My step sons hate me (Update in post #155) - Page 5 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-25-2007, 09:50 PM
 
siennasmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L&IsMama View Post
And *I* don't see why "kid A" should get primacy over "kid B". : The court does not dictate MY right to have children with my husband. Are you saying that MY kids should have just not been born, cause, after all, "kid A" was there 1st? If so, that's just WRONG. And cruel towards my children, and all the other "subsequent" children out there.
I'm not judging you or your situation. All I'm saying is that it shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody who marries someone who already has children that those children are going to need to be supported. To deny those children support is wrong and cruel, too.
siennasmom is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-25-2007, 09:52 PM
 
rmzbm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 15,098
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by siennasmom View Post
No, because A's parents knew they would have to take care of A. If A's parents choose to have more children, they know in advance that they will have to support them with what's left after they've taken care of A. If there's not enough left over for B, C, and D, that is a choice the parents made and it is terrible for them. It's not their fault. It's not A's fault or the court's fault, either.
Law aside, that's revolting. The subsequent children deserve NO LESS.

~Marie : Mom to DS(11), DS(10), DD(8), DD(4), DD(2), & Happily Married to DH 12 yrs.!
rmzbm is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 09:52 PM
 
L&IsMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Simplifying...
Posts: 1,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by siennasmom View Post
No, because A's parents knew they would have to take care of A. If A's parents choose to have more children, they know in advance that they will have to support them with what's left after they've taken care of A. If there's not enough left over for B, C, and D, that is a choice the parents made and it is terrible for them. It's not their fault. It's not A's fault or the court's fault, either.
I'm glad the issue is so cut and dry in your eyes. Geez :
L&IsMama is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 09:52 PM
 
siennasmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmzbm View Post
If anyone says, yes, the others shouldn't be here...can you hold my hair while I vomit? Can you imagine telling those kids that? That is absolutly heart wrenching. The step kid mean more, hu? Based on ORDER? Gag me.
Yeah, it sucks to have your parents tell you that they can't afford to support you because they have other kids to take care of. I know, because I was Kid A and my dad couldn't afford to send child support once he had a new batch of kids.
siennasmom is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 09:53 PM
 
siennasmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmzbm View Post
Law aside, that's revolting. The subsequent children deserve NO LESS.
Of course they deserve no less. But that doesn't mean their parents have it to give them. Sometimes parents make choices that their children have to pay for. It sucks. It's wrong. But it happens anyway.
siennasmom is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 09:55 PM
 
rmzbm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 15,098
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So, what would be wrong with splitting it FAIRLY? Law aside, of course. Because kid A getting a slab of money that prevents the others from eating is - eh...UAviolation, self censored.

~Marie : Mom to DS(11), DS(10), DD(8), DD(4), DD(2), & Happily Married to DH 12 yrs.!
rmzbm is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 09:56 PM
 
L&IsMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Simplifying...
Posts: 1,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by siennasmom View Post
I'm not judging you or your situation. All I'm saying is that it shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody who marries someone who already has children that those children are going to need to be supported. To deny those children support is wrong and cruel, too.
Do YOU have step children? Have you ever had to send in 205.00 a week, even when it meant that YOUR children would have to go without something they needed (I'm not talking food, but things like a new carseat, or clothes) so that your dh wouldn't end up in jail ? Of course, *I* should have KNOWN they would more than DOUBLE my dh's CS payments, and therefore should never have had my kids, right?
L&IsMama is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 10:00 PM
 
mmace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southwestern Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,936
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This whole thread is making me sad. I hate so much that people on both sides of the issue are struggling with child support payments. There aren't many ways I can count myself lucky when dealing with my ex, but I am lucky in that we agreed to an amount and have both been able to comfortably live with it. And no, neither of us are rich - I'm surviving supporting three kids by myself on about $2k a month (child support, a rental income, and the money I make for cleaning our church) and he is doing very well for himself taking home just about the same amount.
mmace is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 10:00 PM
 
siennasmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmzbm View Post
So, what would be wrong with splitting it FAIRLY? Law aside, of course. Because kid A getting a slab of money that prevents the others from eating is - eh...UAviolation, self censored.
Of course everybody should be able to eat. I didn't realize we were talking about the barest of essentials.

