either, why do it? I guess, for me, having a child together, or co-owning property would be a good reason to break the legal ties with an ex, but I guess it's not the same for everyone. (Actually, for me, just breaking the legal ties was important, but that's not important to my SO or his ex). I don't think it necessarily translates to f.cked up kids, either. Not after all that time has gone by. It's not at all the same as dad walking out on mom and shacking up with his honey a week later. I know this is a bit of a side topic to the main idea of the conversation, but people keep bringing it up in a morally judgemental way as if it has to be a big part of the problem. I'm just pointing out that it isn't always any big deal in anyone's life that someone is long-term separated (and divorced for all intents and purposed) vs. divorced. After all, most people in this group accept that a live-in SO is the equivalent of a husband or wife. So, on the other hand, a long term separation is pretty much equivalent to a divorce. Deb R. >Jess > Divorce is expensive and a huge PITA. If there's really no reason to > proceed with one, what's the hurry? Same with marriage. You know, OOH, I agree with this. OTOH, it's not something that, IMO, you can make a decision about and just expect that everyone else involved is going to accept and deal with in the same manner you are. There are very young kids involved here and there is no way that they can be expected to understand 'Yes, your mother and I are still married. No, I will never be coming back to live with you and your mother and, in fact, I'm going to start another rela- tionship and another family over here in this house so just get the idea that your mother and I will get back together right out of your head because it ain't gonna happen.' >If you don't have a really good reason to do either, why do it? I guess, for me, > having a child together, or co-owning property would be a good reason > to break the legal ties with an ex, but I guess it's not the same for > everyone. (Actually, for me, just breaking the legal ties was > important, but that's not important to my SO or his ex). You know, I *do* understand that there are people out there in the world who won't screw someone else over just because they can. I really do understand that. At the same time, I don't understand how and why people don't feel the need to protect themselves just in case. My husband and I went through this about a year after we married when, in the course of cleaning stuff out, I found that his life insurance still had the woman he had lived with before he married me on it as beneficiary. When I mentioned that he needed to change it, he put it off for a bit until I insisted that he get it done. And when talking about it, he couldn't seem to grasp that the possibility that this woman, who *still* believed that they would end up together, could very well have decided to keep the money if something happened to him. He kept saying 'Oh, she'd do the right thing and give it to you and the kids.' >I don't think it necessarily translates to f.cked up kids, either. >Not after all that time has gone by. It's not at all the same as >dad walking out on mom and shacking up with his honey a week later. I don't think it will necessarily translate to messed up kids, either, with a couple of caveats. There has to be, IMO, a certain maturity and experience in the kids' lives. Kids under the age of 10 have no such maturity and experience and I don't think that there is any way to explain it to them that they will understand and accept. Tracey >> I'm seeing something different-kids are seeing that dad is living >> with another woman (who had just had a baby with), but he's not [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > Deb R. I think for me, I do have 'issues' with it, but that is my problem. My ex moved from our house to hers immediately on the days he didn't have custody of the kids. That is, admittedly a hot button of mine. For these kids, it appears that the BM has made major issues of it to the kids, which is why the assumption on my part that it messes with the kids heads. He has given his "ex"-wife ammo she knowingly uses against him, to force a wedge between him and his kids. Also, they very well may have messed up any chances of getting those boys out of what appears (if what the OP says is true) a neglectful situation. Though a divorce court doesn't really care if they are living together and making babies while they are still married to someone else, a family court judge deciding who is best fit to raise these kids may very well see it differently. God forbid the OP's ex-husband decides that he doesn't want her to have custody of her older son, due to this situation.. I can easily see a judge not liking it and removing a kid from it. They've done it for lesser reasons than that. IMO, if what the OP has said about the BM is true, she is doing the proverbial 'slapping the child, hoping to hurt the parent' when she says things against their father. It could be she hates him more for leaving her than she loves her children. Or she's just a lazy-a.s parent that hasn't a clue as to how damaging her statements about their father can be. Dunno. In any case, these kids are obviously messed up in some way. A NCP has an uphill battle to affect change, and it can't really be done by the girlfriend of the NCP alone. That parent _has_ to be on board as well. Cal~ >> Jess >God forbid the OP's ex-husband decides that he doesn't want her to have >custody of her older son, due to this situation.. I can easily see a >judge not liking it and