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 think maybe i put my question wrong? I didn't mean both parents. I meant when one parent is dating a new person (their bf or gf) or if one of them is a stepparent and they side with them over their kids. Thats what i was asking I have seen a lot of this.
The answer to why do men and women let their spouses mistreat and abuse their children? Because they are mentally ill and desperate. that's what you're really asking, because in a healthy functional relationship putting your spouse first isnt a detriment to the children it is a positive as it helps keep the household healthy
I am a stepmother and a mother. My son resents my husband because he feels that if we weren't together I would be with his father. And it's a very difficult line to straddle, making sure my son feels safe and my husband gets respected. We have been together for 6 years, this isnt new. In am argument or disagreement between my son and husband, if I take my sons side, I make sure my son knows I do so he doesnt feel victimized. If I take my husbands side I diffuse the situation and speak privately to my husband about how we can possibly prevent this in the future and I speak to my son privately also. Balance is important
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 6 days ago)
35,625 posts, read 17,953,728 times
Reputation: 50644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk
As has been mentioned before, marriage changes the picture.
Yes, the step-parent should take priority over the children.
I was a single parent when I re-married. My wife took priority over everyone else. I still love my son mightily, but my wife took priority.
Today my son is 40 years old with a wife and three kids of his own.
My wife of now 35 years is still my priority.
That's not so atypical for men, especially men with boy children, to make a girlfriend their priority over their children. Men seem to have less difficulty going and finding another woman to replace the mother of the children, and maintaining sexual access to her becomes the goal, over the wellbeing of the kids.
Typically, the bond between mother and child is primal. And when it fails because the mother doesn't have normal mothering instincts, the children suffer terribly.
That's not so atypical for men, especially men with boy children, to make a girlfriend their priority over their children. Men seem to have less difficulty going and finding another woman to replace the mother of the children, and maintaining sexual access to her becomes the goal, over the wellbeing of the kids.
Well, now that is certainly a total mischaracterization of what I said.
Quote:
Typically, the bond between mother and child is primal. And when it fails because the mother doesn't have normal mothering instincts, the children suffer terribly.
There are quite a few mothers who are able to properly prioritize their marriage against their motherhood.
There was a movie with Bette Midler a few years ago. I never saw the movie, but I remember a line from the trailer.
There had been an argument between a father and his adult daughter. Bette Midler, the mother, had sided with her husband in the dispute.
The daughter said, exasperated, "Why do you always side with Dad?"
Better Midler replied, "Because when you leave, he's the one who stays."
Ideally, nobody should come between wife and husband. Not parents and not even children.
There are lots of broken relationships today and lots of people in crippled relationships, but if a man and a woman are planning to be husband and wife, one thing they need to get straight up front is that nobody will come between them. They must both be willing to tell their respective parents to butt out, and they must be willing not to complain to their parents about minor issues between them. (Clearly, I'm not talking about marriage-extinction events, however.)
And that includes any children they might already have.
A single mother who tells a man, "My children must always come first" isn't ready for a relationship with a man. She just isn't.
She might find a man who is willing to be "Number Two" (at least for a while), but she shouldn't expect a man to accept that provision, she shouldn't be surprised if he'd rather find a woman with whom he can be "Number One Person," and he's not wrong for wanting to be a woman's "Number One Person"--because women certainly expect him to make them the "Number One Person."
What's going to happen more often is that after she's made clear "you're number two," the man has actually assigned her to some subordinate level behind some other interest as well.
This does not make any sense to me. Reasonable people can have more than one very important relationship. The nature of the relationships are going to be different. But they needn't be hierarchical. You don't "side" with one or another. You use your problem solving skills to ... well solve problems. If your partner is being a douche you deal with it in private. But you don't "side" with him or her simply because they are your partner.
As has been mentioned before, marriage changes the picture.
Yes, the step-parent should take priority over the children.
I was a single parent when I re-married. My wife took priority over everyone else. I still love my son mightily, but my wife took priority.
Today my son is 40 years old with a wife and three kids of his own.
My wife of now 35 years is still my priority.
That's kind of different from a woman with a few kids where her boyfriend is diddling her 15 year old daughter.
I have a friend with what was, at the time, a 5 year old a son, who married, had a daughter, and discovered 10 years later that her now-ex husband was physically and emotionally abusing her son. Fast forward another 10 years. That kid is a total disaster after that upbringing. The husband was booted out the door shortly after all the facts came out.
My girlfriend has a 28-year-old daughter who opted out of college to live the Vail ski bum life. The father was a Vail ski bum so there was 10 years of the Pied Piper of Hamelin effect. My girlfriend is now supporting her education. From my point of view, it's her ethical obligation to get her daughter launched even though it causes some financial burden. The fact that her daughter is 28 is unimportant. If we married, my opinion wouldn't change. If you take on the obligation of parenthood, that's your #1 obligation in life to make sure they're launched. As long as they're gaining education and job skills to establish a career to support themselves, I think parental support is appropriate. Your spouse becomes obligation #1A. If her daughter had some kind of health issue where she boomeranged (unlikely), we'd make it work. The three of us had a talk about it back in October. My girlfriend had heard my point of view many times but her daughter hadn't.
i have a question that i have been thinking about, but nobody to ask. Growing up, my mom put a lot of her relationships before any of us kids. She would date guys and theyd move in, this was a pattern for a long time. Of course some of the guys werent nice at all. There was one situation where one of them messed around with my sister and she was 15 years old. My mom refused to believe it and put all the blame on my sister and the whole situation was horrible. That kind of thing didnt happen again, but my mom basically siding with her boyfriends was always a thing. It was always them over us.