Quote:
Originally Posted by L&IsMama View Post
Do YOU have step children? Have you ever had to send in 205.00 a week, even when it meant that YOUR children would have to go without something they needed (I'm not talking food, but things like a new carseat, or clothes) so that your dh wouldn't end up in jail ? Of course, *I* should have KNOWN they would more than DOUBLE my dh's CS payments, and therefore should never have had my kids, right?
I don't have step-children. Having been a step-child, I was careful not to date anybody who had kids, because I didn't want to end up in a difficult situation. Not just financially, but emotionally. I think people underestimate how hard it can be to blend families.
siennasmom is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 10:03 PM
 
rmzbm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 15,098
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by siennasmom View Post
Of course everybody should be able to eat. I didn't realize we were talking about the barest of essentials.
And my point is I am pretty sure there ARE families out there where this is reality. Wouldn't you think? Telling those kids "Child A eats, then you do" is pretty evil.

~Marie : Mom to DS(11), DS(10), DD(8), DD(4), DD(2), & Happily Married to DH 12 yrs.!
rmzbm is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 10:06 PM
 
siennasmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmzbm View Post
And my point is I am pretty sure there ARE families out there where this is reality. Wouldn't you think? Telling those kids "Child A eats, then you do" is pretty evil.
I am not by any means saying that Kid A lives in the lap of luxury while the rest of the kids wear rags and live in a hovel. However, if parents put their kids in that kind of a situation, that is also pretty bad if you ask me. It's not like the fact that kids have to eat should come as any big surprise.
siennasmom is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 10:06 PM
 
BelgianSheepDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: unemployed in Greenland
Posts: 6,878
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm really glad my parents stayed in their miserable marriage. And I never thought I'd say that. :
BelgianSheepDog is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 10:11 PM
 
rmzbm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 15,098
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by siennasmom View Post
I am not by any means saying that Kid A lives in the lap of luxury while the rest of the kids wear rags and live in a hovel. However, if parents put their kids in that kind of a situation, that is also pretty bad if you ask me. It's not like the fact that kids have to eat should come as any big surprise.

Of course not. But would you agree that sometimes circumstances can rapidly go downhill...through noones fault? I just think that the courts SHOULD take the TOTAL number of kids into consideration, not just say "Step kid wins, rest: suffer!" And, clearly, that does happen.

~Marie : Mom to DS(11), DS(10), DD(8), DD(4), DD(2), & Happily Married to DH 12 yrs.!
rmzbm is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 10:22 PM
 
siennasmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmzbm View Post
Of course not. But would you agree that sometimes circumstances can rapidly go downhill...through noones fault? I just think that the courts SHOULD take the TOTAL number of kids into consideration, not just say "Step kid wins, rest: suffer!" And, clearly, that does happen.
I guess it depends on what kind of lifestyle Kid A has with his/her other parent. Obviously all the kids should have their basic needs met, but after that I'm not sure that A should always have to sacrifice when his/her parent decides to have more kids. It is up to the parents to support their children, and if you take away from one kid to give to another it's like you're making that kid support his/her sibling. So IMO it would depend heavily on the totality of the circumstances.

But again, all of this information is known to the parents before they have more kids. They know what they owe in CS. They know that more kids cost more money. They generally, though not always, know whether they will have enough money to support all of their children. If they make poor choices even with that information (and just to reiterate, this is NOT a commentary on anybody here) their children *will* have to pay for those choices. It's just a matter of which kids and how much.
siennasmom is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 11:29 PM
 
kerikadi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Training in Houston
Posts: 4,362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L&IsMama View Post
I'm SO outta this thread now. Too emotionally charged for me
Promises, promises.

 Keri wife and Mama to  Cory 17,  Brendan 15,  Kerianne 8,  Avery 7,  Lilia 3
kerikadi is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 11:32 PM
 
kerikadi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Training in Houston
Posts: 4,362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Listen, if your family cannot make it after child support then it's time to quit your bitchin and petition the court for a reduction.

CS is usually a % of income.

I am also glad that CS is something my ex and I agree on. And he has to pay through college so consider yourselves lucky.

 Keri wife and Mama to  Cory 17,  Brendan 15,  Kerianne 8,  Avery 7,  Lilia 3
kerikadi is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 11:55 PM
 
rmzbm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 15,098
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So what would you say about those cases in which Dad is hit with an order yrs. after the fact? It happens.

