Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was the first poster in this series. You are right that I probably didn't hear both sides of the story. I was told that the son reluctantly signed away his rights after a lengthy period of trying to negotiate/fighting with his ex-wife (I believe almost two years). He had been paying child support and the ex-wife was not allowing him or his family any contact with his son (as she was living with her new boyfriend/later to be her husband) and said that she didn't want the child to be "confused". My friend would call me very excited about the plans that had been arranged to see their grandson for an outing (with their son, too) and then call me later in tears because the ex-wife wasn't home or didn't show up at the meeting place. This happened again and again even after the courts told the ex-wife that she must allow the dad to have his court ordered visitation rights.
An interesting thing was that we had been told that the same thing happened to the ex-wife when she was a child. Her mother divorced her biological father when she was about four or five and they moved away and she never even knew that her mom's second husband wasn't her biological father until she was an adult.
Although, it broke my friend's heart perhaps it was a blessing in disguise. He was a teenage father and had a crappy low paying job. A couple of years after he gave up his parental rights he went to college and ended up with a four year degree and a well paying career (and a few years after that a new wife and family).
Ironically, we were told, that one of the reasons that his wife left him was because he only had GED and her new husband had a one year technical degree.
Right, but that is ONE of the reasons you were told. Like me and another poster said, you were not part of this marriage, and you are going by what your friend is telling you about the girl's upbringing. You don't know her personally either. Who cares about her biological father? If your friend's son didn't have access to his child, he should have went before a judge and told his story, end of story. Other then that, all I hear is a bunch of excuses
A blessing in disguise that he gave his kid away?
Oh yes..
I was the first poster in this series. You are right that I probably didn't hear both sides of the story. I was told that the son reluctantly signed away his rights after a lengthy period of trying to negotiate/fighting with his ex-wife (I believe almost two years). He had been paying child support and the ex-wife was not allowing him or his family any contact with his son (as she was living with her new boyfriend/later to be her husband) and said that she didn't want the child to be "confused". My friend would call me very excited about the plans that had been arranged to see their grandson for an outing (with their son, too) and then call me later in tears because the ex-wife wasn't home or didn't show up at the meeting place. This happened again and again even after the courts told the ex-wife that she must allow the dad to have his court ordered visitation rights.
An interesting thing was that we had been told that the same thing happened to the ex-wife when she was a child. Her mother divorced her biological father when she was about four or five and they moved away and she never even knew that her mom's second husband wasn't her biological father until she was an adult.
Although, it broke my friend's heart perhaps it was a blessing in disguise. He was a teenage father and had a crappy low paying job. A couple of years after he gave up his parental rights he went to college and ended up with a four year degree and a well paying career (and a few years after that a new wife and family).
Ironically, we were told, that one of the reasons that his wife left him was because he only had GED and her new husband had a one year technical degree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Me 82
Right, but that is ONE of the reasons you were told. Like me and another poster said, you were not part of this marriage, and you are going by what your friend is telling you about the girl's upbringing. You don't know her personally either. Who cares about her biological father? If your friend's son didn't have access to his child, he should have went before a judge and told his story, end of story. Other then that, all I hear is a bunch of excuses
A blessing in disguise that he gave his kid away?
Oh yes..
Sorry, "a blessing in disguise" was a very poor choice of words. I was mainly referring to my friend's son's education and his quality of life. He was only a sophomorein high school when his girl friend got pregnant and he dropped out of high school to get a job to support them. At the time he was a very poor student and almost flunking out so later he got a GED.
When he went to college, perhaps six or so years later, he was much more mature and determined to succeed. He ended up getting almost a straight A average from a fairly good University and graduated with a degree in Engineering. Would this have happened if he was still married to his first wife and supporting a child? Maybe, maybe not. Would his son's life have been better with him in the picture? Maybe yes, but my friend and her son have no way of knowing as the ex-wife & son & new husband simply disappeared.
BTW I was fairly close to both my friend and her son and I believe it when they said that he did go in front of a judge several times because of being denied access to his child. I was told that the ex-wife even had to spend a weekend in jail because of "violating the custody agreement" or something like that, but continued to "hide the son" (moved to a different city, etc) and the child support checks went to her at her mother's house.
Again. I don't know the whole story.
To the OP, there have been some great suggestions to help stay close to your nieces (sending little care packages, sending post cards, offering to have them visit you in the summer). Good luck to you.
