Tell the children they have siblings from affair?

[Sub]

Yes seriously. When you take your cheating spouse back, you take their child with them. You can't compartmentalize what part of the marriage you want to take back and which part you don't. You can't pretend the affair didn't happen and the kid didn't either.

It's the parents of the child who are responsible for that child's well-being and upbringing. In this case, Raena is not the childs parent. She has no responsibility to him. The WH and OW1 are responsible for figuring out how they are going to parent the child. Or in this case, how not to parent a child. Raena's responsibility is to her own son, no one else's. Even if that child is a half-sibling of his. She has no responsibility to bring them together, keep them in each other's lives, etc. Whether or not she should disclose the siblings existence can be debated. But the idea that because she took the H back she has to bring his estranged son with OW1 along as well doesn't hold water. It's completely on the H to do that. For all we know, the kids mother wants nothing to do with Raena and her son. And I'd be willing to bet she doesn't want OW2 posting his picture on FB.

[Redheaded Mistress]

It's the parents of the child who are responsible for that child's well-being and upbringing. In this case, Raena is not the childs parent. She has no responsibility to him. The WH and OW1 are responsible for figuring out how they are going to parent the child. Or in this case, how not to parent a child. Raena's responsibility is to her own son, no one else's. Even if that child is a half-sibling of his. She has no responsibility to bring them together, keep them in each other's lives, etc. Whether or not she should disclose the siblings existence can be debated. But the idea that because she took the H back she has to bring his estranged son with OW1 along as well doesn't hold water. It's completely on the H to do that. For all we know, the kids mother wants nothing to do with Raena and her son. And I'd be willing to bet she doesn't want OW2 posting his picture on FB.

 

Just like I can't say my stepchildren aren't my problem and I owe nothing to them or their relationship with the child I had with my husband, she can't either. When I married my husband, he was the package with children, and with the children comes the ex and when she took her husband back, she takes back all of his baggage.

 

If I said my husband's kids weren't my problem and I wanted nothing to do with them, I'd get all sorts of grief. I'd be the stereotypical wicked stepmother and people would rally around the children's mother as being yet another poor woman scorned by yet another deadbeat Dad and his evil new wife who hurts the children out of spite. That's exactly what's going on here with this woman's ex and the former OW/now girlfriend.

 

This situation is no different. She knew taking him back would mean being tied to this child by virtue of the fact that the child is her husband's child. Even ignoring her moral responsibility of allowing or supporting her husband in cultivating a relationship, visitation, bringing the child to the house, there is a legal responsibility there too. He's legally responsible to pay for the child, provide insurance if applicable, and ensuring the child is cared for reasonably. If nothing else, that alone is her obligation to the child.

 

There's no way that she can say "I take this, this, this, and that part of you back on our reconciling, but not the child." Her responsibility is to her child, that meant her responsibility is to her husband and, by extension, his child with the OW too. If the OW doesn't want to share is equally irrelevant. As a father, he has rights to the child and as his wife, she does too.

 

Who's posting what of whom on somebody else's FB... So not her problem. And it's not like she didn't want the picture posted out of respect for what OW1's wishes may or may not have been, she wanted it not posted to protect their child from knowing about it. For all we know, OW1 and OW2 and this child and her kids are all one big, happy family.

[Noirek]

When the OP's husband was willing to abandon his first affair child without an apparent thought it showed his character. He now has just as easily abandoned the OP's son. He is fickle and unreliable. I am glad the OP got honest with her son. It really is all she can do. What a sad and messy situation for these children.

[sandylee1]

Then you condone a child not having a parent and essentially being abandoned because said parent's wife doesn't feel like dealing with him or her?

 

IT'S THE FATHER THAT DIDN'T WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CHILD IN THIS CASE.

 

Then you can't be upset if he's not spending time with this child post-divorce if the new wife/girlfriend says she's just not into wanting to deal with the child.

 

AN AFFAIR CHILD IS DIFFERENT.

 

 

Personally, I think that if a woman told her husband/boyfriend that she wanted him but not the kids, so he needs to abandon the kids, people would revolt. As a stepmother, if I told my husband that I didn't feel like his kids were "my issue," and condoned his abandoning them or encouraged him to do so or supported him in doing so, I'd be a witch and my husband would be labeled a deadbeat. Even now, this guy didn't talk to this kid for years and didn't acknowledge the child and people are more upset that he's not spending time with child produced in the marriage. There's something wrong with that.

 

STEP CHILDREN ARE DIFFERENT. THEY WERE THERE BEFORE YOU AND YOU WERE NOT DECEIVED AND CHEATED ON WHILED THEY WERE CONCEIVED THEY ARE NOT THE PRODUCT OF AN AFFAIR.

 

 

 

Sure, I have a right to ignore my stepkids. That would make me morally repugnant, but I can do it. It also means that a core foundation of our relationship is built on just ignoring things we don't want to deal with, which isn't healthy and, in the case of the kids, may not even be legal.

 

THERE IS NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT A FATHER NOT HAVING A RELATIONSHIP WITH THEIR CHILD, AS LONG AS THEY SUPPORT THE CHILD FINANCIALLY.

 

THERE WAS AN OW WHO TOOK HER MM TO COURT FOR CS. THE OW DIDN'T WANT THE BW AROUND HER CHILD AND SAID ONLY THE MM SHOULD HAVE CONTACT. HIS BW WAS OKAY WITH THE CHILD COMING TO THEIR HOME, BUT OW DIDN'T WANT THIS. THE MM THEN SAID HE WOULD HAVE TO GO NC WITH HIS LOVE CHILD, BECAUSE OW WAS BEING UNREASONABLE.

REALLY SHOWS WHAT HER MOTIVES WERE. SHE WANTED THE MM AND SACRIFICED THE CHILD HAVING A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DAD.

 

THE JUDGE SAID, I CANNOT MAKE YOU HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH YOUR CHILD, BUT PLEASE THINK ABOUT IT. HE SAID I HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT IT, BUT SHE (OW) SAYS MY WIFE CANNOT SEE THE CHILD AND MY WIFE DOES NOT WANT ME TO SEE OW ALONE.

 

 

ALREADY ADDRESSED. STEP KIDS ARE DIFFERENT.

WHY WOULD ANYONE MARRY A WOMAN OR MAN THAT WAS GOING TO IGNORE THEIR PRE EXISTING CHILD ANYWAY?

 

 

And if you're the married man who does it, be prepared to open your wallet and if you're the woman who takes him back, be prepared to watch your money go out the door.

 

I AGREE, THE MM BETTER BE PREPARED TO PAY UP. ALL COULD BE SAVED BY USING PROTECTION, BUT HEY. ...THAT'S NO FUN. MM DESERVE ALL THE GRIEF THEY GET FOR DOING THIS.

 

Your family most certainly does have financial responsibility to that child and can't simply say "he was married, you and your illegitimate child get nothing, get over it you wh****." Not only isn't that legal, that is cruel to the hapless child who did absolutely nothing wrong but be born in a crummy situation.

 

I WOULD NEVER DENY AND HAVE CONSISTENTLY SAID THE MM MUST PAY CHILD SUPPORT. NOT A PENNY OF THE MONEY I EARN WOULD GO TO AN OC. THAT'S ON THE FATHER.

 

 

Yeah, the other woman has to deal with the circumstances, but so does the father who created the child, and the wife who chooses to take him back knowing he fathered a child elsewhere.

 

BUT THE REALITY IS THE DAD ACTUALLY can WALK AWAY AS ILLUSTRATED. NO COURT IN THE LAND CAN MAKE HIM HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CHILD. AGAIN, IT'S THE PRICE YOU PAY AND THE RISK YOU TAKE GETTING PREGNANT BY A MM.

 

Just like any stepparent, you can't stuff your hands in your ears and not acknowledge the child's existence and say you want nothing to do with it.

 

WHAT STEP PARENT REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF CHILDREN BORN IN LEGITIMATE CIRCUMSTANCES ? THE TWO ARE NOT COMPARABLE. IF ANYONE EXPECTS A BW TO WELCOME AN AFFAIR CHILD, IT'S ASKING WAY TOO MUCH. IT'S A CONSTANT REMINDER OF HER H's INFIDELITY. SHE'S NOT GOING SCREAM FROM THE ROOFTOPS. .............PLEASE BE REASONABLE.

 

 

 

Morally, this child is as much his child as the child conceived in marriage and the father has every bit as responsibility to both.

 

WHAT HAPPENED TO MORALS IN THE AFFAIR?

 

Legally, the child is due child support, coverage under insurance if she needs it, and if he dies, is entitled to a share of what his father leaves behind.

 

UNLESS A WILL SPECIFIES OTHERWISE.

 

Ignoring the child and condoning your spouse in ignoring the child, sure you can do it, but it's morally reprehensible on both your parts.

 

WELL NEXT TIME, SHE'LL THINK TWICE BEFORE SLEEPING WITH A MM.

 

 

Teaching people that it's OK to abandon children if you don't like the circumstances behind their conception means that the child is punished, the cheater can avoid accountability, and the woman who stays with him in those circumstances can just ignore it all and expect that the marriage will be healthy. That's not how this works.

 

It's not OK to abandon your children. Period. It's not Ok to be the person who's allowing your spouse to abandon their children. Period.

 

UNFORTUNATELY, THESE ARE CONSEQUENCES.

