TOTALLY GEEKED!

I'm wondering if the son is an only child. If he is, she may need to change her strategy or risk losing contact with the only two grandchildren she will probably ever have.

Otherwise, she may need to just stop giving her son money period, if she is feeling so "used". Is it a hill to die on? Only she can answer that question.

IMHO, it's not a hill to die on. An extra hundred bucks is not going to hurt you in the long run, to keep peace within her little family.

Chances are the dynamics will change in the next year or two anyway.

huskerbb wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

I specifically said "ONE of the ways". Not the only way we show love is through money. One of the ways we show love is through gifts. One of the many ways.

It doesn't matter if you like it or not, that's the way it is. When you love someone you do things for them. Those things frequently cost money. Is this really news to you?!

Again, it isn't the only way to show love. But it is one way. The OP doesn't want to aknowelgde some children in her son's home because she doesn't like the circumstances under which they are there. She needs to get over it.

---

 Of she can continue to live a bitter, lonely life.

flan

---

 So--wanting to give your grandchildren gifts means you are bitter and lonely?

Another flat out stupid statement from flan.  

---

 Absolutely.  You give to some kids, you give to them all. Especially something as trivial as this. Dont want to? Fine...suffer the consequences.  

---

 Again, what is "trivial" and what is not?  You have again failed to delineate where that line is.  

---

 A couple thousand dollars is trivial to me. But we have a blended family.  We (and the grandparents ) supported our kids. We do the same with the grands....they are ours....

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

I really have a hard time believing some people don't see how the kids feel in this situation. It's NO ONE'S fault they are there. Not the grandma even. We bitch, gripe, and moan about charity starts at home but when push comes to shove we can't do it.

---

I agree. Charity does begin at home. A good life lesson. 

Grandma wanted to help 2 of her grandkids.

Her son put a stipulation on the money.

Grandma withdrew her offer.

It isn't the end of anyone's world.

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

I really have a hard time believing some people don't see how the kids feel in this situation. It's NO ONE'S fault they are there. Not the grandma even. We bitch, gripe, and moan about charity starts at home but when push comes to shove we can't do it.

---

 Right?!?! 

These children, whether she likes how they came to be included in her son's life or not, are still part of his chosen family. They have been living as family for 2 years. This isn't a fling, or some summer romance. It sounds like her son is trying to do right by these children, who desperately need the love and support. The OP can choose to be a positive part of the lives of all of these children or she can choose to segregate them by blood  and only be loving to those she shares blood with. It doesn't seem like a choice to me. 

If she can't afford to send all to soccer, then don't send any. Give mom and dad gift cards for clothing stores for the kids or to Target, buy diapers if needed, etc. Do things that will benefit the whole family and no one specifically. Or scale back on all the other support she is giving them so she can give them all soccer registration. No big deal. 

---

 

He's not married to the Gf. BTW why can't she pay for soccer and he pay for the other kids? It's not like he has to advertise that fact.

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

He's not married to the Gf. BTW why can't she pay for soccer and he pay for the other kids? It's not like he has to advertise that fact.

---

 He stated that they cant afford to pay for the other kids. 

---

   Well, maybe not in this instance.  But, i am making a point that if there are other things they are going to do anyway and pay for, and grandma wants to pay for her bio grandkids, they don't have to adverstise that fact necessarily to the kids.  

And grandma doesn't have to advertise that she is giving money towards the bio kids either. She could say "you are going to the zoo? Here is <XX> money to use towards tickets" instead of saying she will pay for HER grandkids to get tickets. For example. She doesn't have to make it about who is related and who isn't. She is making a choice to divide them up. She shouldn't.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Meh. Just because your son is living with the flavor of the month, doesn't mean you open your checkbook to them. I mean, her son can say no, he has the ultimate say. But, in principal, i agree with her.

---

 It's been 2 years. This isn't a flavor of the month. 2 years of living with these kids and raising them. How about giving the son some support for trying to do the right thing by these kids?! He is stepping up where others in their lives are not. I think he has a real opportunity to be a hero for these kids. And so does grandma. But all she can see is who is related and who isn't. That's a shame. 

And there are a lot of reasons why that might be the case. Maybe he is missing and she can't afford to hire someone to track his butt down. Maybe she can't afford a divorce lawyer. Maybe she is fighting her every step of the way and it is taking forever. We don't know why that's the case. She might be trying her darnedest to get away and separate from him. It takes time. And if he won't be found and has no income, good luck tracking him down.

No. She why does it have to be about fault? She might be trying her hardest. We just don't know and I won't just say she is a terrible person because I don't know all the facts.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Well, neither is grandma a terrible person for not wanting to fund everyone else's kids.

---

 I don't think she is a terrible person, but I think she is being short sighted. I don't think she appreciates the likely outcome of her behavior, and I don't believe she is making any effort to understand her son's point of view. Drawing such clear lines in the sand will only harm her relationship with her child and her grandchildren,  and I think it is sad she can't see that. 

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Meh. Just because your son is living with the flavor of the month, doesn't mean you open your checkbook to them. I mean, her son can say no, he has the ultimate say. But, in principal, i agree with her.

---

 It's been 2 years. This isn't a flavor of the month. 2 years of living with these kids and raising them. How about giving the son some support for trying to do the right thing by these kids?! He is stepping up where others in their lives are not. I think he has a real opportunity to be a hero for these kids. And so does grandma. But all she can see is who is related and who isn't. That's a shame. 

