Genny, This is not a technical website that will give you a lot of specific info, but I think you'll really enjot this website... Here is a link that might be useful: Maria's Duck Tales

Henrik was due to visit last christmas, but with family coming, and my husband having passed a little over a year before, re-thought the idea, and needed to consider my children. He called and I relayed this back to him, and he wasn't too happy. He said he was really looking forward to visiting, didn't expect me to pay for the ticket, and doing any work would only be me requiring to pay for what was needed. I let him know I didn't think my family would be comfortable with his being here, to which he became annoyed and left me pi**ed off. We haven't spoken since, whereas he was calling almost monthly. I still think of him and what might have been a friendship or maybe more. Please tell me I need to 'GET OVER IT'(said by Cher in one of her movies). Would love a dinner, movie, etc., with a male other than my son! Dating sites? Don't want an older man, and that's what the choices would be for someone my age. Am I doomed to be alone the rest of my life? I'm a very young 71 year old! Single cruises anyone? I would love to take a river cruise to Europe !

Wow, this thread has taken off. Just a few days and I'm about 30 posts behind. As mkroopy observed, it's difficult to take this as a 'black-and-white' issue simply because there are so many variables to be considered. Roles within the blended family unit can change dramatically depending on the amount of time the child is in your home, the involvement of the other bio-parent, the amicability or animosity the bio-parents feel toward one-another, the age and personality of the kids involved, and the makeup in general of the stepparent in question to name only a few. As I mentioned in my post WELL above now, my own personal saga involves a situation where my stepson has been physically in our home about 95% of the time, and since high school probably closer to 98%-99%. We also have two younger children of our own, and I feel that all parties consider us to be a full-on family unit. Certainly things would be totally different if my stepson were with us less than half of the time or only on certain holidays, so my comments only apply to my own current makeup. With that in mind, I really like silversword's comment above: ""I think if you trust someone enough to marry them, combine finances, have them drive your kids around in the car, have them sleep in the same house at night with your kids, have them dispense medicine and go to doctor visits, etc. etc. etc. that they should be able to put the kid in time out, take away privileges, etc. That's what I mean by discipline."" That's what I'm talking about. If you marry someone who you feel is a good person, then why would you not allow that person to make calls on basic discipline/privilege revocation? Especially if you have children with that person and thereby consider him in a good enough light to be a father to these other children of yours. Moms and dads have had different opinions on child rearing from time immemorial, but I think that's a good thing. I would submit that the fusion of stereotypical mom nurturing and stereotypical dad toughening is a great mixture that should be applied liberally to any growing child. I speak from my own experience when I say that the effects of neglecting one side can be long-lasting. My stepson, while in high school and beyond, got into some pretty major problems: arrested for drinking underage, for causing mischief with a knife the night before Halloween, and even later being caught with pot in his car. Right from the start I wanted to be able to step in - WITH my wife - and try to correct his course. I spoke with him quite frankly about these issues, and even suggested that his mother and I would have to discuss sanctions. Problem was, he totally knew the situation. For years I was not allowed to take a full role in the parenting and he basically blew me off. Knowing he only had his mom to contend with, he'd make a full-court press to her and get what he wanted. I recall one situation where he was caught at 15 with booze and arrested. I went and got him from the police station that night and told him that I'd be speaking with his mom and was sure there would be sanctions. He actually laughed. The NEXT night, his mother allowed him to go out to a party, and the kid basically sneered at me. When I asked my wife about it, she just said that he was being so annoying about going out that she just couldn't hear it anymore and let him go. When I expressed to her my feelings about my lack of authority and my stepson's reaction she again stated the mantra: "I am his mother, you are the stepfather, and so you are not allowed to discipline". Look, mine is an extreme case, I know. And hopefully my stepson is more of the exception and not the rule in the way he has acted. But if your spouse is going to be a step to your child and if they are going to be in the home together a good majority of the time, I feel it must be incumbent on both adults to share the authoritative role. Yes, the step should be allowed to give the timeouts, impose extra chores, remove a privilege when the kids are younger. When older, they should then be part of the team that works with the child/young adult if more intense situations arise as well as positive aspects like choosing a school, relationships, etc. My experience tells me that without the parenting involvement at the beginning, the latter involvement is all but impossible. Sadly, I feel it has affected my and my stepson's relationship in other areas as well. I'm less inclined to seek him out to go play golf or to a movie or something like that because I feel disrespected many times by him - and have been outright disrespected at others. Again, just a case-in-point and probably a more extreme one at that, but hopefully some food for thought.