 

I personally find it horrifying you'd tell anybody that an abandoned child because of the complications surrounding their conception is totally Ok and part of the process. I just am not at all used to this idea that parents can walk way from kids and that's fine and socially acceptable.

 

BUTS IT'S SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE TO CHEAT AND SLEEP WITH MM?

AFFAIRS AREN'T OKAY, SO IF I WAS SO INCLINED TO STAY WITH A WH AND HE DIDN'T WANT A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CHILD, I WILL IGNORE THAT CHILD AS LONG AS I WISH.

 

 

If it were my daughter, I'd say that she wasn't particularly smart about how she got pregnant, but I get that she probably fell into the same allure and passion and false promises that most OW's get caught up in. Then I'd march her pregnant butt to court and tell her that she needs to now think of the child. Her reputation, his reputation, his other family, her plans... It's all about to change. She needs to lock down medical expenses, insurance for the baby, and child support because, however dumb she was or wasn't, they both now have a child they owe it to take care of. If his wife has an issue with it, she can suck it right on up because I'll see to it that both my daughter and he give my future grandchild all that it deserves and not an ounce left.

 

 

I'D FEEL SO ASHAMED THAT MY CHILD WAS THIS FOOLISH AND JUST SAYING 'NOT THAT SMART " DOESN'T STRESS THE SERIOUSNESS AND THE LACK OF MORALITY ON HER PART.

 

I'D HAVE A FEW CHOICE WORDS WITH HER, NOT TO BE POSTED HERE. IT'S ONE THING FIGHTING FOR CS FOR A DEADBEAT SINGLE DAD, BUT THE VISION OF MY PREGNANT DD IN COURT AFTER AN AFFAIR REALLY SICKENS ME. I'LL NEVER HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT, BECAUSE MY DD HAS MORALS. SHE'D KNOW BETTER THAN THAT.

 

 

 

If you're the BW who takes the guy back, you've got to suck it up. It's not about you and your hurt feelings, your damaged pride, or what makes you comfortable.

 

IF THE MARRIAGE IS TO SURVIVE, IT IS ABOUT WHAT MAKES ME COMFORTABLE ACTUALLY.

 

It's about what's best for the kids.

 

WHAT'S BEST FOR MY CHILDREN. THAT'S MY CONCERN.

 

.

 

Apologies again for the caps. I'm not shouting.

 

We have very different opinions on this. So I'm happy to agree to disagree.

 

None of this would really fall at my feet because he would be an EX H immediately. Any relationship with my kids and his affair child is down to my H. I'm not going to start arranging play dates for them.

 

We're all different, we all react differently.

 

It just seems like you want THE BW to roll over. This doesn't happen.

You have a kid with a MM, then you have to deal with him not being there.

 

OW won't do that again.

[Sub]

Just like I can't say my stepchildren aren't my problem and I owe nothing to them or their relationship with the child I had with my husband, she can't either. When I married my husband, he was the package with children, and with the children comes the ex and when she took her husband back, she takes back all of his baggage.

That's not at all what this situation is, though. You married a man who had children from a prior R. Raena was pregnant with the H's son, he cheated on her, and had another kid. We don't know what the arrangement was between the H and the OW in regards to the child, or what led to the H having no relationship with him. Raena would have to answer that, and I don't think it's fair to assume the worst of her.

 

 

Who's posting what of whom on somebody else's FB... So not her problem. And it's not like she didn't want the picture posted out of respect for what OW1's wishes may or may not have been, she wanted it not posted to protect their child from knowing about it.

It's an oversimplification and misrepresentation, IMO. This isn't simply about the other kids existence. She didn't want her son to see it because he himself has also, in effect, been abandoned by his father. It was a matter of protecting his feelings, and addressing how the current GF is still trying to get to her. She didn't want him to see it and wonder why his Dad won't come see him yet can spend time with another boy.

 

For all we know, OW1 and OW2 and this child and her kids are all one big, happy family.

Reading the thread helps here. Per Raena, they're not.

[sandylee1]

Duplicate post

Edited June 4, 2015 by sandylee1
double post

[autumnnight]

How sad to think this way about a little innocent human being just because of hatred to the mother.

 

You'd be surprised how many people label the innocent child as "dirty" though he/she did nothing except be born.

[minimariah]

It is about hiding the child.

 

no, it's not.

 

If you're telling your ex that he needs to be careful about publicly acknowledging the child, you're assuming or expecting the existence of this child is going to be hidden.

 

nope -- that doesn't mean that you assume or expect this child to be hidden. that only means that you expect this child to be acknowledged to your SON BEFORE posting pictures on the FB. the only problem that the OP has is the fact that her son found out about the entire situation through Facebook -- was taunted by it on the place folks knew he will see it & wonder. not really sure why is that so hard to understand...?

 

The issue is that this kid exists and he was treated like some big secret and the expectation was clearly there by the OP he'd remain that way.

 

no -- the OP wanted the father to come clean to the kid BEFORE posting something for the kid to see and wonder.

 

The husband did the right thing by finally laying claim to this child, and that is the right thing by the way, and she's the one who's wanting it to be this big secret still.

 

ummm... no.

the saddest thing about this entire situation is the fact that the father STILL DIDN'T "lay claim" to the child -- the OP & his OW did it instead of him.

 

The discovery via a picture on Facebook and the fallout of that... That's both parent's fault. Hers as much as his for not forcing him to come clean.

 

you can't force anyone to do anything -- so she really couldn't have "forced" him to come clean. so the fallout is SOLELY the father's fault. it is really as simple as that.

 

So it's Ok for the other child to have no father, know nothing about him or his sibling, and to sit and wonder why his father spends time with another child but finds no time to schedule a visit with him?

 

it isn't -- but nobody on this thread won't tell me how is that ANY of the OP's business. you all want to demonize the OP & make her seems responsible for this another kid... let me repeat for the folks in the back once more -- the OP isn't responsible & shouldn't really give a crap about the other kid. the only kid she should take care of is HERS.

 

At least the OP's child was and is an acknowledged child, whereas this child was expected to be the big, shameful, family secret.

 

not much happiness in that, considering the fact that the tables have turned and now the OP's kid is being the one who is neglected.

 

If that's not acceptable treatment for your child, you shouldn't expect it to be an acceptable treatment for your husband's other child.

 

she didn't expect anything -- i really don't know why you keep assuming that...? the woman continued to live her own life with her own family. that is really all that is to it - but i guess it's more simple to project from your own situation & demonize the OP because there just has to be her fault in this situation somehwere... right?

 

The fact that, post divorce, the father packed up to move closer to the child he hadn't seen in almost a decade makes me wonder how much of a role the OP played in making sure this child stayed out of the picture.

 

Clearly living far away was a barrier to seeing this child, and clearly that's now the barrier in seeing the OP's child more often now. But picking up to be nearer this child? That doesn't align with the OP claim of him not making any effort or wanting to be involved with this kid's life.

 

the simple fact that this dude didn't sit down and speak with his son and told him about the other kid should tell you how bad of a parent he is but, for some reason, that's irrelevant to you and you completely dodged it.

 

the OP didn't want this kid to be a secret -- if she had wanted it, she would've NEVER come clean.

 

Since she has children by another person it sounds like, she probably gets this dynamic and how abandoning children is wrong in a way the OP clearly doesn't get.

 

right, because the fact that she has kids automatically means she is a good parent (?!).

 

It's the father's fault for not acknowledging the child and stepping up to be a true father, it's the mother's fault for not forcing her husband to be a responsible human being towards his other child and expecting it to be a big secret.

 

sweetheart... i mean... are you kidding me right now? how can you force to do another person to be a good parent? like, NO. NO, it is NOT the OP's fault that her husband isn't a good parent and never came clean. you cannot force another person to be a parent and it isn't the OP's responsibility -- that's the only reality check here.

 

Both of them were equally wrong for treating this child like a second class child for the last decade or so.

 

*sigh*

 

why do you need the OP to be responsible for this child so bad...? she didn't treat this kid like anything, LOL. like, she moved on with her life because that kid doesn't represent anything to her. that's a random kid to her -- the OP is not responsible for him, it is NOT on her to force her husband to do anything.

 

Now Dad wants to do the right thing and he's still the bad guy? Nope.

 

he is -- because he's doing the wrong thing by the 1st kid.

 

Um, yeah, you are obligated to involve your husband's child in your life.

 

no, you aren't. you are obligated to involve the kid in your CHILD's life and that's the husband's responsibility because that's HIS kid.

 

This is a child. Your husband is the parent. You are now this child's stepmother.

 

you aren't if the husband refuses to have anything to do with the child. you'll be a stepmother and you'll include the child IF THE HUSBAND BRINGS THAT CHILS TO YOUR LIFE -- in this case, that didn't happen.

 

A. Why are you with a man who creates children and abandons them?

B. Why are you OK with that?

 

the same reasons folks forgive infidelity.

 

C. If he can abandon his own child, what makes you think he won't do that to you too?

 

what makes you think he will...?

just like "once a cheater, always a cheater" doesn't work -- this doesn't work either.

 

D. If he abandoned his other child, why are you so surprised that he abandoned your mutual child?

 

the OP isn't surprised at all.

but she has every right to be hurt.

 

Minding your own business? That's a child with your husband as a parent, who has a claim to your money, who has ties to your family, who's related to your child. That's your business if ever I knew what "my business" was.