Last edited by germaine2626; 04-23-2013 at 04:40 PM..
I was only worried about the emotional implications of moving the girls away from their family so soon after their fathers death.
The girls are not alone - they have a Mom and a Dad. Is the Mom a step-mom? If your brother elected to leave his children with her - he must have faith in the way should would raise them.
First of all, I offer my condolences on the loss of your brother.
Do you think that she would be amenable to reviewing literature about children and the grieving process, what helps, what doesn't help? If so, you might offer literature. Another option could be to express your well wishes for her and remind her that you were always in support of her getting on with her life. You might then very gently look her in the eyes (so she can see your sincerity) and tell her that you are worried about your neices moving away so quickly after the loss and that you read that it might be hard for them right now. Very, very gently. See what she says. She loves her daughters and will want the best for them. She may look into other options that would allow her to be with her husband and allow the girls lots of time back with the family...especially since summer is coming up. She might allow them an extended vacation with you and family that will allow them to have that comfort that they have grown accustomed to. It is more than likely difficult for any child to adjust to a new spouse but probably doubly so when Dad just passed away too. This is stacking basic child adjustment issues with grieving issues. Remember, just let her see your sincerity.
I agree with LovelySummer.
If the OP has concerns, then she should share them with her SIL. LovelySummer spoke of showing sincerity, which tells me that she is advising the OP to speak to her SIL from a place of love and gentleness. As long as the OP uses this approach, then I agree that her SIL will realize that the OP is not trying to "guilt" her or manipulate her but is purely speaking to her out of love and concern for her nieces.
If the OP has concerns, then she should share them with her SIL. LovelySummer spoke of showing sincerity, which tells me that she is advising the OP to speak to her SIL from a place of love and gentleness. As long as the OP uses this approach, then I agree that her SIL will realize that the OP is not trying to "guilt" her or manipulate her but is purely speaking to her out of love and concern for her nieces.
God bless you and your nieces, VyseTheQuick
Actually no matter how the message is delivered, you can't control how the other person interprets it.
It seems that you have a hangup with people who get involved with the children of others.
Every post has been to advocate the potential bad results of doing so. If you do not want to get involved and allow possible negative effects that could possibly happen in the future to guide how you handle matters that go on with children that you know, then that is your prerogative and I do not fault you for your viewpoints as I understand your concern with negative consequences. However, some people will act on things that they feel strongly about when it comes to children, even if there is some chance that the person to whom you are speaking will not agree with you.
Now, if I thought it would place the child in more harm (like if the parent was going to take things out on the child), I might not say anything and would try other ways to help the child.
Anyway, I do not see the point in advocating this don't get involved approach. Some people want to get involved. If we had more people erring on the side of getting involved when it comes to children that are not there's, I think that the world would be a better place. No research to support that, just my assumption based on the positive effects that an adult/mentor can have on the life of a child generally. Even if the adult is not the parent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larkspur123
Actually no matter how the message is delivered, you can't control how the other person interprets it.
I think that what you are saying is to the OP is that the girls are blood relatives and that the mother should consider that these are the girl's blood relatives and the possible advantages.
Sometimes when you give an example, other posters get distracted from the main point. That is what is going on here. Your main point has been totally lost in people picking apart your example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by germaine2626
Sorry, "a blessing in disguise" was a very poor choice of words. I was mainly referring to my friend's son's education and his quality of life. He was only a sophomorein high school when his girl friend got pregnant and he dropped out of high school to get a job to support them. At the time he was a very poor student and almost flunking out so later he got a GED.
When he went to college, perhaps six or so years later, he was much more mature and determined to succeed. He ended up getting almost a straight A average from a fairly good University and graduated with a degree in Engineering. Would this have happened if he was still married to his first wife and supporting a child? Maybe, maybe not. Would his son's life have been better with him in the picture? Maybe yes, but my friend and her son have no way of knowing as the ex-wife & son & new husband simply disappeared.
BTW I was fairly close to both my friend and her son and I believe it when they said that he did go in front of a judge several times because of being denied access to his child. I was told that the ex-wife even had to spend a weekend in jail because of "violating the custody agreement" or something like that, but continued to "hide the son" (moved to a different city, etc) and the child support checks went to her at her mother's house.
Again. I don't know the whole story.
To the OP, there have been some great suggestions to help stay close to your nieces (sending little care packages, sending post cards, offering to have them visit you in the summer). Good luck to you.