removing a kid from it. They've done it for >lesser reasons than that. I'm pretty sure that the OP said she was NCP of her older child. Deb R. >Cal~ >> God forbid the OP's ex-husband decides that he doesn't want her to >> have custody of her older son, due to this situation.. I can easily >> see a judge not liking it and removing a kid from it. They've done >> it for lesser reasons than that. > > I'm pretty sure that the OP said she was NCP of her older child. I'm sorry, I missed that. Cal~ > Deb R. > >> Cal~ In a previous article, driel@wpi.edu (Deborah M Riel) said: >Divorce is expensive and a huge PITA. If there's really no reason to >proceed with one, what's the hurry? My ex and I had been legally separated for 5 years when DH and I decided to marry. When we told him what we planned, he gave me a hug, shook Paul's hand and inquired "Don't you think you should divorce me first?" But I think that the reasons this guy has for not divorcing are suspect. His ex-to-be doesn't "feel comfortable" with it? The same ex that is saying that her children are too fragile to handle the idea that Dad's not living there anymore, although he's been with someone else for years and they have a child? I'd worry about that. It shows a degree of attachment that would make me uneasy. Vicki SignaturePower may be justly compared to a great river; while kept within its bounds it is both beautiful and useful, but when it overflows its banks, it is then too impetuous to be stemmed; it bears down all before it, and brings destruction and desolation wherever it goes." -- Alexander Hamilton. >In a previous article, driel@wpi.edu (Deborah M Riel) said: > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Vicki Oh, I agree that this is odd. My only point was that speculation that the kids are messed up because they're making a moral distinction between dad and mom being separated for 6 years and dad and mom being divorced could be jumping to some very big conclusions. I'd be willing to bet that if the kids are in fact fragile about the whole thing, it would be the same fragility either way--divorced or separated--they just don't like that it happened at all. Deb R. > My only point was that speculation that > the kids are messed up because they're making a moral distinction [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > thing, it would be the same fragility either way--divorced or > separated--they just don't like that it happened at all I see your point. I have been looking at it that their mother uses this little tidbit as another axe to grind in regard to what she says about their father. Perhaps I'm reading more into what was posted. It is something she uses to hurt the BF, through her children is how I'm reading things. Though I will admit that I find it morally reprehensible to bring another child into a mess like this so that may very well be coloring my responses. Since the child is here now, that is a moot point. I understand when a kid that isn't thinking straight gets themselves into trouble and finds themselves pregnant unintentionally. I have a much harder time being sympathetic to adults who don't take the necessary precautions. I admit that I am judgmental on this issue. Or perhaps, less sympathetic to their woes. Dunno.. maybe judgmental and less sympathetic. When you combine all the issues that have been posted so far: - their father still being married to their mother, but living with another adult and her child (part-time) and their child together (full-time), -a BM that is hostile, resentful and neglectful, and is an apologist for their bad behavior. - a BM that blames their problems on the BF leaving the family. - up till now they've been allowed to do whatever the hell they wanted - got away with the screaming and carrying on to get their way - now their father's GF (and even the BF?) wants to change the rules on them(rightly so, IMO, however...) .. does anyone really wonder why they're being bratty at this point in the game? It's a matter of "we are here, and how do we get there from here". It is one thing if the BF isn't on board 100%. Since the OP has clarified that he is, then that's good. I would start with the BF getting the divorce ball rolling. And then having the BF & GF deciding how their household is going to be run, how they are going to deal with the differing needs of the children when those needs conflict with each other. And IMO, getting those two boys into counseling, and integrating them into the rest of the family. In the meantime, I would say that if the BF is interesting in affecting positive changes, he needs to start _really_ parenting. Not leaving it to the GF to handle and especially not shipping them off to their mother when the going gets rough, that's not parenting, that is abdicating his responsibility. Cal~ >> I'm seeing something different-kids are seeing that dad is living >> with another woman (who had just had a baby with), but he's not [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > SO is the equivalent of a husband or wife. So, on the other hand, a > long term separation is pretty much equivalent to a divorce. The main place I can see a problem with it, besides the moral issues for people that these are moral issues for, is the legalities involved if a child is conceived. My oft repeated example of this is when Brian was involved with BM, by the time SD was born, she had been separated from her previous husband for about three years, however because of some technicality that she never got around to handling, the divorce was not final. So, in the eyes of CA law, SD would have been her ex-husband's