 

LMAO... how...? like, how is your husband's affair kid ANY of your business? how? are the cousins of your kid your business, too? is the uncle of your kid your business, too? no. the only OP's business is her own kid and not another kid else.

 

Welcome to the world of accepting that all children have an equal right to access to their parents.

 

welcome to the world where you can't force anyone to do anything. welcome to the world where the BS isn't responsible for the affair child. welcome to the world where moving on with your life and taking care of YOURS doesn't mean harming and treating another kid as a 2nd class citizen. welcome to the world where moving on with your life and living YOUR life with YOUR family doesn't mean pretending the affair child doesn't exist.

 

what you WON'T do is to blame the OP & make her seem like a bad guy here because the child was neglected. that isn't her responsibility and that was never on her.

Edited June 4, 2015 by minimariah

[minimariah]

This situation is no different.

 

...

 

the situation is different because the father never took care of & never acknowledged the kid in the 1st place. yeah, yeah... i know. i know you want to blame it on the OP and i know you want to believe the "well, he probably wanted the child but the OP banned him from it" narrative but that just won't work.

 

the difference between your and the OP's situation -- your husband came with the "baggage" of his kids he wanted to take care of, the OP's husband dropped that baggage somehwere along the way.

 

Even ignoring her moral responsibility of allowing or supporting her husband in cultivating a relationship, visitation, bringing the child to the house, there is a legal responsibility there too.

 

first of all -- she has 0 (ZERO) moral responsibility for her husband's affair child. this logic where the mother is morally responsible for everyone who is related to her child and i just... how does that make any sense to you?

 

and here you go again -- assuming that she must've banned her husband from seeing the kid because i guess... i guess the scenario where the father abandoned his child on purpose is just so unbelievable to you.

 

He's legally responsible to pay for the child, provide insurance if applicable, and ensuring the child is cared for reasonably.

 

that's right -- HE is.

 

If nothing else, that alone is her obligation to the child.

 

HERS...? how is SHE responsible LEGALLY and financially for the child...? is there a law somewhere that says so...? if not, you can give up the legal responsibility right now.

 

There's no way that she can say "I take this, this, this, and that part of you back on our reconciling, but not the child."

 

how do you know THAT was what she had said...? she moved on with her life and took care of her kid. she, i assume, went by the H's wishes and H (most importantly) went by hers.

 

i mean -- even if she did say all of this, she CAN. that is her RIGHT and it is up to her HUSBAND to either accept or deny her wishes. so again -- it all boils down to the only responsible person here -- HER HUSBAND.

 

Her responsibility is to her child, that meant her responsibility is to her husband and, by extension, his child with the OW too.

 

nah.

Edited June 4, 2015 by minimariah

[minimariah]

No you keep protecting yours!!! Saying you know all these men that don't take care of the kids they didn't want & the women they're with are fine with that. That's personal feelings.

 

whet.........?

 

All I read is there are 2 OW...

 

i don't think you've read anything past the first two sentences of the first post so any further discussion with you is absolutely pointless.

[minimariah]

Then you condone a child not having a parent and essentially being abandoned because said parent's wife doesn't feel like dealing with him or her?

 

you seem to ignore one important fact -- the husband didn't want the kid. don't think... not even for a second that the only reason this husband had abandoned his kid was because his W didn't like the situation. that's not why folks abandon their children and refuse to parent -- that, if it is the case, serves only as an excuse for a parent who would've bailed anyway.

 

As a stepmother, if I told my husband that I didn't feel like his kids were "my issue," and condoned his abandoning them or encouraged him to do so or supported him in doing so...

 

your story has literally 0 similiarities to the OP's story so not sure why you keep bringing it up.

 

And here we have the crux of the problem. The affair was wrong, the husband was wrong, the OW was wrong, the poor BS did nothing and is entirely innocent and thus everything from then on in righting the situation should cater to what a BW wants to deal with and doesn't want to deal with...

 

this was never about what the BW wants to OR doesn't want to deal with. that's up to her husband and you keep shifting the blame on the BW. the H decides if he wants to deal with the situation or not and the BW goes along with it.

 

ths is the crux of the problem = you and other posters are heavily projecting from your own horrible experiences with your own BS (yes, it is THAT obvious) & you made up an entire narrative about a scorned wife who did everything in her power and forced this father abandon his child and now is freaking out when the father is "doing the right thing". that's not the story at all.

 

i mean... literally 3 people on this thread bothered to READ the OP's post -- the rest is just taking out their own frustrations and using the OP's situation as a punching bag.

 

let me give you an example of that -- you seem to be under the impression that this father suddenly wanted to be a good dad and moved to another state to take care of the kid #2. IN REALITY = he moved to another state to be with the OW#3 and the kid #2 just happened to live there so he conveniently started hanging out with his child.

 

the most baffling thing in your posts is the fact that you blame the OP for........ get this -- NOT FORCING her husband to take the responsibility for his action. as if you seriously think you can force a grown man to... well.... grow up.

 

amazing.

Edited June 4, 2015 by minimariah

[sandylee1]

you seem to ignore one important fact -- the husband didn't want the kid. don't think... not even for a second that the only reason this husband had abandoned his kid was because his W didn't like the situation. that's not why folks abandon their children and refuse to parent -- that, if it is the case, serves only as an excuse for a parent who would've bailed anyway.

 

 

 

your story has literally 0 similiarities to the OP's story so not sure why you keep bringing it up.

 

 

 

this was never about what the BW wants to OR doesn't want to deal with. that's up to her husband and you keep shifting the blame on the BW. the H decides if he wants to deal with the situation or not and the BW goes along with it.

 

ths is the crux of the problem = you and other posters are heavily projecting from your own horrible experiences with your own BS (yes, it is THAT obvious) & you made up an entire narrative about a scorned wife who did everything in her power and forced this father abandon his child and now is freaking out when the father is "doing the right thing". that's not the story at all.

 

i mean... literally 3 people on this thread bothered to READ the OP's post -- the rest is just taking out their own frustrations and using the OP's situation as a punching bag.

 

let me give you an example of that -- you seem to be under the impression that this father suddenly wanted to be a good dad and moved to another state to take care of the kid #2. IN REALITY = he moved to another state to be with the OW#3 and the kid #2 just happened to live there so he conveniently started hanging out with his child.

 

the most baffling thing in your posts is the fact that you blame the OP for........ get this -- NOT FORCING her husband to take the responsibility for his action. as if you seriously think you can force a grown man to... well.... grow up.

 

amazing.

 

Minimariah

 

You get it. Fantastic last few posts. You're spot on.

[minimariah]

and just to be clear -- this dude is NOT a good father. there is nothing the OP (his W) could have done to prevent him from parenting & raising this other kid.

 

shifting the attention from one kid to another is actually a pretty common behavior with the deadbeats -- the fact that this dude started taking care of his other child only AFTER the split just proves that he blended in with another family since his 1st one went to hell. it DOES NOT mean that the OP was somehow keeping him from the kid and now that he is "free" he finally went to raise the child. it is about adapting the role of a father -- not REALLY taking care of the children you're supposed to take care of.

 

in 2015 nobody can prevent you from raising your kid -- even when the courts do it, people fight and WIN and they fight for years. i know of some situations where the father SECRETLY raised his child because he was dealing with a "wild BS" who threatened him with everything. he waited for the right moment to divorce while raising and being close to both kids.

 

so there is no excuse for this father's abandon of the 2nd child -- just like there is no excuse for this father's abandon of the 1st child. JUST like there is no excuse for this father to allow his own kid to be taunted by some FB pictures.

 

the one person who should be demonized & held accountable is the father, the OP's husband. not the OP, not the OW. the husband. and folks are focusing on EVERYONE ELSE but him. it's fascinanting and unfortunately -- pretty expected. blame the woman & give the man every excuse in the book. even going so far to blame the woman for not forcing the man to do what he is supposed to do - welcome to patriarchy.

Edited June 4, 2015 by minimariah

[Redheaded Mistress]

IT'S THE FATHER THAT DIDN'T WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CHILD IN THIS CASE.

 

Then we have a guy who's proven he'll turn on blood when it's convenient to do so. That should be a big, huge, gleaming red flag on just exactly how precarious your situation is with him. If he can father a child and abandon it with no thought, he can do it to you and your child with him as well.

 

Even then, though, I have an impossible time imagining the situation where a man would say "I don't want anything to do with a child I created" and I'd answer "Ok, good. Nothing wrong with that!"

 

AN AFFAIR CHILD IS DIFFERENT.

 

There is absolutely no way that an "affair child" is different. It's a child he created, she knew about, and was part of the package that was a marriage with him that she accepted when she reconciled with him. If she wanted nothing to do with it or him or the dynamic that brings, she should have left then and there.

 

I get the impression the only reason you think the "affair child" is different is because of how the child was conceived somehow making it less of a child than other children which I find horribly sad. It's punishing the child for the transgression of the parents. It's using the child as a weapon. That's really not Ok.

 

STEP CHILDREN ARE DIFFERENT. THEY WERE THERE BEFORE YOU AND YOU WERE NOT DECEIVED AND CHEATED ON WHILED THEY WERE CONCEIVED THEY ARE NOT THE PRODUCT OF AN AFFAIR.