I agree that the scenario is a little different in that the ADULTS discussing the matter are blood relatives in my case and not in the OP's case. The kids are blood relatives, however, as another poster indicated - however, as you implied - what someone is saying to an adult about their children may not be seen the same way or the stakes for action/inaction seen as so high if there is no blood relation between the two adults.
It is a little bit of a shame that the stakes are not seen as so high since the children are still blood relatives but that is the nature of the beast in some cases.
I agree that asking open-ended questions can be a good approach. I also agree that the less direct approach of simply saying how much you'll miss the girls and offering to let them come visit (and even helping financially) can also be a good approach if the concern is only that they won't see the girls once they move or that moving away so soon after death of father could be more traumatic since the kids have a close relationship with family. OP could ask, how do the girls feel about the move? Are they excited?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stijl Council
This is not the same scenario. The big difference is that the niece's mom isn't a blood relative: she's not only an in-law, but one who was separated from the OP's brother for a year. It's highly unusual in that situation for the SIL to maintain close contact with the ex's family for the kids' sake. (I think that bespeaks a fair amount of emotional maturity, actually, on the SIL's part.)
Your sister may or may not have approved of your "interfering," but you guys were blood relatives. Unless things were really egregious, she wasn't going to sever the relationship between y'all and her kid because it would mean severing her relationship with her own family. Doubly so if she was relying on you or your parents for childcare or for financial/emotional support. Here the only thing tying the OP's family to the nieces is the SIL's willingness to facilitate that relationship.
This isn't a case of either speaking up or not speaking up but the relationship surviving either way. Previous posters are absolutely right that the OP's implying that the SIL hasn't considered something as rock-bottom basic as the impact this move would have on her kids could well be considered a huge insult, grave enough to disrupt or end the relationship they have.
I don't think there'd be a problem with asking open-ended questions ("How do the girls feel about the move?") and there certainly wouldn't be a problem with expressing how much you'll miss them and asking to visit/have the girls come visit, but OP is in a delicate situation here.
I have not read any literature re whether uprooting a child during a grieving process is a bad idea. I was piggybacking off of a previous poster who said that there is literature. Thus, I was suggesting - rather than just going off of emotions, getting some of that literature to present to her. The OP asked if there was any negative effect on the girls possible, someone mentioned literature to that extent, I was saying perhaps present the literature. Sometimes, my husband has to see literature before he'll take action or view something seriously. The SIL may be one of these people.
However, common sense would tell me that taking a child away from everything that they are used to while they are grieving their father would likely upset them if they are of the age at which they actually had a relationship with their father and are grieving him, and at an age at which they actually understand the close relationship and experiences that the OP says the children have with both sides of their family back in Cali. That's just common sense 101. Take a child anywhere away from their comfort zone and the child will be unhappy. Unless the zone was never a comfort zone to start with.
I suspect that you disliked your MIL as much as I dislike mine. I get it and mine is still alive. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't consider whether her advice will actually benefit my child. Fortunately, the nutso lady has decided that she doesn't ever want to speak to me (for reasons in her old mind) along with a number of other people that she has written off her communication list. LOL. She has to do her, I guess.
Seriously, though, for me, it is not about who it comes from. The Bible says you can learn something from even a FOOL in some cases. Your comment about cleverness indicates that you despised that she was trying to manipulate you. I would have simply and gently told her woman to woman that my goal is to do what is best for my child so please be direct with me so that I can ensure that I understand the full scope of her viewpoints. After her discussing her viewpoint with me, I would have thanked her acknowledging her years of experience, and told her that I will take it back to my husband and we will make a decision. I would come back to her and let her know our decision after it was made. Basically, I would handle the situation as two adults handle things.
You asked why an adult has to be "humble" in circumstances. MY reason for being humble is bc the Bible says that sometimes you have to shut your mouth and open your ears when you are trying to consider a point. To say that it comes from your **MIL** and you are not going to listen and she tries to cleverly give you advice that you do not want has NOTHING to do with whether the advice is good for your CHILD. I stay focused on what is best for my child, not where the information comes from.
Yes, I did make a point that some people have more experience. I never said you had to do crazy stuff just because someone tells you to do so. I did not think that I needed to say it but I believe in using common sense and my brain too. Just because I listen with an open ear does not mean that I have to do something that I consider to be ridiculous (like training out of being left handed). Perhaps you were just playing devil's advocate.
