Wow! This is a can of worms opener! I disengaged because I could not compete with the hold my OSD had over her daddy, although she is now well into her 40s. I haven't seen or spoken to her for 6 months and that suits me fine, although I have lately come to the realisation that they are in an 'enmeshed' relationship to which I can see no resolution.
If only, at the very beginning, when I was trying to please my DH, had we put down some grounds rules. Instead it became a bit of a battle from which I had to withdraw..
However, I know she is frustrated with my disengagement and she no longer has any control over me, although I now think she wishes she could have it back. She doesn't deal well with rejection.
I think because I was the one to disengage I do feel I am the one with the power here- I can re-engage at any point but choose not to. It was difficult over the holidays but I did it and I now know it was the right thing to do.
If only DH could read this and realise that he has put his daughter before me and if I were in a different situation I would have attempted to leave. He now meets with her as the only form of contact every single Thursday night and rings here more frequently. As far as I can work out this was his decision, but the two of them are so thick it is impossible to know who is the decision maker in the pair.
So yes, I do agree with the above quote because it promotes a healthy relationship between all parties. I cannot dictate how often DH and OSD contact each other and I don't know how long we can carry on like this- but I know I will only re-engage when I consider their relationship to be healthier and DH begins to put my needs first. It may take a very long time indeed.

Do you WANT to be present when DH meets SD31? As to your quoted bit - no, I don't think it's reasonable that the SKID gets to insist that he/she will only meet up with parent if the SP is excluded. However, if that is the way you all prefer it I see nothing wrong.

I see my adult SDs now, about twice per year when they come to our house for a meal. The rest of the time, DH meets them individually about once every few weeks, for coffee or lunch away from our house. I am always invited, but I never go, I prefer not to, and I'm sure the SDs prefer me not to.

It's easy to feel rejected when someone specifically excludes you. But the reality is that she can't possibly really dislike YOU if she doesn't even KNOW you. I guess maybe her parents' divorce is a painful thing for her and she doesn't want to confront it? As a tough minded person, I say "cry me a river", but I got to be tough by living a tough life, and if these wittle babies have been coddled most of their lives, they aren't as tough minded as they should be. But still, you are a wonderful person, and the fact that she doesn't want to get to know you is her loss, so try not to take it personal. You don't deserve to be shunned. Maybe you could change your mindset from 'excluded' to 'pardoned'. If she's a bish, which seems likely, she is doing you a favor. It's a shame she's too selfish to put her fee fees aside for the sake of her father. I bet if she got to know you, she'd really like you.

Regarding the article, I somewhat agree. BM tried pulling some idiotic control game when DH and I were already living together, BM booked Killjoy's 6th birthday party, and repeatedly told him, and had Killjoy also deliver the message, that DH was invited but Ipso was not. Nice parenting. Of course, you know, she was still going to expect him to pay for the entire extravagant party she'd planned without consulting him. DH felt it was disrespectful, so he told BM, "Ipso is my wife, and anywhere she is not welcome, I am not welcome". BM then told Killjoy that her Dad did not care about her. DH refused to pay for the party.

Over the next few months, BM kept making up fake urgency issues to try to gain facetime with DH so she could manipulate him. Even back when we were dating, she'd call him to talk crap about me even tho we'd never even met. Her efforts obsessively circulated around purposely undermining our relationship. She tried everything to break us up, until he filed a restraining order. Now she still tries to sow discord thru Killjoy.

I think motivation matters. If SD is trying to break the two of you up, then she is disrespecting your relationship. It could be a malicious power play. The fact that she invites him to parties where her BM is in attendance seems to hint that she's hoping they will reconcile. But like I said before, she may just have very fragile fee fees. Maybe DH should ask her.

If she is that fragile, maybe it's time for DH to be a better parent and tell her to grow the eff up. If I were DH, I would refuse to meet her under these conditions. On the other hand, there are plenty of SPs here who have banned SKs from the household, or mandated that the BP can only meet the SK outside the home. Under most of those conditions, the SK did something to warrant the condition, but I'm sure if you asked the SKs, most would say they didn't do anything wrong and want to get along, which is often bullcrap.

You say you are disengaged. It would be weird if you forced an invite and then refused to go.

I suggest turning the tables. You and DH could do the hosting and invite her every time. Then it's on her if she refuses to have a relationship with her father.

I agree with this 100%: "The response to adult children’s attempt to exclude the new spouse must be through a firm statement that this person is the mate and the couple is undividable. It is acceptable, on occasion, for the parent to meet alone with the adult child but not as a primary or only form of contact."

Maybe they should start putting that statement on Holiday cards?: "The response to adult children’s attempt to exclude the new spouse must be through a firm statement that this person is the mate and the couple is undividable. It is acceptable, on occasion, for the parent to meet alone with the adult child but not as a primary or only form of contact." It can be in fine print, on the bottom of any card from dad and his wife, kind'a like a disclaimer.

I have balked many times at situations that didn't feel "fair" to me. When DH started seeing SS outside our home, I remember being mad. Now, I didn't want SS here but I didn't want to feel left out either and I wanted DH to choose me. I can't even tell you what my expectation was for this whole situation but the reality was that I only wanted my way.