 

A child's value isn't defined by how they are conceived. When this child was born, because she decided to stay, she became the stepmother and that her step child. How it happened is totally inconsequential to what the child deserves. You don't get to say "I want nothing to do with that child" because you don't like that it was "the product of an affair." If it was such a sticking point, the solution would be to leave, not condone the desertion of a child.

 

THERE IS NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT A FATHER NOT HAVING A RELATIONSHIP WITH THEIR CHILD, AS LONG AS THEY SUPPORT THE CHILD FINANCIALLY.

 

That depends on what state you reside in. In our state, if you pay, you're granted visitation rights that, in order to not be "cashed in," both parents have to agree to letting one or the other off the hook unless there's some huge, overriding concern like abuse.

 

THERE WAS AN OW WHO TOOK HER MM TO COURT FOR CS. THE OW DIDN'T WANT THE BW AROUND HER CHILD AND SAID ONLY THE MM SHOULD HAVE CONTACT. HIS BW WAS OKAY WITH THE CHILD COMING TO THEIR HOME, BUT OW DIDN'T WANT THIS. THE MM THEN SAID HE WOULD HAVE TO GO NC WITH HIS LOVE CHILD, BECAUSE OW WAS BEING UNREASONABLE. REALLY SHOWS WHAT HER MOTIVES WERE. SHE WANTED THE MM AND SACRIFICED THE CHILD HAVING A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DAD.

 

Without knowing the particulars, it's hard to say what the real scoop there is. If my husband left and went back to his wife, I'd go to court for child support and I'd want him to have a relationship with his child, but I wouldn't want his wife around our child because, well, she's bat crap mental. If I wanted supervised visitation at a neutral location and he only wanted unsupervised in a home that is hers and can't prove she's vacated during visits, I'd say no too. I want my child to know and love his father, but I don't want him around the woman who took me to court when I was pregnant with him and not married to her ex husband yet to block me from giving my child his father's last name, and filled out the court filing with the name "illegitimate bas****" and only referrs to me as "the wh****." TBH I even hate that the children she shares with my husband are ever alone with her because she scares the crap out of me with how she cares for them.

 

For all I know, this is a similar situation with an OW who's worried about a batcrap mental BS and concerned about the lack of protection that comes with letting your child go to a place that the BS has every right to be at.

 

ALREADY ADDRESSED. STEP KIDS ARE DIFFERENT.

WHY WOULD ANYONE MARRY A WOMAN OR MAN THAT WAS GOING TO IGNORE THEIR PRE EXISTING CHILD ANYWAY?

 

There is zero difference. The day he said he had an affair and there was a child that resulted and she responded by taking him back was the day she became a stepparent to this child. Circumstances of conception do not determine the standing of a child. That child is 100% equal to her child in rights and standing, is related by blood to her husband and to her child. There is zero... Not one fraction of the tinest of the smallest difference... Between the legitimacy of her child and this other child or the choice that we make when we enter into a stepparenting relationship with somebody with kids besides the ones we share.

 

I AGREE, THE MM BETTER BE PREPARED TO PAY UP. ALL COULD BE SAVED BY USING PROTECTION, BUT HEY. ...THAT'S NO FUN. MM DESERVE ALL THE GRIEF THEY GET FOR DOING THIS.

 

You seem fixated on using this as a means to exact revenge for the deed, when the reality is it has nothing to do with punishing the husband or his OW, but seeing to the care of the living, breathing, legitimate child they created.

 

Your family most certainly does have financial responsibility to that child and can't simply say "he was married, you and your illegitimate child get nothing, get over it you wh****." Not only isn't that legal, that is cruel to the hapless child who did absolutely nothing wrong but be born in a crummy situation.

 

I WOULD NEVER DENY AND HAVE CONSISTENTLY SAID THE MM MUST PAY CHILD SUPPORT. NOT A PENNY OF THE MONEY I EARN WOULD GO TO AN OC. THAT'S ON THE FATHER.

 

 

Yeah, the other woman has to deal with the circumstances, but so does the father who created the child, and the wife who chooses to take him back knowing he fathered a child elsewhere.

 

BUT THE REALITY IS THE DAD ACTUALLY can WALK AWAY AS ILLUSTRATED. NO COURT IN THE LAND CAN MAKE HIM HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CHILD. AGAIN, IT'S THE PRICE YOU PAY AND THE RISK YOU TAKE GETTING PREGNANT BY A MM.

 

WHAT STEP PARENT REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF CHILDREN BORN IN LEGITIMATE CIRCUMSTANCES ? THE TWO ARE NOT COMPARABLE. IF ANYONE EXPECTS A BW TO WELCOME AN AFFAIR CHILD, IT'S ASKING WAY TOO MUCH. IT'S A CONSTANT REMINDER OF HER H's INFIDELITY. SHE'S NOT GOING SCREAM FROM THE ROOFTOPS. .............PLEASE BE REASONABLE.

 

If she can't deal with an "affair child," then she should leave. It's just that simple. If it's too much to ask to take her husband back with the full realization of the affair and all that resulted from it, then she's not cut out for that marriage. I get that for many the affair becomes the "I don't have to deal with what I don't want to" trump card for any situation, but in this case, the priority stops being the husband, his OW, and the BS. The focus falls to making sure the kids are cared for. A BW, under no circumstances whatsoever, can just opt out of dealing with her stepchild or asking her husband to opt out of raising the child, even if it came from an affair. If you can't deal with the child or will only see it as something that reminds you of the affair, cut your losses and leave. Don't expect that a living, breathing, walking, talking, child will be slighted just to spare your feelings. Your feelings as a BW mean nothing to the feelings of the child.

 

Reconciliation without dealing with the affair isn't a reconciliation. It's a "you can come back and I'll ignore what happened and it'll be fine." Expecting the child to vanish to make your life easier isn't reasonable, just as it's not reasonable for me to expect my stepchildren will vanish so I don't have to deal with their horrid mother.

 

WHAT HAPPENED TO MORALS IN THE AFFAIR?

 

So are you saying that because the affair was bad, it's perfectly OK to treat the child badly? Because you're implying that punishing the child is perfectly acceptable if the BW feels it so or needs it to happen to feel OK with her marriage.

 

The affair isn't the be all and end all of life and the world. It does not become the thing for which all other things are based around. This includes the rejection of children from said affairs.

 

UNLESS A WILL SPECIFIES OTHERWISE.

 

Are we now advocating depriving the child out of what is owed him in the event of his father's death because he was conceived in an affair? Because not only is that not true in many, many, many states, it's as morally repugnant as ditching paying your child support.

 

WELL NEXT TIME, SHE'LL THINK TWICE BEFORE SLEEPING WITH A MM.

 

A BS and her husband who reject a child on the grounds that it was concieved in an affair are not the ones to take the moral high ground over the OW. Not only was he a willing and consenting partner in said affair, but removing a relationship of a child with their father and threatening their legal right as an equal child to the one they have in their marriage so you can do a "now you'll think before you mess with my man you wh***" is using the child as a weapon to punish, where the only loser is the child.

 

The affair? That you'll get over. You'll move on and so will life. A child who has no father, who may or may not be sending child support, who's being referred to as an "affair child" and a "love child" as grounds for treating it badly? That's a bigger transgression than the affair will ever be.

 

UNFORTUNATELY, THESE ARE CONSEQUENCES.

 

Children are not the means to execute a "these are your consequences for sleeping with married men" morality lessons. Children are not weapons. It's not Ok to do that to a child, even if you don't like how the child was conceived.

 

BUTS IT'S SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE TO CHEAT AND SLEEP WITH MM?

AFFAIRS AREN'T OKAY, SO IF I WAS SO INCLINED TO STAY WITH A WH AND HE DIDN'T WANT A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CHILD, I WILL IGNORE THAT CHILD AS LONG AS I WISH.

 

Then neither of you can't claim moral high ground. A child was created and thrown away, all so you could teach a woman some sort of lesson about sleeping with your husband and because it's easier to ignore it all as opposed to truly dealing with the affair, what happened, and all that resulted from it. And he truly gets a super end in the deal... He can mess around, have his fun, leave when it becomes too complicated, and go home to a wife that says he doesn't have to deal with the mess he made because she doesn't want to have to face it either. He has the full support of his wife in avoiding all consequences besides her own personal wrath, which, if he's back, will blow over sooner rather than later.

 

I'D FEEL SO ASHAMED THAT MY CHILD WAS THIS FOOLISH AND JUST SAYING 'NOT THAT SMART " DOESN'T STRESS THE SERIOUSNESS AND THE LACK OF MORALITY ON HER PART.

 

I'D HAVE A FEW CHOICE WORDS WITH HER, NOT TO BE POSTED HERE. IT'S ONE THING FIGHTING FOR CS FOR A DEADBEAT SINGLE DAD, BUT THE VISION OF MY PREGNANT DD IN COURT AFTER AN AFFAIR REALLY SICKENS ME. I'LL NEVER HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT, BECAUSE MY DD HAS MORALS. SHE'D KNOW BETTER THAN THAT.

 

My mother raised me to have morals too. The funny thing about morals is that you stick to them so hard and fast until something comes that challenges them, then you can find any excuse in the world to justify why what you're doing still fits with your own moral code. And it's funny the things a girl will do when she's in love, or when she hears a guy tell her everything she's ever wanted to hear.