I have seen both online and in real life the exact same thing. Two of my friends say the same thing happened to them, where their parents sided not with them but the person they were with. My friend told me that her stepdad would beat her up and put his hands on her (not like that but in an abusive way) and she would try to tell her mom but her mom would just tell her to shut up about it. And its not a situation that just happens to poor people because her mom was a successful nurse and had a lot going for her.
I just wonder why this happens and what the parents thought process is? Do they really not believe their kids or are they just lonely? why do they not want to deal with the situation?
I'm sorry if this isnt the right place to put this, i didnt know where to put it.
I think maybe i put my question wrong? I didn't mean both parents. I meant when one parent is dating a new person (their bf or gf) or if one of them is a stepparent and they side with them over their kids. Thats what i was asking I have seen a lot of this.
It's because you and much of your peer group didn't have very good parenting. If you went a few miles from where you are in Raleigh over to the Duke campus where they only admit the top people in the country, most of those students had parents who put their children first. They made sure they got properly educated. They did their best to teach them good decision making skills. They gave them a strong set of personal ethics and work ethic. Their parents could have been poor Asian/Indian immigrants or they could have been very wealthy. Parenting is the key, not money and wealth. Those students at Duke also had the good fortune to be born intelligent and healthy but most would have had a pretty good outcome if they'd been born with average intelligence.
This does not make any sense to me. Reasonable people can have more than one very important relationship. The nature of the relationships are going to be different. But they needn't be hierarchical. You don't "side" with one or another. You use your problem solving skills to ... well solve problems. If your partner is being a douche you deal with it in private. But you don't "side" with him or her simply because they are your partner.
Duh. This thread is weird.
Thank you!
Honestly it was the mark of how UNHEALTHY my marriage to my sons' father was, that I had to constantly contemplate where my top priority was, and he did the same thing. I literally had an argument with him once, I told him if the house was on fire, I was getting the kids out first, and I wasn't leaving until they were out. He argued that he needed ME out first, and THEN he'd get the kids out, because he said, "as long as I've got you, I can make more kids." Not bloody likely, fella, if you let our sons die. Not likely at all.
But I felt I had, instead of a fully adult partner, a big child who wanted me to put him first, and who saw our own children as competition for my resources. If I'd felt that both of us were equally adult partners in a team together, rather than a needy addict (him) and codependent caregiver (me) then things may have been far different.
My present relationship is a healthy, sane one. And I never feel like I have to even THINK about who comes first. Because almost always, there aren't even conflicts. I don't feel like I am the only adult, and I have to choose between my kids' needs and my partner's (and NEVER my own.) They are not in competition. And nurturing my relationship is in effect nurturing myself, it keeps me on a nice, even keel, so that I can be my best as a parent.
I am amazed at how healthy and good it feels, and how easy it can be, to do both.
Honestly it was the mark of how UNHEALTHY my marriage to my sons' father was, that I had to constantly contemplate where my top priority was, and he did the same thing. I literally had an argument with him once, I told him if the house was on fire, I was getting the kids out first, and I wasn't leaving until they were out. He argued that he needed ME out first, and THEN he'd get the kids out, because he said, "as long as I've got you, I can make more kids." Not bloody likely, fella, if you let our sons die. Not likely at all.
As if "kids" are a concept? Replaceable? YIKES! His response is so self centered, as if the kids exist For HIM. My husband and I agree. If either of us saved the other before the kids, we'd have some serious trouble.
Quote:
But I felt I had, instead of a fully adult partner, a big child who wanted me to put him first, and who saw our own children as competition for my resources. If I'd felt that both of us were equally adult partners in a team together, rather than a needy addict (him) and codependent caregiver (me) then things may have been far different.
Ayuh. Sounds like you figured it out.
Quote:
My present relationship is a healthy, sane one. And I never feel like I have to even THINK about who comes first. Because almost always, there aren't even conflicts. I don't feel like I am the only adult, and I have to choose between my kids' needs and my partner's (and NEVER my own.) They are not in competition. And nurturing my relationship is in effect nurturing myself, it keeps me on a nice, even keel, so that I can be my best as a parent.
I am amazed at how healthy and good it feels, and how easy it can be, to do both.
... A parent's job is to look after their own children and care for their well being. A relationship with another person, EVEN THE FATHER should always be secondary. It really is that simple.
Well said. It is a parent's job to love their children. My children, their father (my husband) will always be my top priority. Family first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by belle woods
I think maybe i put my question wrong? I didn't mean both parents. I meant when one parent is dating a new person (their bf or gf) or if one of them is a stepparent and they side with them over their kids. Thats what i was asking I have seen a lot of this.
Because the parent has lost sight of their priorities. Very sad.
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.