I was hurt. I wanted to be in control. I wanted to come first. I secretly wanted DH to run it by me and accept my opinion as to when he saw SS. Regardless of my feelings, DH seeing SS was not wrong. DH seeing SS outside the house for a few hours was actually what I wanted, but THEY were choosing it. I didn't get to lay down that rule and have all the players agree to what I wanted, therefore it didn't feel like the decision came from me and I continued to feel like the "outsider".

Tiger, no one can tell you how to feel and certainly no one can prepare us as spouses to all the emotions living in step life will bring. Don't let an unknown sense of fairness keep you from seeing the bigger picture. Do you want to be right or do you want to be happy? MANY MANY times I have answered that question with: I WANT TO BE RIGHT DAMNIT AND THEY BETTER DO WHAT I WANT....hahahhhaaaa, I am just human and sometimes dealing with step life really hurts. You are already disengaged, which is a fabulous place to be. For me, it took keeping SS out of my head. Would I have cared if SS made the decision instead of DH for meetings? Oh yes, but to be happy, I knew I had to let those thoughts go. Not telling you what to do, just reflecting back on what I did that saved my sanity.

There is a problem when you have minor Stepkids. In that there is going to be events in there life, Gratuitous, wedding, Grandchildren to name a few. Where you are expected to pay or pay half of the events. And you are not invited to the event. Everyone else will be there. BM Your SO Family. Maybe even your bio chrildren. That going to really feel bad for you. The money is going to come out of household moneys and everybody is going to have a good time on you.

You can’t allow this.
SO married you and you should be part of all of this. If you let the SK controll how you live your life, you are not going to be happy about it. Your SO should put his foot down, they can see SK some of the time alone but there has to be times where you should be part of it. You can disengage somewhat, you can never totally disengage, because there are times where they will force you to engage. Like going away to an event, what your family is paying for,

BM will go and play the old Happy Family with SO as you sit home
SO is creating this life with SK for many years, He is going to feel it normal for him

Remember SO also wants to play Happy Family. If you like it or not BM and SO had a thing once they were very happy together one time. they both love reliving the past and rewriting the past. (She only cheated on him with five guys. But it really was a mistake just make it five times)

Amazing and thoughtful replies!

I think Veritas especially nailed it: Right or Happy?

There are few easy answers here. Yes, your DH should stick up for you and the Step reaction is a poor, immature one.

But what do you gain if you go? What do you want to gain?

Not how do you want them (skid or DH) to respond. But why do you want this?

There’s no correct answer. But figuring the answer for you might help with your decision.

I also agree wholeheartedly their behavior is not a reflection of nor about you. Rather, it’s a glimpse into someone’s else’s soul.

Duplicate

Honestly, I don't think there is a cut and dried correct answer here.

For example, if the new wife was perhaps the "other woman" while the man was married to his adult children's mother, I could completely understand the desire to shun the "home wrecker" Yeah.. we know, the husband was also complicit and possibly more at fault for breaking his vows to mommy. However, in the end, he still is the only father the kids have and for a variety of reasons (unconditional love, dependence on finances or future will) they don't want to break up with dad. In this case, as the "other woman" I think I would have to understand and accept my exclusion from meetings with the kids. (assuming it isn't some huge chunk of my husband's time).

If the guy is a widower and the kids just "can't accept daddy moved on from mommy".. I think a bit more firmness from the father would be in order and I think he owes it to his new SO to insist that his kids not exclude her.

Of course if there are actual circumstances where unkind acts and words have occured from the new wife towards his kids then you might have another view.

Basically, on the face of it, if I was not interested in having a relationship with his adult children, I would not mind that they met without me. It might be somewhat hurtful, but in the end, I wouldn't expect my husband to cut his kids off because they didn't want to meet me. (as immature as that is). I can't control his kids and neither can he. All I can do is try to be understanding of the tough spot he is in and try to be generous in spirit and look at the bright spot of not having to deal with the kids myself.

Yes I do.

Good to see that your DH is following it.

I agree with the statement.

No adult kid would tolerate a parent rejecting their significant other for no good reason. Why would a parent allow a kid to do it? (Answer: Because the parent feels guilty.)

All their lives, kids are forced into new experiences that change their lives. Forcing a kid to give something a try is how we get kids to like broccoli, attend their first day of kindergarten, stick with piano lessons to get the reward of being a great musician. If a kid gets to say a stepparent may not attend, that is as good as saying, "I reject this person forever." How childish. What good parent would encourage that?

I always believed what sunk me early on was that SD demanded I not be there and my husband obliged. This shifted power to SD and that dynamic became the norm - all she had to do was make a decree and husband followed. My husband's decision to cater to SD's demand put husband and me in opposition and caused many fights. No one was asking SD to like me - she was only being asked to let me sit at a dinner table. And she said "no." And he said, "OK, honey. She won't be there." How humiliating for me, especially when the child is an adult and knows exactly what she was doing.