 

Frankly, if my daughter got pregnant because she as a married woman, a single girl on a one-night-stand, an OW, or whatever... How the child was conceived would matter to me only so far as to making sure that she physically was Ok, was emotionally Ok, or would be Ok emotionally by the point the baby was born. How she got pregnant means nothing to me vs how she will care for the baby and making sure that whomever got her pregnant realizes that they're not getting off the hook either. Child support, insurance, death benefits, all of that is going to get locked down. If she had an affair and his BW doesn't like it, that's really not my problem. Making sure the child gets as much as is deserved or as much as his other children get, that's my concern.

 

IF THE MARRIAGE IS TO SURVIVE, IT IS ABOUT WHAT MAKES ME COMFORTABLE ACTUALLY.

 

A marriage will not survive if neither party deals with the affair. Ignoring a child to make you feel better is not dealing with the affair. It's making it all go away so you can pretend you're feeling OK with how it all settled out.

 

And I'll be honest, post affair it isn't all about what makes you comfortable. I'm not one who subscribes to this philosophy that a BW who chooses to stay now becomes the God of the marriage who calls each and every shot and lords over the cheating spouse over each and every thing. Either you deal with the problem, accept it happened, forgive it, or move on, or you don't in which case you end the marriage. You don't act like warden and he like prisoner until you feel like maybe acting like a normal wife again.

 

WHAT'S BEST FOR MY CHILDREN. THAT'S MY CONCERN.

 

Well, ignoring that your children are no more special than that child, here we have a woman who operated by that thought... Then, several years later, he finds out via Facebook that his father had another child and he has a sibling that nobody told him about and was obviously hurt by that. So clearly, the "la la la la, the child doesn't exist" approach doesn't really line up with what's best for your children either.

 

It just seems like you want THE BW to roll over. This doesn't happen.

You have a kid with a MM, then you have to deal with him not being there.

 

OW won't do that again.

 

Yeah, the husband and the BW do need to accept the child exists and treat him or her accordingly. If she welcomes him back knowing the child is out there, then yeah, she does need to accept it and act accordingly, not use the child as a pawn or a means to punish the OW. Again, that's what we're claiming the new girlfriend of the OP's is doing to her child and we see how highly people think of that. Just because the BW is the one doing it to the OW doesn't suddenly make it Ok.

 

To be totally honest, if I even thought that was happening and this was a case of a BW standing back and saying "now she's got hers," I'd go straight to court and get every. Last. Single. Detail. Hammered. Down. He'd be on the guy's insurance, he'd be getting child support, his salary would be reviewed annually to make sure he was paying the max on child support, he'd outline death benefits that included my child, and yes, I'd even make sure his 401k has him listed as beneficiary. I'd make everybody's life a living hell in order to make sure my child was cared for and, if it wasn't and he started slouching on his payments, he'd be in jail. Use my kid as a weapon against me and then scoot out of his or her life like they don't exist? I think not. I'd make sure the checks roll in regularly to remind you he's out there and he or she is owed exactly everything the other kids are.

 

Having had to do all of this, but on the opposite end where I watched my husband have to measure out which kids get what when he dies, how insurance is settled, etc etc, I know exactly how not fun this is to all hammer out. It becomes a lot more difficult to be smug about the "you got what's coming to you" in that situation.

[Redheaded Mistress]

That's not at all what this situation is, though. You married a man who had children from a prior R. Raena was pregnant with the H's son, he cheated on her, and had another kid. We don't know what the arrangement was between the H and the OW in regards to the child, or what led to the H having no relationship with him. Raena would have to answer that, and I don't think it's fair to assume the worst of her.

 

But he told her he had a child and she welcomed him back anyway, which means she, like everybody else who enters into a relationship with somebody who has a child, did so knowing that he has certain obligations to fulfill. Am I assuming the worst in her? No... But I'm questioning how she could be OK with knowing there was a child out there that she herself admitted he didn't see and why she still expected until very recently, per the discussion about "being careful," that this child should still be a secret.

 

When you add together that he didn't see the child, she clearly expected it would remain a secret, but as soon as the marriage ended he rushed to be there for the child and learn about him and be involved in his life... It's just not gelling with the idea she presented earlier that the child was born and he wanted no part of it. Men who father children they want no part of don't suddenly up and run away to be with them in another state when they're free to do so. It seems like either the location was a barrier to his being there for the child, as it is now for their child, or that there's more to this story.

 

It's an oversimplification and misrepresentation, IMO. This isn't simply about the other kids existence. She didn't want her son to see it because he himself has also, in effect, been abandoned by his father. It was a matter of protecting his feelings, and addressing how the current GF is still trying to get to her. She didn't want him to see it and wonder why his Dad won't come see him yet can spend time with another boy.

 

He hasn't been abandoned... He sees his father less, which is part of the ugliness of divorce and something the OP would know happened when she kicked him out. It seems like they call, Skype, and have FB contact, which is more than this other child had for 8ish years. And the answer to why he's with the other child is quite simple... He is that child's father too, he hasn't seen him in years, and now he's getting to know him. Just like it was hard to see that child when he lived so far away, it's now hard to see him. By the OP's statement, they're seeing each other this summer (I'm assuming no school makes it easier to travel), and she's doing a great job in making sure he can contact his father the best way that's available given his location.

 

As for this being a case of the current girlfriend "getting to her," I'm still not seeing proof of that in this particular case. She took a picture and labeled it with the father's name and the child's name. She probably didn't know that this child was a secret as the father isn't acting like the child is a secret... I know if it were me and he didn't tell me "my other child doesn't know about this child," I'd see a guy who's getting a divorce picking up to move nearer to a child he didn't know much until now and not assume that posting a picture would be a big deal. For all we know, the ex told the girlfriend that he wanted a relationship with the child but the OP prevented it. True or not, it would mean that posting the picture wasn't a deliberate attempt to hurt feelings, it was her sharing a picture of the guy she's seriously dating with his child.

 

Or, for all we know, she's best buddies with OW #1 and she was standing just outside of camera range during a fun filled family outing. Or maybe they fight like cats and OW #1 resents she raised their child alone for so many years and that now that he's single he's with somebody else and wandering in to the child's life like it's no big thing, and posting the picture by the girlfriend was designed to get OW #1's goat and getting the OP riled up was an unintended, but welcomed, byproduct.

 

This problem, like so many, would just be so easily solved if everybody who didn't like somebody would stay off of each other's social media. If this was the good ol' days before Facebook, this wouldn't even be an issue. Just let him do his thing on social media, you do yours, and don't look and don't allow yours to be looked at. So much stress is alleviated by that it's ridiculous to not do it.

 

I'm still baffled as to why a child younger than Facebook's age minimum would be allowed onto their father's Facebook, even for communication, when somebody you believe deliberately hurts you or your child also haunts the same page.

 

Reading the thread helps here. Per Raena, they're not.

 

So there you have it. As said, she probably was trying to tweak the nose of OW#1 and had no idea of the added benefit of it tweaking the nose of his ex too. That's like a two-for-one deal. I bet she didn't even know that this was some big secret.

[minimariah]

Even then, though, I have an impossible time imagining the situation where a man would say "I don't want anything to do with a child I created" and I'd answer "Ok, good. Nothing wrong with that!"

 

that's the thing -- that is something YOU wouldn't do. the topic is not about you.

 

There is absolutely no way that an "affair child" is different.

 

the affair child is not different -- but the circumstances are. and when i talk about the circumstances, i talk about the fact that the father abandoned his child... not about the fact that the child came from an affair. and when you're in an affair -- you have a pretty big chance that you'll end up as a single parent.

 

I get the impression...

 

the only reason you got this impression is the fact that you're traumatized by your own BS & your situation. i don't know your story but she did a huge number on you (& keeps doing it). if it wasn't for that, i firmly believe you'd be able to see this topic from a more logical & rational point of view.

 

TBH I even hate that the children she shares with my husband are ever alone with her because she scares the crap out of me with how she cares for them.

 

you just hijacked this entire thread because you can't hold the negative emotions in. that being said... if you're already seeing a therapist -- find another one. this one is doing a really lousy job. these emotions need to be dealt with to the point of indifference -- that is the goal.

 

The day he said he had an affair and there was a child that resulted and she responded by taking him back was the day she became a stepparent to this child.

 

just to address this last thing -- giving birth doesn't make you a mother. RAISING and taking care of your child does. giving sperm doesn't make you a father, RAISING and taking care, loving that child does.

 

all of that being said -- your husband having a kid does NOT make you a stepparent. having that kid around and raising that kid does.

 

mother, father, stepparent -- you EARN those titles. so the OP isn't a stepmother for one simple reason -- the child was never around for her to actually raise.

 

ALSO... i don't see a problem in the OP's kid being on Facebook when it's clearly the only way he communicates with his father. the OP already said that she's monitoring his feed but this somehow went unnoticed (we are all familiar with the FB's "oopsies" when it comes to privacy settings). the funny thing is... if the OP didn't allow her kid to be on FB, people would gang up on her for trying to keep the kid away from his father and not allowing them to communicate. kid being on a social network that is tracked and monitored by a parent isn't a problem at all, actually.

Edited June 5, 2015 by minimariah

[truncated]

This is a young child people are talking about. The op needs to do what is best for HER child. The mother of the other little boy has not approached her to allow the siblings to meet and get to know one another, so it's not up to the op to force the issue and insist that it happen.

 

For now, her little boy knows that somewhere out in the world, he has a brother, and when he is old enough to decide for himself, he can seek him out and get to know him should he wish to do so.