child, if Brian had not been willing to sign the affidavit of paternity. (Given the circumstances, he is a better person than I would have been.) Meanwhile, even with that, when they went to court to determine custody, Brian had to again reestablish paternity by declaration to the judge. Signature**Geri** "Pigs Can Fly!" GO HUSKERS! > What if the father doesn't care to parent in that fashion? He's > obviously gone a long time in allowing the type of behavior that is > being described, so it can't be that huge of a deal to him. In a > situation like this, who gets to decide what is or is not appropriate? > What if they don't agree? I think I called it a marital problem, and that's what I think it is. And yes, it may end their relationship. > *Also*, I don't think the GF has a right to cut out the father from > those fun things with their shared daughter, simply because she isn't > happy with his other children or how they are parented. What right > would she have, for instance, to say that he can't come to his > daughter's party because he has to 'sit on his <other> children'? She > is his daughter, too. If his priority is that his older kids come to his younger kid's party, then it's his responsibility to find a way to get them there; I read they were an hour late for the baby's party -- if they had guests, were they waiting that whole time?? If he thinks their behavior is sufficiently unacceptable for a party, then he can leave them at mom's if she refuses to support him getting them up and ready to, and attend the party without them. Or he can skip the party, I suppose. None of this is the poster's responsibility to arrange. (Though I would not have made arrangements for a party I expected them to attend when it wasn't my custody time.) > This all seems like a recipe for a break-up. (Almost said divorce, but > if I got the story straight, the OP is living with, and had a child with > a man who is still married to someone else? Yes, you're right; I skimmed right through the he's still married part. > ----Any wonder the kids > are messed up, with a situation like that, and a BM that has no idea > what it means to raise healthy, happy children, to boot?) No question. > I've read this twice now and though I believe this is what it would take > to make positive changes in the boys, it comes across (to me) that you > are telling her to put both the father and his boys in a "time out" > together, because she is unhappy with how the boys behave. Well, if there's a mutual decision between BF and SM that the boys' behavior is unacceptable in their home, then it also sounds like they have to change the tactics they're currently using since they don't appear to be working. Since it's dad's responsibility, he's the one who ought to be pushing any changes, and that means doing the work to make them happen. (I don't think I'd have stayed this long if it's really been screaming fits all these years, and it is a bad idea to bring another life into the relationship if there's that much tension over the kids.) > It comes across (to me anyway), that you are telling her to dictate to > the father that he has to parent in the way she deems appropriate, and > in a way treating the BF like one of the children she is responsible for > parenting. I don't think that's what I meant; I do mean that she should step back from responsibility for the kids if it frustrates her and let their father handle it. And that means if they planned something for the whole family that the boys' behavior cancels, I wouldn't necessarily cancel for her and the other kids. > I am *not* saying that she has to live with this and not affect changes. > However, between calling the BM up and trying to dictate to the BM how > she is to parent and discipline in her home, and also trying to dictate > to the BF how he is to parent, it sounds like this is a good way to end > up in a shared parenting situation with an _Ex-BF_ to me. Yep. > I'm hoping you guys have two cars -- I'd recommend you let the boys' > father handle pickups and any subsequent fights, and you proceed to > whatever your plans were, without him if that's how it ends up going. Don't agree, this is one thing I think I'd put my son's father smack on the spot for. Whether or not the Skids are required to attend the birthday party, the dad is certainly, IMO, obligated to go. I think it's a mistake to allow the dad to accomodate the skids at the expense of the daughter, sets a baaaaad future precendent. Yeah, there is some balancing that needs to be done, but in this example, late for daughter's party because they were trying to force skid's to go? Nope. There's a bigger issue here, about the relationship between the half-siblings, but I'm wanting to noodle on it a bit more. rebecca > Don't agree, this is one thing I think I'd put my son's father smack on the > spot for. Whether or not the Skids are required to attend the birthday [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to be done, but in this example, late for daughter's party because they were > trying to force skid's to go? Nope. As I just said to Cal, I wouldn't have scheduled a party I expected them to attend outside of their custody time in the first place. If I was that concerned about ever getting them out of the house to go somewhere with a time deadline, I would have scheduled any party at home. Planning ahead in a realistic way should have made it possible for at least dad, mom and the baby to be at the party on time, and probably the boys as well. On the specific example here, yes, I'd be really pissed if my husband was late for a birthday party