So now we have a parent who has given away power to a child at the expense of a spouse. Wow, what a way to start a marriage. On top of that, SD never had an opportunity to find common ground with me because her father constructed a world for her where I did not exist. We actually have quite a bit in common, apparently.

I warned my husband in those first years that he was creating a life for himself that would forever be split in two: if he's with his kid, he won't be with his wife; if he's with his wife, his kid will not be there. And that is exactly what came to pass. So when he makes the two-hour drive to see her alone, I try not to feel sorry for him. I warned him I wouldn't be the scapegoat forever if he did not "train" her to play nice. He would never demand, nicely request, advise or even suggest she give me a chance. So why should I be exposed to her acid tongue and bad behavior?

In just about any other circumstance, a parent would tell a kid "just give it a try." If it were any other person (a coach, a doctor, a new neighbor), a parent would say, "just give them a chance." This is a very specific person a child gets to reject without question. And the parent who allows it sets up the kid and the spouse for collision.

I hear what some are saying, but I don’t think it is always a question of right vs. happy. Right vs. happy comes up in non-step marriages often enough too. When it comes to SPs, though, what is really comes down to a question of justice. My DH hanging out with his adult kids all the time sans me, will never make me happy (although I may come to accept it), because, through no fault of my own, I’m not permitted to be a part of something he is a part of. Whether or not it is right, is maybe debatable, because some would argue that his main concern should be his children, even when they are adults. Others would say it is not right, because a husband and wife shouldn’t be separated or feel they have to be separated just because someone else wants it so.

What I see as the real argument here is where is the justice for SM? SM, as dad’s wife, is clearly not being seeing as an equal, as she is not being treated the same as other married couples. Other married couples are pretty much permitted to go anywhere they want together, are always treated as a married couple and allowed to sit together any time and any place, and they rarely if ever have to deal with someone thinking why the heck is so-and-so here? These are all things that no SM can take for granted that pretty much any other married couple can. So, this is why people can argue all they want that SM should suck it up and take it (to be happy?) or take the high road or kids first or however one wants to spin it. But, at the end of all of that, there is still the question of where is the justice for SM? Why is SM always expected to suck it up for a situation that she had no part in? And, why doesn’t that seem to matter to more?

Right now there is all this concern for sexual harassment in the entertainment industry? But, someone could make the argument with these women, do you want to be right or happy? Do you want to whine about someone coping a feel once in a while or do you want to suck it up and take it and advance your career? I’m glad to see that in this case, very few are making that said argument and that most seem to be able to see that it is a question of justice for these women vs. a choice. I just wish more people would feel that way about SMs—that is more about justice vs. a SM supposedly having some sort of choice and that she can make the choice to settle for kibble while everyone else around her seems to be getting steak, and yet somehow she can still be happy even though it may not be right.

This so hits it on the head for me. I agree with the statement 100%. If it is not handled like this then the power is given to The skids. In my case DH gave all the power to the skids.
They were allowed to pick if I was allowed to go somewhere or not. If on the rare occasion I had their permission to go, I was suppose to jump for joy. They on the other hand were always invited. They were never told they could not come only I was.

My problem is I don't think that Skids should have the power. My Bkids don't have that power over DH. I would not allow it. No one tells SD that her husband is not allowed to go somewhere with her.

Why should Sparents be any different? Why should anyone be able to tell a married couple that one but not the other is welcome.

I have disengaged from my Skids. I do not see them at all. DH goes to see them by himself. I have 13 years of being bullied by them. I have alot of resentments built up against them, as I or anyone else would of anyone treating me like they have.

DH told SD she need to apologize to me for her actions. She sent me a card at Christmas thru DH. She said she forgave me and we should move on. She did not apologize. She did not take any responsibility for her actions. She has a narcissitic personality. DH says that she feels she apologized.

SO now he wants me to step back my disengagement. He wants me to go around his kids when they will allow it. He will still mainly see them by himself. I do not want to give that power back to them. I don't want them in my house and I don't want to be anywhere they are. They are dead to me. I don't want them invited anywhere I go. I do not want them to have the power over me anymore or ever again. They damage they did to me was severe. I do not want to be in a position of them ever being able to do it to me again.

Just because I married their father does not give them the right to treat me like anything less than the same respect a first wife deserves.

kindness is the cure all? not!

i tried all kind of kindness but all it did was make me look like a door mat.

IMHO - I will decide when to engage, not the brat and not the parent.

Oh they can try and tell me what to do, I will simply ignore it.

It's your decision Hon when to engage and when not, DH can get angry and scream and shout, simply stick to your decision, only you know what's best for your sanity and health....

so what if SD31 decided you are not welcome... it's her choice, and even if she invites you - then the choice are yours... to go or to decline.

The problem would be for me if DH always take his daughter's side, if he always puts her ahead of the marriage, and I believe couples spend Christmas and birthday together, thus sorry but if SD insists Daddy comes for Christmas and you not - Daddy should tell her to get lost, he's spending it with his wife,

Yep! Acrat is on the nail as usual- welcome back, you were missed!