 

 

Both of the biological mothers are doing their best to keep their young sons free of all the drama of this situation. It's too bad the ow who has been posting the pictures has been doing so, as it's not her place to get involved.

 

It sounds like the father never made a move to tell his second child about the first, and I'm sorry, but it's a piss poor way for the little guy to find out about his brother...pictures on Facebook? Why didn't his dad speak to him before the pictures were posted, or at least give the op a heads up about what his girlfriend is doing.

 

 

If I was the op, I would be speaking with a lawyer and getting some plans in place to keep the ow out of her son's life. If his father suddenly develops the need to be a father rather than just a sperm donor, he would be well advise to spend time with him without her hovering around.

[truncated]

What if the situation was reversed and it was a bs who was doing something like this to the ow and her child?

[autumnnight]

AN AFFAIR CHILD IS DIFFERENT.

 

This statement actually made me cry.

[minimariah]

This statement actually made me cry.

 

come on, autumn.

 

i'm sure the statement didn't mean to portray the "affair child" as a less of a child. a child is a child and all children are wonderful and they all deserve love and care and a father who will actually go out of his way, to the end of this Earth to protect them and know them and cherish them and care for them.

 

the circumstances are different, that's all -- and that doesn't even mean the AFFAIR but the fact that the father "chose" his marriage over taking care of his kid. we all know that both of these children deserve the best of care and love that they can possibly get, all kids do.

 

but all of that is not on the OP but on the father. now... how right or wrong was the OP for staying with a dude who abandoned his kid? that's another story for another day.

[Redheaded Mistress]

nope -- that doesn't mean that you assume or expect this child to be hidden. that only means that you expect this child to be acknowledged to your SON BEFORE posting pictures on the FB. the only problem that the OP has is the fact that her son found out about the entire situation through Facebook -- was taunted by it on the place folks knew he will see it & wonder. not really sure why is that so hard to understand...?

 

no -- the OP wanted the father to come clean to the kid BEFORE posting something for the kid to see and wonder.

 

So again, if he found out in a way she didn't like, this could have been avoided by:

 

A. Telling him in the first place

B. Saying to yourself "hmm, my ex is a crap father and will probably bungle this... I'm going to handle it sensitively so that it's not like a bombshell for my child."

 

The fun thing about divorce is even if he didn't want the child to know, you still are in your rights to say something because, hey, you're getting a divorce. Divorce means I don't have to kowtow to the demands my ex. Clearly it's in the child's best interest to know and to know after being told in a safe, supportive way.

 

Why you'd rely on your ding dong ex who abandoned the child in the first place and who you now believe is abandoning your child to be able to deliver that news, I have no idea. He's proven to be an insensitive, questionably invested father and for the better part of the last decade he's handled the situation pretty terribly... So why are we thinking that this time he'll handle it fabulously?

 

Ultimately, it was up to her to say something too, especially after the marriage was over and she had no obligation to keep his secrets anymore. I mean, what's he going to do, get thrown out again? As is evidenced by the question by the child of "did you know?" by keeping it from him, he's not saying to himself "Gee, why didn't my father tell me?" he's saying "Gee, why didn't either of my parents tell me?" Clearly, he expected this to be news his own mother would deliver to him, even if his father didn't. I think realizing she'd keep the secret too as opposed to coming clean rattled him too. Here, the one parent he has left full-time who he thought was his safe place, has been keeping secrets from him too. That's kind of earth shattering, especially for a kid who's going through a divorce and essentially the loss of a parent.

 

ummm... no.

the saddest thing about this entire situation is the fact that the father STILL DIDN'T "lay claim" to the child -- the OP & his OW did it instead of him.

 

She did no such thing. When the secret was spilled, she asked him to be careful about it. When he asked her if she told the truth or lied about it, she was offended by the question. Then she went back and forth on if she should tell the child. Then, finally, she grudgingly did while also hoping that she could say something while avoiding details.

 

Meanwhile, he moved away to be near the child, brought the girlfriend, and has been spending time with the child.

 

He acknowledge the child waaaaaay before she did.

 

you can't force anyone to do anything -- so she really couldn't have "forced" him to come clean. so the fallout is SOLELY the father's fault. it is really as simple as that.

 

Sure she could have. When she took him back, they could have formulated a plan on how to deal with it, as opposed to ignoring it. Part of the deal in him coming back could have been in hearing how he was responding to the situation for the child and how it related to their child. She could have said "we need to tell our child," and held him to it. Or, when he was booted out and then unceremoniously moved to be nearer to said child, she could have said "oh, by the way, he's probably moving there because..." and said something then.

 

You can't force him to tell, but you can decide to stop keeping his secrets because of how it'll hurt their child.

 

Point being, if we got to this point where the child is finding out like this, it's because at some point, the ex said "lets keep this a secret" and the OP said "sounds good to me."

 

it isn't -- but nobody on this thread won't tell me how is that ANY of the OP's business. you all want to demonize the OP & make her seems responsible for this another kid... let me repeat for the folks in the back once more -- the OP isn't responsible & shouldn't really give a crap about the other kid. the only kid she should take care of is HERS.

 

It's her business because it's her husband. Because this child is now part of his package. When we partner up with people, we don't select which parts we do and don't want to deal with, we kind of get the whole package. You don't get to say "that part of you is icky so I won't be dealing with it." Especially when said part is a child.

 

Demonize her? No. But asking questions of the dynamic? Oh heck yeah. She claims he wanted no part of the child, but as soon as he was free to do so, he zipped off to be with the child. And she had no qualms with him not being involved with the child? No questions about that? If my husband stopped seeing his children, I'd have a question or two and I wouldn't be Ok with it.

 

The fact is that the child was his child, so this "I don't have to care about that child" act is perfectly ludicrous. By virtue of the fact that the child is his, and is as much his as the child they share, means she should very much give a huge crap about the child.

 

not much happiness in that, considering the fact that the tables have turned and now the OP's kid is being the one who is neglected.

 

I don't get why when he does it to one child, it's super and dandy and she doesn't have to give a crap about it, but now that she's getting a tiny taste of what was dealt to this other child, it's a travesty to end all travesties. When the child from the affair is treated that way, it's "that's what happens" and "she doesn't have to care about that kid." When it's her, he's a jerk, he's a bad father, he's this and he's that.

 

Any guy who abandons a child isn't a great Dad and it should come as no great shock when he does it to your child too.

 

she didn't expect anything -- i really don't know why you keep assuming that...? the woman continued to live her own life with her own family. that is really all that is to it - but i guess it's more simple to project from your own situation & demonize the OP because there just has to be her fault in this situation somehwere... right?

 

No... I think you're getting really worked up here. I'm not "projecting" anything on anybody. I just can't picture under what circumstance on the planet one would hear that your partner had a child and it's perfectly acceptable to pretend the child doesn't exist, and we rest the fault in that not with the person who's abandoning the child, but the person who had the child. It literally makes no sense to me and I'm utterly baffled at how some's blind allegiance to all things BW would make this a totally acceptable thing to do.

 

I just am not seeing where abandoning a child as long as you hate one of the parents enough or feel they need to learn a lesson in morality or simply just don't feel like dealing with it is acceptable. Using a child as a weapon is thoroughly disgusting to me.

 

the simple fact that this dude didn't sit down and speak with his son and told him about the other kid should tell you how bad of a parent he is but, for some reason, that's irrelevant to you and you completely dodged it.

 

the OP didn't want this kid to be a secret -- if she had wanted it, she would've NEVER come clean.

 

I'm the one who said from the start that if this guy is such a terrible parent, why would you let him handle such an important issue? Why would we assume he'd start being Mr. Conscientious when it came to telling his son, who we are claiming he has now abandoned and cares little about, that he abandoned another child?

 

And if he's a crap parent for not telling, then sure we can see why she maybe is more than a little responsible for what happened considering she was in no great rush to tell him either.

 

Yeah, she did want the child to be a secret. If it wasn't for the FB post, the child would still be a secret to his brother. She told because she had to, not because she wanted to, and even then, before she told, she had to come here and ask if it was a good idea or not to ask. She was in no great rush to tell him, and now the poor kid knows that too.

 

right, because the fact that she has kids automatically means she is a good parent (?!).

 

I didn't say that she was or wasn't a good parent, only that as a single parent herself, these are issues that she probably has dealt with in a way that the OP hasn't yet. That's all.

 

Since it clearly bothers you, we'll get out of the way now that I don't think the BS is always right and holy simply because she's a BS. I don't think the cheating spouse is automatically a callous, insensitive jerk who needs perpetual punishment, and I don't think the OW is automatically the embodiment of all that is evil in the world. Sometimes BS's are awful, sometimes their cheating spouses are simply people who make a stupid mistake, and sometimes the OW did nothing wrong to anybody. Sometimes a BS handles an affair revelation terribly and the OW handles it better.

 

I'm not one to jump into a thread like this and rail on the OW simply for being the OW or raise the BW on my shoulders in all her behaviors simply because she's the BW. I get that any sort of something perceived as positive towards the OW in this situation is getting you wound like a top and any questioning of the BW's behavior in this is sullying the untouchability of the innocence of a BW is seen as egregious... But really, I think the OP handled this situation wrongly from the moment she took him back and went about life like the child didn't exist.