---

 Blood isn't the main factor in determining family.

flan

I agree with LL. If she wants to start college funds for her grand kids that's one thing. She is not obligated to pay for college for the other kids or help pay for a wedding. These are elementary school kids though. Giving a gift should be more even. Her son has been living with this woman for two years. Maybe it won't last a lifetime. Maybe it will. Is that what we want to base gifts on? Whether we approve of the relationship or not? My DN is living out of wedlock with a man. A man she intends to marry sometime down the road so I know it's an intimate relationship. I would prefer they not live together but they are 28 and 29. They are adults. I simply cannot control them. And if I try I lose my relationship with them. It is not a hill I want to die on.

My IL's have always been unfair in their gift giving. Yes, my kids "get over it". But they also have no desire to get to know my IL's or invest any of their life in them either.

Well honestly? Let's look at this. Her son is living with a married woman but somehow it's the kids fault? Maybe, just maybe, instead of punishing the kids, she should have a come to Jesus talk with her son. We have no idea why she's still married after two years but I wouldn't even be worried about the kids. I'd be having a hey day with my son for living with a married woman. She's trying to come off all righteous and moral and all she comes off as is a snob. He priorities are messed up. If this is such a big deal to her she needs to tell her SON "I will not support your lifestyle in anyway because it goes against what I believe in." But that's not what she's doing. She's picking and choosing what and who she wants to support and then blaming it on the marriage issue. The marriage issue doesn't have anything to do with the kids. It has to do with the adults. So yeah, she should either get in or out if her values are being threatened so much.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Well honestly? Let's look at this. Her son is living with a married woman but somehow it's the kids fault? Maybe, just maybe, instead of punishing the kids, she should have a come to Jesus talk with her son. We have no idea why she's still married after two years but I wouldn't even be worried about the kids. I'd be having a hey day with my son for living with a married woman. She's trying to come off all righteous and moral and all she comes off as is a snob. He priorities are messed up. If this is such a big deal to her she needs to tell her SON "I will not support your lifestyle in anyway because it goes against what I believe in." But that's not what she's doing. She's picking and choosing what and who she wants to support and then blaming it on the marriage issue. The marriage issue doesn't have anything to do with the kids. It has to do with the adults. So yeah, she should either get in or out if her values are being threatened so much.

---

 Well, it's not her grandkids fault, either that their father is shacking up against Grandma's values.  Do they have to suffer, too?

---

 Personally, I don't think any of the kids should suffer.  But people here keep saying that the grand mother has an issue with the living arrangement.  My point is that if the living arrangement is that objectionable to her she should have long ago addressed it to her son.  I know if I was in a situation where I found one of my kids living in such a situation that it bothered my morals so much I wouldn't fun any of their life.  I just find it hypocritical to say, "I'll fund my own grand kids even though you're living in sin but I won't fund her kids even though they're living in the exact same situation."  Not sure if I'm making my point clear or not.  Sometimes I think what I'm typing makes perfect sense to me but others don't seem to understand the point I am making?

From the letter it appears they are not involved.

You know, I see this stuff about steps and non bio kids and grandkids and it makes me so very thankful my pawpaw didn't see me as "not his".

I can't imagine being thought of as "not his".

We have many steps in our family and not once have we ever thought any of them were "not ours".

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

From the letter it appears they are not involved.

---

 Seriously...How many times have we reminded her of that?

flan

No. They are not married.

And a step child is the result of a marriage.

So what I said still stands.

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

I am so very thankful my pawpaw didn't treat me like an outcast because I "wasn't his".

No, this couple isn't married, and probably because of CS and insurance reasons.

But, the kids have 2 years invested.

Grandma has 4 grandkids now.

Stop being a miser and embrace the kids.

---

 Yeah.  Ok.  I was referring to this quote by you. 

msrock wrote:

---

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

I am so very thankful my pawpaw didn't treat me like an outcast because I "wasn't his".

No, this couple isn't married, and probably because of CS and insurance reasons.

But, the kids have 2 years invested.

Grandma has 4 grandkids now.

Stop being a miser and embrace the kids.

---

 Yeah.  Ok.  I was referring to this quote by you. 

---

 Yeah. It isn't rocket science.

You don't punish the kids for the sins of the parents.

I also said grandma needs to have a come to Jesus talk with her son.

 

Tinydancer wrote:

---

It doesn't say they asked for help. It said she wanted to pay for soccer for 2 kids and not the others. Not sure where you got that they were asking her to do anything.

-- Edited by Tinydancer on Tuesday 1st of March 2016 02:51:16 PM

---

I edited my comment but this line was what I was referring to:  

"They usually live paycheck to paycheck so I do a lot to help financially when it comes to my grandkids."

 

I took that to mean that she's helping with the basics for her grandkids because they can't do it.

msrock wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

msrock wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

From the letter it appears they are not involved.

---

 Seriously...How many times have we reminded her of that?

flan

---

Ok.  So now it's all on her to be everyone's grandma?  I'm a little perturbed at this couple that's not solely supporting their own family and expecting grandma help out.  She does enough as far as I'm concerned.  Why are they not paying their own bills?  Then maybe grandma could be a grandma with the extra's.  This is ridiculous.  Two grown people with 4 kids looking to mom for help.  Go get a second job!  Go get a third if you have to!

eta:  I take back the comment about paying their own bills.  I reread the OP and don't see now where she's doing that... but she is helping them financially so... I don't know wth.  lol!

-- Edited by msrock on Tuesday 1st of March 2016 02:47:30 PM

---

I pay for Sweetness's dance because I want to.  They don't need me to, they don't expect me to, but I like to do it.  It's something that she enjoys and I'm happy to do it. I also pay for other things (photo sessions, birthday parties). What's wrong with that? 

---

Nothing.  You are her grandma. 

---

And if there were a step-sibling involved, I would pay for them too.