for my youngest because he was off fighting with my step-daughter somewhere else. However, I know damn well I wouldn't be standing right next to him getting increasingly pissed off and more late, especially if we had guests coming. > There's a bigger issue here, about the relationship between the > half-siblings, but I'm wanting to noodle on it a bit more. And there's also not wanting to encourage the boys to have fits to get out of doing something they don't want to do, which can also be tough to balance. > His children, from the very beginning, have been difficult to deal > with. At their mom's house they have full reign, they choose what [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > night of the week. They choose what they want for dinner, to wear the > same clothes for days on end. You get the picture. Nothing you can do about that. > I don't have a problem with what they do at their own house. In fact, > for the first 2 years that my BF and I lived together I even managed [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > we were going someplace together. This is when the issues really > became a problem. It's not your job to "make" them do those things. Of course it became a problem because, basically, it becomes either "them" or "you". I, personally, would have chosen "them" and gotten the heck out of there faster than a jackrabbit with three legs, *or* I would have made sure I had a firm, solid agreement with my SO that we were going to work on these issues with his kids together in our house and be a team with the same goal. > Without fail, any attempt to "require" something of the boys that they > didn't want to do would prompt huge screaming fits and demands to go [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > They don't feel like it, they're tired, etc. In the end, we're an > hour late for the party and the boys aren't with us. Well, the mom probably knew they didn't want to go in the first place but didn't want to be the one to tell you. I can't say I agree with all the drama involved, but I can see why she backed off. Why was there a screaming fit? Did they scream in response to you asking them to go/get ready or did they scream when you nagged/bitched/threatened/screamed yourself in response to their "I don't want to go"? > I'm furious that my daughter's birthday party has turned into a big > event about the boys, as usual. Oh Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnneee, where are you?? Isn't this a marital problem? What's more, she isn't old enough now > to be hurt by this but next year and the year after...what then? It's > just not fair to expect her to spend the rest of her life having to > acquiesce to the lame excuse of her brothers' pain for everything. And it's just not fair to expect them to want to go to their sister's birthday party where her lovely, intact parents can shower their joy and love on her together when they're still having issues. Get over yourself and your daughter. Enjoy her and your son and if the boys don't want to go then leave them alone. They have the right to not go if they don't want to. I > should note that my son has no such issues and very happily makes the > transition between houses and never uses my divorce as an excuse for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > basically told me that the boys made a choice and that she believes > they have that right. Sounds good to me. I would have said the same thing. I don't know why you called her in the first place. It's none of your business. I asked if there would be consequences and she > told me that it was none of my business. Well hot damn! I just typed the same thing! :) So, I treated this the only > way that I felt I could and told her that the boys would have to write > an apology letter to their sister before returning, which my boyfriend > backed me up on. ODL. So is she going to actually read this or chew on it? To this she tells me that "she doesn't feel > comfortable making them do that". She also tells me that this wasn't > really the boys having bad manners or behaviour, they are great kids, > that this incident is due to the fact that they are hurt by their dad > leaving. Maybe they actually are. Maybe the dad and his sons should spend more quality time together, and perhaps even have some counseling together. Broken families are sometimes really, really hard on children, and they don't just "get over it" with time. I'm sure some do, that have the right personality and a peaceful, calm environment with both parents getting along nicely, but even then I think it's still something they have to deal with in life. Heather > I've been looking for some answers or maybe at least some helpful tips > for a couple of weeks. I thought I'd try to post some about this [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > I'm just at a loss. I don't really feel like being the understanding > one that just puts up with it anymore. Okay, I think you have 3 problems, tell me if I'm right: 1. Your boyfriend's showing no signs of divorcing his wife, clearly some commitment issues going on here. 2. You and your boyfriend are clashing on parenting styles/expectations of the children in your family. (All children, or just his boys?) 3. You have an image of the sibling relationships, between your daughter and her half-brothers, that isn't working out like you want it to. Any one of these could lead to a book, which one is causing you the most pain? rebecca sorry, meant to snip, I'm a loser. rebecca > "rebecca" <justrebecca5@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> > sorry, meant to