 

sweetheart... i mean... are you kidding me right now? how can you force to do another person to be a good parent? like, NO. NO, it is NOT the OP's fault that her husband isn't a good parent and never came clean. you cannot force another person to be a parent and it isn't the OP's responsibility -- that's the only reality check here.

 

It's not the OP's fault that her husband never came clean. It is entirely her fault and responsibility that she didn't either. She couldn't force him to tell, but that doesn't mean she had to keep his secret. And that's where her accountability lies. Their child finding out via Facebook is just as much her fault for keeping his secret as it is his for not saying anything.

 

As a parent, if my husband told me to keep a secret that I thought would ultimately hurt our child, you wouldn't even be able to time how quickly I'd tell him to take a flying leap as I rush to do what's best by my child. And my husband is an outstanding father. If my husband was a crap father who I didn't even trust to help my kids to safely cross the street, I'd never in a million expect that he could handle this issue with the best interest of our child in mind and then sit back and let him deal with it.

 

*sigh*

 

why do you need the OP to be responsible for this child so bad...? she didn't treat this kid like anything, LOL. like, she moved on with her life because that kid doesn't represent anything to her. that's a random kid to her -- the OP is not responsible for him, it is NOT on her to force her husband to do anything.

 

I don't "need" her to do anything. She can continue to ignore it and let it slide and pretends it doesn't exist... No skin off my nose. The world is full of deadbeat dads and the women who love them.

 

But it means when she comes onto a forum and rails on how her ex husband and his girlfriend did X, Y, and Z to her child and it hurt him and isn't he such a jerk, I'm going to be one of the ones who say "Well, this is a situation you contributed to as well and maybe we need to examine the part you play in this..." It's an entirely logical thing to ask, actually, as evidenced by the fact that one of the first things her son asked was "did you know about this too?" And when she says yes, he's going to ask many of the same questions that I'm asking and may even arrive at the same conclusions I and others did.

 

he is -- because he's doing the wrong thing by the 1st kid.

 

In the context of that original quote was me saying that she has no right to be offended that he's trying to do right by the child that he abandoned for years.

 

no, you aren't. you are obligated to involve the kid in your CHILD's life and that's the husband's responsibility because that's HIS kid.

 

Well, if you wash your hands of the other child and leave anything about that child to your husband because you want nothing to do with it, it means that when your child finds out via Facebook, you have absolutely no right to complain. You laid it at your husband's feet, you said it wasn't your problem, you opted out of parenting your own child by letting them know they have a half sibling... If it wasn't your problem then, it's still not your problem now when your child has hurt feelings over how he was told and the fact that both of his parents lied to him for years. And when he asks "why didn't you tell me?" you can say "it wasn't my job to do this particular part of raising you, protecting you, and caring for your well-being."

 

That's how it works. You can't say "not my problem, not my kid, your problem, you deal with it," then turn around and say "wait a minute, you did it wrong, you hurt feelings" etc etc etc. You got what you asked for. Total non-involvement in this child which, coincidentally, means you decided to not really parent your own child either.

 

So you and the OP have nothing to be so upset over. It was his job and he did it. She shouldn't have to deal with it and she didn't. She got just exactly what you say she should have gotten.

 

you aren't if the husband refuses to have anything to do with the child. you'll be a stepmother and you'll include the child IF THE HUSBAND BRINGS THAT CHILS TO YOUR LIFE -- in this case, that didn't happen.

 

You're a stepparent if you chose to be or not choose to be. It's an automatic upon marriage, not a title you get if you feel like doing it. Regardless, even if she decided that she could opt out of being a stepmother, that doesn't excuse opting out of taking responsibility for this situation and how it impacts her own child when she sees it's being handled badly.

 

But, as you said, she didn't have to deal with it if she didn't want to, which means she can't complain her child was hurt. It's, as you said, not her problem.

 

the same reasons folks forgive infidelity.

 

The reason you choose to forgive a cheating spouse isn't the same reason you choose to be OK with his ignoring the child he created. One is forgiveness and a willingness to move on. The other is denial and an outright refusal to deal with the affair and how it has changed the family dynamic.

 

Actually, come to think of it, you may be on to something... It may be the same reasons people forgive cheating.

 

what makes you think he will...?

just like "once a cheater, always a cheater" doesn't work -- this doesn't work either.

 

Commonsense makes me think he will. He abandoned her and their marriage by having an affair. He abandoned the OW and the child after he was caught and she became less fun... The man has a history of abandoning obligations. That's his MO. When he's abandoned you once, while pregnant even, why on earth would you think that he won't do it again? And when he abandons one child, why would you think he's not capable of doing the same to you?

 

Once a cheater, always a cheater may not hold water... But somebody who cheats habitually is shocking nobody when he cheats again, just like a guy who makes a habit of abandoning obligations and people means you shouldn't be stunned when he does it again.

 

the OP isn't surprised at all.

but she has every right to be hurt.

 

She shouldn't be. She was the one who booted him and giving his track record and that she knew it was bound to happen, it shouldn't be something that hurts her, just a prophesy that was fulfilled.

 

LMAO... how...? like, how is your husband's affair kid ANY of your business? how? are the cousins of your kid your business, too? is the uncle of your kid your business, too? no. the only OP's business is her own kid and not another kid else.

 

Um... Because he's my husband and his business is my business. Let's flip this... Let's say I got pregnant during an affair. Could my husband say "none of my business" and let it slide? Of course not. Why? Because I'm his wife.

 

Could we say his affair was none of her business too? After all, it's his mistress, not hers.

 

Of course not. Again, because they're in a relationship. That's her husband. What he does is her business.

 

And, for the record, yes, the cousins of my child are my business. So are my child's uncles. Welcome to the world of being a wife and mother. Everything that's connected to either one of them are my business. I don't opt out of being a wife to the stuff I don't like and I don't get to opt out of the part of being a parent that I don't like. So yes, that means the cousins he spends time with, I know about. The uncles he spends time with, I know about them too. The uncle with the drug problem? Doesn't spend time with him. The aunt married to a man who beats her and is an alcoholic? Doesn't see her either.

 

The things in my son's world and the people in his world, the people he's connected to, his blood relatives... They're all so much my business it's ridiculous.

 

welcome to the world where you can't force anyone to do anything. welcome to the world where the BS isn't responsible for the affair child. welcome to the world where moving on with your life and taking care of YOURS doesn't mean harming and treating another kid as a 2nd class citizen. welcome to the world where moving on with your life and living YOUR life with YOUR family doesn't mean pretending the affair child doesn't exist.

 

Your world is a very powerless one with very little responsibility. Because you can't force people to do things, you must also enable and assist them in doing things that are going to hurt the people you care for. You're a wife who's only responsible for dealing with the parts of your husband you want to deal with, the rest of it, and the fallout of it... Even if it hurts your children... Isn't your problem. You can ignore a child and forego encouraging your spouse to do the right thing by that child and label it an "affair child," but also claim you're not treating the child badly or treating it like a second class citizen. You can move on and live your life, but that includes not taking responsibility for things you don't really feel like being responsible for, be it your husband's other child and your stepchild, or telling your own child information he needs to know in a way that's best for him.

 

I literally can't even envision being that passive about so many important things in my life. It's almost worth it to be a BW in this scenario because apparently you don't have to do anything for anyone, you can opt out of aspects of parenting and being a wife you don't want to deal with, and your word is law and your feelings trump that of even children. Who cares if a child doesn't have a father if it means you can live your life all is fine and dandy?

 

what you WON'T do is to blame the OP & make her seem like a bad guy here because the child was neglected. that isn't her responsibility and that was never on her.

 

I didn't blame her for neglecting the child. I questioned why she was OK with the child being neglected, why she felt like she didn't have to tell her child about this child, why she still expected it should be a secret, and why on earth she'd leave her ding dong ex husband to handle this issue. I'm also saying she carried half of the responsibility for telling her child about this and if he was hurt by how he found out, she should acknowledge that she could have easily prevented it by telling him sooner, or at the least, not waffling back and forth on if she should tell him after the cat was out of the bag.

 

I will point out that as his wife and her child's mother, she had some responsibilities here that she didn't see to and now she's paying for that. Which is entirely true.

[Redheaded Mistress]

This statement actually made me cry.

 

I was stunned reading that too. I don't get shocked by much, but that did it.

 

I've just chalked it up to different belief systems and values. Unfortunately we live in a culture where abandoning your children isn't as uncommon as it should be and there's an entire generation of people who just think that it's OK, as long as your reasons for doing it are justified.

 

I'm a stepparent and my life would be a thousand times better if I didn't have to deal with what comes of having stepchildren. The only time we argue in our relationship is about the kids or his ex in relation to the kids. If I could just say "Nah, I'm not dealing with that part of our relationship anymore because I don't want to" my life would be so much easier.

 

"Unfortunately," I don't have it in me to slight or ignore children, regardless of how much I hate their mother or how miserable she makes us, and my husband takes being a father so completely seriously. If I said I wanted no part of that part of his life, it'd devastate him and probably destroy our marriage.

 

So this idea that as a parent I can just opt out, or he can opt out of being a father, and that's totally fine... I can't rationalize it or understand it in the slightest.

 

I mean... These are kids. Innocent children... Yikes.

[velvette]

Raena,

 

 

I would ignore people who don't bother to read the entire story to understand your situation.

 

 

OW2 has been a nutjob bunny boiler from the beginning. She will likely fade into history at some point. And, your ex is clearly a mess.