Look - all I'm saying is NO child is MORE IMPORTANT than another. To think otherwise is wrong. Just cuz a kid came "earlier" doesn't make it more worthy.

~Marie : Mom to DS(11), DS(10), DD(8), DD(4), DD(2), & Happily Married to DH 12 yrs.!
rmzbm is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 11:56 PM
 
L&IsMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Simplifying...
Posts: 1,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerikadi View Post
Promises, promises.
Yeah, whatever. It's kinda hard for me to keep my mouth shut when people are basically saying that any subsequent children should go without, or not even BE here, due to the child who was, after all, here "first".
L&IsMama is offline  
Old 05-25-2007, 11:56 PM
 
rmzbm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 15,098
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by siennasmom View Post
I'm not sure that A should always have to sacrifice when his/her parent decides to have more kids.
Nor should B because A already is.

~Marie : Mom to DS(11), DS(10), DD(8), DD(4), DD(2), & Happily Married to DH 12 yrs.!
rmzbm is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 12:00 AM
 
L&IsMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Simplifying...
Posts: 1,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmzbm View Post
Nor should B because A already is.
And, why is it acceptable for child A's mother, the ex, to have more kids should she remarry or whatever, and no one bats an eye or calls her irresponsible? No one tells her her subsequent children should go without. But God forbid dad moves on in a new relationship and has another child.....
L&IsMama is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 12:02 AM
 
rmzbm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 15,098
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think it's moot to continue saying dad shouldn't have had more, if they are already here - they're here...it's done. Now that ALL the kids ARE here they shouldn't BE PRIORITIZED! A is not more than the others. Period.

~Marie : Mom to DS(11), DS(10), DD(8), DD(4), DD(2), & Happily Married to DH 12 yrs.!
rmzbm is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 12:06 AM
 
L&IsMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Simplifying...
Posts: 1,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmzbm View Post
I think it's moot to continue saying dad shouldn't have had more, if they are already here - they're here...it's done. Now that ALL the kids ARE here they shouldn't BE PRIORITIZED! A is not more than the others. Period.
Exactly. Although that doesn't seem to be concievable to some people.
L&IsMama is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 02:01 AM - Thread Starter
 
dawn1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Squanderville
Posts: 1,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L&IsMama View Post
And *I* don't see why "kid A" should get primacy over "kid B". : The court does not dictate MY right to have children with my husband. Are you saying that MY kids should have just not been born, cause, after all, "kid A" was there 1st? If so, that's just WRONG. And cruel towards my children, and all the other "subsequent" children out there.
I do agree with your thought. All children should be provided for equally. Not onr more than the other.

I know this will be unpopular but I will sa it anyway...

Our situation the ex has a new DH and they make A LOT more money than we do. But in the ration of children to pay we are probably equals financially. She does not need the CS. But we give it because that is what you do, right?

Now if DH and I were to divorce, I am not a person who would seek CS. I feel like for me to take care of DD on my own is just fine. I know I can financially. And I wouldn't ask DH for a dime. But that is just me. Just me but I wouldn't have children that I knew I couldn't support on my own solely. I wouldn't depend on another person to make sure we had food on the table.

I guess a lot of that has to do with my situation with my parents. Dad never paid much CS and my mom did fine without it. For me and DD, I wouldn't have it any other way.

Disclaimer...

This does not mean I look down on the moms here who need CS, I don't, It is just the choice I made for myself before I had a baby.
dawn1221 is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 09:21 AM
 
siennasmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by L&IsMama View Post
And, why is it acceptable for child A's mother, the ex, to have more kids should she remarry or whatever, and no one bats an eye or calls her irresponsible? No one tells her her subsequent children should go without. But God forbid dad moves on in a new relationship and has another child.....
If she has more children than she can afford to support, I would call her irresponsible.
siennasmom is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 10:28 AM
 
mmace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southwestern Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,936
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Now if DH and I were to divorce, I am not a person who would seek CS. I feel like for me to take care of DD on my own is just fine. I know I can financially. And I wouldn't ask DH for a dime. But that is just me. Just me but I wouldn't have children that I knew I couldn't support on my own solely. I wouldn't depend on another person to make sure we had food on the table.

I guess a lot of that has to do with my situation with my parents. Dad never paid much CS and my mom did fine without it. For me and DD, I wouldn't have it any other way.

Disclaimer...