snip, I'm a loser. > > rebecca Hey, if it make you feel any better, as least you didn't misspell "loser" as "looser" like so many other's do. ;-) HTH Cal~ In a previous article, "_calinda_" <calindasinclair@hotmail.com> said: >> "rebecca" <justrebecca5@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >HTH Or misuse an apostophe in a plural instead of a possessive. HTH! HAND! ;-) Vicki SignaturePower may be justly compared to a great river; while kept within its bounds it is both beautiful and useful, but when it overflows its banks, it is then too impetuous to be stemmed; it bears down all before it, and brings destruction and desolation wherever it goes." -- Alexander Hamilton. > In a previous article, "_calinda_" <calindasinclair@hotmail.com> said: > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Vicki LOL- got me. And here I was, trying to make her feel better :-P Cal~ > > "rebecca" <justrebecca5@yahoo.com> wrote in message > >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > HTH > Cal~ Oh, THANK YOU for saying this, Cal! That is something that is so annoying, and I just cannot believe how so many people seem to do this on this group, and in email groups as well. Lori > Oh, THANK YOU for saying this, Cal! That is something that is so annoying, > and I just cannot believe how so many people seem to do this on this group, > and in email groups as well. > Lori sheesh, those loosers. "Cyren" <cyren1@hotmail.com> wrote in Their mother wants us to go wake them. > When we do there's a huge screaming fit because they don't want to go. Well that doesn't surprise me. When they are on 'home turf' they will understandably behave in their home turf way. Why on earth did you go into *her* home and even try to parent the boys in *her* home? That is just setting yourself up to fail if you ask me. It's > just not fair to expect her to spend the rest of her life having to > acquiesce to the lame excuse of her brothers' pain for everything. Mmm getting ahead of yourself here. This kind of negative thinking won't help. So, I treated this the only > way that I felt I could and told her that the boys would have to write > an apology letter to their sister before returning, which my boyfriend [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that this incident is due to the fact that they are hurt by their dad > leaving. Well you left yourself wide open to this kind of reply from her. Why on earth did you feel it necessary to involve BM in what is essentially an issue between you, your BF and the boys? > I'm just at a loss. I don't really feel like being the understanding > one that just puts up with it anymore. How does your BF feel about it all? Amy > I've been looking for some answers or maybe at least some helpful tips > for a couple of weeks. I thought I'd try to post some about this [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > I'm just at a loss. I don't really feel like being the understanding > one that just puts up with it anymore. Let me just understand this... you are living with, and have had a child with, a man who is still married to someone else? Someone who left his wife and his (then) 5 year old and 3 year old children, and who has basically allowed himself and them to be in limbo for six years now? Of course they are upset. I haven't a whole lot of sympathy for you. You have allowed something for far longer than you should have, and have now inflicted it upon another innocent child by having a baby with him. Yes, it sounds like (based on your description) their mother has very poor parenting skills. Nothing you can do about that, though it sounds like serious neglect to me.Personally, my advice is to see an attorney, split from this man, and get your child out of this situation. if he hasn't gone through with divorce and married you after all this time, he never will. Why should he? Lori >I'm a divorced non-custodial mother of 1 boy (8 years old). My >boyfriend and I have been living together for almost 6 years. BF is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >has changed in the divorce department because his ex-wife "isn't >comfortable". OK, I realize you both adore your daughter together. But having a child together at this point in your lives was a supremely poor idea. If he ever does start divorce proceedings the fact that he already had a child with someone else isn't going to look good for him. Also, having a child with a married man isn't going to look good for you if you ever decide to fight for custody of your son from your previous marriage. But it's already too late to think through those things, isn't it? >His children, from the very beginning, have been difficult to deal >with. At their mom's house they have full reign, they choose what [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >night of the week. They choose what they want for dinner, to wear the >same clothes for days on end. You get the picture. That's an awful way to raise children, but there's nothing you can do about how she raises her children. It's also unsafe (and very neglectful) to let an 11yr. old and a 9 yr. old stay out until 10 p.m. at a video parlor by themselves. But again, there's nothing you can do. Don't worry about that one though, sooner or later some proprietor of one of those businesses will call the police when they realize those children are out at that hour alone, especially since they likely don't behave any better out than they do at home. When the police arrive and realize the ages of the children, the police will contact social services. Hopefully this will end in a scenario like that, isntead of