 

 

In the meantime, I don't know whether or not your divorce/custody arrangement has been finalized, but I would see a lawyer to include a provision that your ex cant have her around your son.

 

 

She is clearly willing to go to any length to hurt you including using your son. Make sure you are documenting everything.

[velvette]

I was stunned reading that too. I don't get shocked by much, but that did it.

 

I've just chalked it up to different belief systems and values. Unfortunately we live in a culture where abandoning your children isn't as uncommon as it should be and there's an entire generation of people who just think that it's OK, as long as your reasons for doing it are justified.

 

I'm a stepparent and my life would be a thousand times better if I didn't have to deal with what comes of having stepchildren. The only time we argue in our relationship is about the kids or his ex in relation to the kids. If I could just say "Nah, I'm not dealing with that part of our relationship anymore because I don't want to" my life would be so much easier.

 

"Unfortunately," I don't have it in me to slight or ignore children, regardless of how much I hate their mother or how miserable she makes us, and my husband takes being a father so completely seriously. If I said I wanted no part of that part of his life, it'd devastate him and probably destroy our marriage.

 

So this idea that as a parent I can just opt out, or he can opt out of being a father, and that's totally fine... I can't rationalize it or understand it in the slightest.

 

I mean... These are kids. Innocent children... Yikes.

 

 

I'm stunned that as a step parent you think your life would be a thousand times better without your "innocent" step children. Also, that you hate their mother which surely will be obvious to them sooner or later.

 

 

I think as Mini said, you have your own work to do before counseling others on how they should parent. Perhaps you should start your own thread to address these issues.

 

 

In Raena's situation this is all water under the bridge. Do you have any advice going forward about what she should do to protect her son from a bunny boiling OW? Because that is the situation she has been dealing with.

[minimariah]

Ultimately, it was up to her to say something too, especially after the marriage was over and she had no obligation to keep his secrets anymore.

 

she wasn't obligated to keep her husband's secret by the marriage, she was never really obligated by anthing or anyone to keep her husband's secrets -- it wasn't on her to spill the secret because it wasn't her secret to keep. as simple as that.

 

I mean, what's he going to do, get thrown out again?

 

projection #1 = how do you know that the OP threw her husband out? according to her - he was the one who left without saying goodbye. EDIT --- she did throw him out, i just noticed. my mistake.

 

I think realizing she'd keep the secret too as opposed to coming clean rattled him too.

 

Here, the one parent he has left full-time who he thought was his safe place, has been keeping secrets from him too. That's kind of earth shattering, especially for a kid who's going through a divorce and essentially the loss of a parent.

 

projections #2 & #3 - earth shattering...? give me a break.

 

She did no such thing.

 

she did -- she told the child, didn't she? doesn't really matter how or when... SHE told the child and claimed that kid before the father did.

 

Meanwhile, he moved away to be near the child, brought the girlfriend, and has been spending time with the child.

 

projection #4 = where did it say that he moved away with one goal: to spend the time with this other child?

 

He acknowledge the child waaaaaay before she did.

 

when...? in those 6 years that he kept ignoring the kid's existence or that moment when the OP had to tell their son all about it?

 

Sure she could have.

 

no, she couldn't have. you want to know why? because you can't force people to do something they don't want to do.

 

When she took him back, they could have formulated a plan on how to deal with it, as opposed to ignoring it.

 

they had decided not to deal with it -- that, in fact, is not the same thing as ignoring it.

 

yes, i am serious.

 

Point being, if we got to this point where the child is finding out like this, it's because at some point, the ex said "lets keep this a secret" and the OP said "sounds good to me."

 

what the OP said doesn't matter -- the only one who should have said something is the father of the child. you gotta hold the right person accountable.

 

It's her business because it's her husband.

 

so? how is it her business when the husband doesn't want to bring this child into his life, their life and their family?

 

Because this child is now part of his package.

 

how is this kid a part of her husband's package when the husband refused to acknowledge, raise and see him?

 

When we partner up with people, we don't select which parts we do and don't want to deal with, we kind of get the whole package. You don't get to say "that part of you is icky so I won't be dealing with it." Especially when said part is a child.

 

projection #5.

 

But asking questions of the dynamic? Oh heck yeah. She claims he wanted no part of the child, but as soon as he was free to do so, he zipped off to be with the child.

 

right... because he wasn't free to do so before. i mean, was he chained to the OP and to the floor so he couldn't travel to this another state...?

projection #6.

 

And she had no qualms with him not being involved with the child? No questions about that? If my husband stopped seeing his children, I'd have a question or two and I wouldn't be Ok with it.

 

projection #7.

 

By virtue of the fact that the child is his, and is as much his as the child they share, means she should very much give a huge crap about the child.

 

no, it doesn't. she isn't that child's mother and the child was never taken care of by his own father. all of that being said - she really shouldn't give a crap about someone else's kid in a situation where the husband refuses to take his responsibility.

 

I don't get why when he does it to one child, it's super and dandy and she doesn't have to give a crap about it, but now that she's getting a tiny taste of what was dealt to this other child, it's a travesty to end all travesties.

 

projection #9. literally no one thinks this, no one has said this.

 

When the child from the affair is treated that way, it's "that's what happens" and "she doesn't have to care about that kid." When it's her, he's a jerk, he's a bad father, he's this and he's that.

 

projection #10.

 

No... I think you're getting really worked up here. I'm not "projecting" anything on anybody.

 

lady, you hijacked this entire thread with your personal issues and I am the one getting worked up? and yes, you are heavily projecting.

 

projecting = making up parts of the story that aren't supported by any real facts or posts, statements by the OP in order to fit the narrative you created in your head. assuming things that aren't true and are only based on your real life negative experience.

 

I just am not seeing where abandoning a child as long as you hate one of the parents enough or feel they need to learn a lesson in morality or simply just don't feel like dealing with it is acceptable. Using a child as a weapon is thoroughly disgusting to me.

 

nobody used this child as a weapon -- you assumed the OP did.

projection... i lost count.

 

Yeah, she did want the child to be a secret. If it wasn't for the FB post, the child would still be a secret to his brother.

 

you don't know this -- the kid is freaking 8. maybe the OP wanted to wait for the time the kid gets older.

 

Since it clearly bothers you...

 

why would it bother me? i simply call it the way i see it. and this time -- i was spot on.

 

I'm not one to jump into a thread like this and rail on the OW...

 

notice how no one railed on the OW (i sure didn't) - folks mostly railed on the father and his girlfriend who (claims made by the OP) loves to taunt and hurt the family.

 

...

simply for being the OW or raise the BW on my shoulders in all her behaviors simply because she's the BW. I get that any sort of something perceived as positive towards the OW in this situation is getting you wound like a top and any questioning of the BW's behavior in this is sullying the untouchability of the innocence of a BW is seen as egregious...

 

you do realize these are all ONLY YOUR assumptions, thoughts and projections?

 

But really, I think the OP handled this situation wrongly from the moment she took him back and went about life like the child didn't exist.

 

and you couldn't have said this without derailing the entire topic?

 

It's an entirely logical thing to ask, actually, as evidenced by the fact that one of the first things her son asked was "did you know about this too?"

 

not sure why you keep mentioning that question as some kind of proof of something -- it isn't. trust me. i am sure the OP knows where she went wrong and she is, again, trying to deal with the situation as best as she knows how. instead of offering her some useful advice, you decided to educate her about where she REALLY went wrong... i mean, okay... i guess.

 

In the context of that original quote was me saying that she has no right to be offended that he's trying to do right by the child that he abandoned for years.

 

she isn't offended by that. she is offended by this OW taunting the kid (according to the OP's earlier posts, she made trouble before) and is upset because the kid got hurt. she is upset because it is now ON HER to deal with the situation -- alone.

 

So you and the OP have nothing to be so upset over.

 

why do you want me to be upset? i'm not upset. at all. do you think i should be? do you take every personal criticism as personal attack?

 

But, as you said, she didn't have to deal with it if she didn't want to, which means she can't complain her child was hurt.

 

you don't get to tell her what she can or can't complain about.

 

The reason you choose to forgive a cheating spouse isn't the same reason you choose to be OK with his ignoring the child he created. One is forgiveness and a willingness to move on. The other is denial and an outright refusal to deal with the affair and how it has changed the family dynamic.

 

aha. because the ONLY reason people chose to stay after an infidelity is the willingnes to move on. okay. notice how i never actually said or offered any reasons the OP decided to stay in this situation -- you assumed i meant willingnes to forgive and whatnot. nah.

 

And when he abandons one child, why would you think he's not capable of doing the same to you?

 

what makes you think that she DIDN'T think that he is capable of doing the same to her?

 

Of course not. Why? Because I'm his wife.

 

no... no, honey. that's not why.

 

it is about either keeping the kid around or not. if the husband keeps the kid and decides to take care of the kid -- THEN it is your business. but if he doesn't? THEN it isn't.

 

if you gave away your baby for an adoption, for an example - how would that baby be your husband's business? if you gave the baby to your lover to raise, how is that baby your husband's business?

 

the husband in question never took the responsibility for the kid and never did anything to bring the kid around. THAT is a very immportant information that you just keep dodging and dodging... and i'm too tired to comment and repeat myself again. i made my point -- you either got it, or you didn't.

 

best wishes.

Edited June 5, 2015 by minimariah