This does not mean I look down on the moms here who need CS, I don't, It is just the choice I made for myself before I had a baby.
Dawn, can I ask how old you are? Just wondering, because I'm *guessing* that you were a woman who finished college, had a good career, and then settled down....

In my case I quit college to get married and have kids. I was sure he was the one and we would be together forever. We stood before God and our families and pledged "til death do us part". I gladly quit school to work so he could finish school on a full baseball scholarship. He had already been drafted to play for the Brewers once, and they still wanted him, so we were sure that him finishing one more year of college would set us up to be ready for great things. I worked full-time and we had our first baby, and we counted the days until the next draft. Then he ruined his shoulder and that all went down the drain. But it was okay, because we had each other, had our daughter, moved on to other plans, and we were going to be together "til death do us part". Had another baby a few years later, he moved up in his career, we decided that I should stay at home full-time (I'd been working part-time), we bought a new house. Still happily living our lives "til death do us part". Got pregnant a few years later and things went down hill. He stopped coming home at night. Found out later that he had been cheating since before I got pregnant with number three. So much for "til death do us part".

I'm just trying to say that a lot of us single moms sacrificed a lot of things. I was halfway through college headed towards my accounting degree. If I had gone on to get my CPA like I'd planned I wouldn't need that child support. But we made decisions *together* that put me into the position that I do need it. I don't regret those decisions - they put me on the path to the wonderful kids I have now - but just because he later made the decision to leave doesn't mean that he shouldn't have any responsibility anymore.

I admire the fact that you can make it on your own someday if you have to. But the point is that you *shouldn't* have to. You and your husband made the decision to have your daughter together (at least I'm guessing you did! ;-) ) and you both have a responsibility to support her, no matter what happens in your relationship.
mmace is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 10:42 AM
 
TinkerBelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by siennasmom View Post
If she has more children than she can afford to support, I would call her irresponsible.
I agree. I mean, should the children of the first marriage suffer because daddy remarried and made more children than he can afford and the new wife wants to be a SAHM? That doesn't seem quite fair.

I don't think ANY children should suffer. But people really need to think before getting into new relationships and having another family. Women who decide to marry men with children need to really think before they do it. There might not be enough to go around, because someone's pay only goes so far. She might have to give up being a SAHM. Just like a lot of the single mothers do.

My mother could have done without the CS for my brother. But why should she have done without it? Just because Dad remarried and decided to support his new wife's 5 children, and decided his first children were no longer important.

I will say I feel sorry for all parties involved in these situations.
TinkerBelle is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 12:35 PM - Thread Starter
 
dawn1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Squanderville
Posts: 1,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
MMace wrote:
Dawn, can I ask how old you are? Just wondering, because I'm *guessing* that you were a woman who finished college, had a good career, and then settled down....

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawn1221 View Post
I am in the corporate world and I see how the lack of college effects you. I have not received a college degree but I was lucky someone gave me a chance anyway. I think I am the only one at my company without one. The first thing someone asks is "are you from ASU" or "UCLA"?
I wrote the above on page six. I am 29 years old and had my DD at 27. Not that it matters much but yes DD was VERY planned. I suffer from infertility and had to spend our entire life savings on IVF in order to have her.
dawn1221 is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 07:35 PM
 
mmace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southwestern Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,936
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
I wrote the above on page six. I am 29 years old and had my DD at 27. Not that it matters much but yes DD was VERY planned. I suffer from infertility and had to spend our entire life savings on IVF in order to have her.
Yep! I read that and forgot...Thanks!
mmace is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 07:37 PM
 
mmace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Southwestern Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,936
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
And I didn't ask to put either way down - having a baby young or having a career first - just wanted to point out how different the paths to a family can be, and how it can truly affect your *need* for child support.

Again - best wishes to you - I truly hope you can get things settled back in so that you can have a good relationship with your stepsons.
mmace is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 02:23 AM - Thread Starter
 
dawn1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Squanderville
Posts: 1,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmace View Post
And I didn't ask to put either way down - having a baby young or having a career first - just wanted to point out how different the paths to a family can be, and how it can truly affect your *need* for child support.

Again - best wishes to you - I truly hope you can get things settled back in so that you can have a good relationship with your stepsons.
I truly didn't take offense. I just ran short of time when I responded and couldn't edit before submitting. Thanks for you well wishes. I hope I have a better update soon.
dawn1221 is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off