something awful happening to those neglected and unsupervised children. >I don't have a problem with what they do at their own house. In fact, >for the first 2 years that my BF and I lived together I even managed [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >with plans already for the weekend that we were expected to >accomodate. You don't suck up what you find intolerable, it has to be discussed with your partner. You may not have gotten anywhere with the discussions, but they should have occured anyway. By sucking it up for 2 full years you set a precedent, in doing so you've guaranteed that you're going to hit a brick wall by trying to discuss it now. >However, as time progressed I started to become less >accomodating. I would make them clean up their room, just like my son >would have to, and make them take a shower and put on clean clothes if >we were going someplace together. This is when the issues really >became a problem. Of course, there's that brick wall. The boys don't understand why you've changed, you tolerated all the sh.t they dished out for 2 YEARS. Your BF doesn't get it either, because he's thinking "But it was always FINE with you! Why are you suddenly objecting NOW?" This is why you don't suck things up for as long as you did. But it's too late for that too. >Without fail, any attempt to "require" something of the boys that they >didn't want to do would prompt huge screaming fits and demands to go >home and everything stops to give them whatever attention they need. >Their mother insists that this is because they're tramatized by their >dad not living with them anymore. Great. So she's not only raising neglected, unruly brats but she's also raising Professional Victims. But there's nothing you can do about that either. >Our daughter had her 1 year birthday >party and this was planned well in advance. The day before, their dad >went to the gameshop where they were playing to remind them that we'd >be picking them up for the party the next day. When we go to pick them >up at 12:30 they're sleeping because they stayed out late the night >before and needed some rest. Their mother wants us to go wake them. She should not have requested that you come into her house to wake up her kids, but when she did you should have refused to do that and simply left. Also, considering how you KNOW they behave, why would you even want them to attend your daughter's birthday party? You had the perfect "out" of that potential horror show by simply refusing to go into her house to wake up her kids. I don't why you didn't take the opportunity. >Their mother wants us to go wake them. >When we do there's a huge screaming fit because they don't want to go. > They don't feel like it, they're tired, etc. In the end, we're an >hour late for the party and the boys aren't with us. Hello? Good riddance, you didn't need them there and neither did your daughter. >I'm furious that my daughter's birthday party has turned into a big >event about the boys, as usual. What's more, she isn't old enough now >to be hurt by this but next year and the year after...what then? It's >just not fair to expect her to spend the rest of her life having to >acquiesce to the lame excuse of her brothers' pain for everything. So stop inviting them. Have your daughter's birthday parties when they aren't there. They don't live with you so this shouldn't be difficult. You can't control their behavior or their desire to NOT want to go, but you can control when you have the parties and who will be present. >Later that evening I called to talk to the boys' mom. This is the >first time that I've made a point of expressing my views to her. She >basically told me that the boys made a choice and that she believes >they have that right. And YOU have the right to have functions for your daughter and son when the boys aren't at your home, and you have the right to not invite them. You don't need the aggravation and neither do your kids. Forget about the "happy family all together" fantasy, it isn't going to happen with this group unless there are *major* changes and you seem to be the only ones who wants any changes. >So, I treated this the only >way that I felt I could and told her that the boys would have to write >an apology letter to their sister before returning, which my boyfriend >backed me up on. To this she tells me that "she doesn't feel >comfortable making them do that". An apology letter isn't going to make a damn bit of difference to a 1 yr. old. YOU want the apology, and you have the same chance of getting one as a snowball has in....well, you know. Stop trying, give up on the apology letter, and just don't invite them to functions anymore. If that's what they want, fine, let them have it. If they or their mother start complaining that they are being "left out", well tough, then that can be THEIR problem. You aren't going to change the boys' behavior or their mother's, so just stop including them. >She also tells me that this wasn't >really the boys having bad manners or behaviour, they are great kids, >that this incident is due to the fact that they are hurt by their dad >leaving. Yeah right. When they end up in juvenile hall and then jailed as adults, that will all be someone else's fault too. But that's not your problem. >I'm just at a loss. I don't really feel like being the understanding >one that just puts up with it anymore. So don't, you don't have to. Give up on changing them or their mother, and let their father handle them *completely* when they are visiting. Concentrate on your own children. -Kerri |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.