With regard to your last question, we were doing what you would consider to be just meddling and causing more stress for my sister. Although I'm sure that my niece was happy that she didn't have to repeat a few grades in elementary school. We sure did cause stress for her mommy, though. Stress until she got it together, that is. No, it was not physical danger. It was more like school failure, lack of age-appropriate oversight of a young child, leaving a child with a new boyfriend, etc. You know, harmless stuff that never ends up hurting the child. Stuff that you would have just said, well, she's not mine. Hope all goes ok.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larkspur123
Is there actual literature about uprooting children during a grieving process? I would think that for many where one parent dies, there ends up being no choice to make changes...moving to a lower cost area, maybe moving back to your hometown. But I don't see this as the bulk of OP's problem though, she doesn't think SIL away from that side of the family, which is really not her call.
As to many of your other points, when my MIL was still alive, she'd make a lot of suggestions. It only made our relationship more difficult. Why does an adult have to become "humble" in these circumstances. She was very clever about how she did it. In your scenario there are no boundaries. Why, barring actual danger, should someone who is not a parent have a say in how I raise my child?
One of the things that bothered my MIL is that she knew pretty much from day 1 that private school would be considered as an option for my child. For a variety of reasons, my kids didn't attend private school, but my MIL would make all sorts of remarks to be sure we knew where she stood on the issue.
You talk about others having decades of experience. Perhaps so, but that doesn't mean everyone who is older has made choices that truly benefit their children. Parents years ago used to routinely disown or make the lives miserable of their children who were gay. Spanking used to be more prevalent. Kids used to get "trained" out of left-handedness.
As far as your point about "What if it was you", what sort of situation are you talking about? If I was in imminent danger that someone else knew about..sure I'd expect them to do something about it. But if someone else was just meddling and the situation caused more stress for my mom and dad...that wouldn't really have been a good thing. I did move as a child though, in some ways it was disruptive, but truly my parents had very few options. Only my mom and dad really knew all the pros and cons of staying put vs. moving.
So you think others who don't welcome meddling are keeping their "fingers crossed"...give me a break.
Can you be more specific about what was going on with your niece.
Last edited by LovelySummer; 04-26-2013 at 09:42 AM..
It is a little bit of a shame that the stakes are not seen as so high since the children are still blood relatives but that is the nature of the beast in some cases.
No, I wasn't talking about the stakes of the situation at all. I'm talking about tactics. OP has two main goals here: to make sure that the nieces are safe and emotionally healthy, and to maintain the close relationship they have with the extended family on the OP side. Secondarily she would like the girls to stay nearby.
Suppose the OP were to say to the SIL, "Don't you think it's a bad idea to move with the girls so soon after their father died? And to get married to someone they don't really know?" One of three things could happen.
1.) The SIL will break off her engagement with the fiance (or at least postpone it) in order to keep the girls on the West Coast for awhile longer.
2.) The SIL will say something to the OP along the lines of, "I appreciate how much you care about the girls, but I've taken everything into consideration and I think everything will work out better for my family this way." And she'll mean it. SIL will move, and the relationship will survive mostly unchanged.
3.) The SIL will say something to the OP along the lines of, "Are you honestly saying you think I'm a negligent enough parent that I wouldn't have considered the girls in this decision?!," or she says #2 while thinking #3. SIL will move, but either the relationship will suffer or she'll sever contact.
I would posit that #1 would happen only in a situation where the SIL was in a weird space of emotionally immature enough not to have thought of these things beforehand, but emotionally mature enough to recognize the value of the advice once it's brought to her attention; or in a situation where her ties to the advice-giver were strong enough to override her ties to the fiance. Neither of those circumstances seems to be possible here.
So in practice only #2 or #3 could happen. If #2 happened, then no harm no foul, but if #3 happened it would be counterproductive. The OP's family would have less opportunity to keep an eye on things and make sure the girls are OK (through keeping the lines of communication open and through visiting to see how the girls are doing in person). Speaking up won't keep the girls on the West Coast, it won't make the girls any safer (it will either maintain the status quo or make them less safe), and it won't strengthen the relationship between the OP and the SIL (it will either maintain the status quo or damage it). The only possible upside is that the OP will feel good that she's shared her misgivings, and I for one don't think that's worth the real risks of speaking up here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