You said we did not read this carefully, so I went back and read it carefully. It doesn't make sense. '...He did not date her. He never took her out anywhere they met ata sports bar and she would come in on the nights the deputies were there. Yes he made a mistake BEFORE we were engaged and married. When she came back some time later to tell him she was pregnant he DID tell her then that we were then engaged it was a few months later. She told him then that she was going to get an abortion. She then fell off the earth. Then even later she contacts him to tell him she kept it. He told her he was getting married. She was furious but she did try to get him to spend time with her. He said no. We got married.' Then later you said: 'She admitted to me clearly that she had "hoped" that he would stay with her because she was pregnant. NOT. He told her from the minute he found out that it was not going to happen and they were both at fault.' To recap: they met two nights in a row in a sports bar and had sex. They never had a date. So logically, there was no expectation of affection, friendship, love, or commitment. She disappeared out of his life, he disappeared out of hers. She never saw him again (per your DH) until two or three months later she popped up and told him she was pregnant. He said he was engaged. She said she was getting an abortion. She disappears again out of his life and he out of hers. Again they apparently both agree that there is no expectation of friendship, love, or commitment. Their actions indicate that they both accept it was a one- or two-night stand that meant nothing, that the pregnancy was unfortunate but meant nothing to either of them, and that they each had their own lives and no interest in each other. And yet, you said: "She admitted to me clearly that she had "hoped" that he would stay with her because she was pregnant. NOT. He told her from the minute he found out that it was not going to happen and they were both at fault." If she hoped he would stay with her...(and stays means he never left her, as in he continued the relationship after the two one-night stands)...why would she tell him he was getting an abortion and then drop off the face of the earth. Why wouldn't she be 'furious' that she was told otherwise. But that's not what happened. She told him she was pregnant and getting an abortion, he told her he was engaged and wasn't going to marry her--and then she (according to the story you heard from your DH) dropped off the face of the earth. Then out of nowhere about six or seven months later, she calls him and says the baby was born and she kept it. He says that he is just about to get married and suddenly 'she is furious' and tries to get him to spend time with her. But she does not let him see the baby much and she does not want child support. This also does not make sense. Why would she suddenly be 'furious' on their 4th contact in abt 10 months? If she wasn't furious when he stopped picking her up in the bar (if he did stop), and she wasn't furious when she told him she was having a baby and he responded that he was engaged, why would she suddenly be 'furious' once the baby is born and she hears for a second time he's getting married? If she's going to be furious that he's getting married, why wasn't she furious the first time she heard it when she told him she was pregnant? If the girlfriend and your DH really didn't have any contact except two one-night stands, and a quick conversation about pregnancy and abortion, why would she suddenly be furious about him about to get married when she hadn't had any contact with him for six or seven months and there'd never been any understanding of love, friendship or commitment between them? Do you really believe that she just dreamed it up in her head without any input from him? As you describe it, they were two rather disinterested strangers in the night at the time of conception, spent a few minutes together around month three discussing the pregnancy, abortion and his engagement; and then after the baby was born she popped up and is furious that he's getting married? Kelly, Kelly, Kelly...this does not make sense. Why was she furious? Because she believed there was going to be a different outcome, because she felt betrayed. And she felt that way because he led her to believe that she meant something to him. However, the story makes sense another way. He was seeing her and you at the same time. He proposed to you but kept her on the side and kept his engagement a secret, but he keeps seeing. She comes up pregnant and tells him and expects to get married, move in together, or move the relationship to another level of commitment. He waffles and sooths her with some excuse or some promise to delay her expectations and she's satisfied and continues to gestate and they continue to see each other. There's no talk of abortion, that's a story your DH came up to explain to you why he didn't confess the pregnancy earlier and to hide his continued involvement with the girlfriend. Then after the baby is born she expects him to step up to the plate, or she finds out about you. In any case, your DH is cornered and lets her know he's going to marry you, not her. She becomes furious at this point because she realizes she's been betrayed and used. There's another red flag. Per your story, she's a welfare no-account who hangs around bars and sleeps with strangers without caring about a relationship or commitment. Easy come, easy go. So she spent two nights running with a sheriff's deputy and then never saw him again. No big deal. So she's pregnant. She'll just have an abortion. No matter. It's just a thing that happens when you hang around bars and pick up strange men and have sex with them and then don't intend to see them again. Although maybe it's something you can use to get a man to marry you. So she's a calculating floozy who picks up strange men in bars and sleeps with them without a commitment unless she gets pregnant, in which case she wants to marry them, even though per your story she's spent two nights and one additional conversaton with him, when he told her he was engaged--maybe a total of 24 hours? Yet that's enough for her to disappear out of his life for months and months while carrying his child, then pop up out of nowhere and suddenly be furious that he's not going to marry her and that she "hoped" he would because she was pregnant. How would she know he was marriage material, a nice person, someone she wanted to spend the rest of her life with. How would any affection have time to develope if they only spent two nights together and then had nothing to do with each other at all for the next nine or ten months? If that were the case, there'd be no 'hoping' he'd marry her, there'd be no fury when she realized he wasn't going to. Also--considering she's a dellusional promiscuous bar floozy--your DH never questioned this was his child. He seems pretty confident that the dna test is going to prove him the father. Confident enough to spend money on the mother and attempt a relationship with the child. If she were just a easy bar pick-up, he'd be wondering if it were his child or not, or why she thought it was his child. There must be other candidates for fatherhood. And he'd hold off on the getting involved in her life until he knew for sure. Except it looks like he already knows for sure. And he knows because they've had more of a relationship than he's letting on to you. She's not a dellusional promiscuous bar floozy, she's someone he knows pretty well and has known for a while...and maybe if he plays his cards right he can keeps this going. Get his wife involved in his girlfriend's life--appeal to everyone's noblest sentiments by making it all about what's BEST for the baby. Interesting that she didn't want child support or anything from him except to see him alone with her baby (their own little family). Child support would not have created ties that would complicate her moving. He would send it to FOC, they'd record it and forward it to any bank of her choosing anywhere in the world. And not accepting child support does not avoid complications of her moving her child away from him. Whether he pays child support or not, if he's the bio father, he has rights, one of which may be to prevent her from moving. So what's the real reason she didn't want child support? Maybe because he's providing more than state guidelines to her secretly? Or maybe because she's accepted that he's married and he two timed her and she just wants to get away and not have to think about him again. I don't know. I just think that someone who 'hoped' a man would stay with her because she was pregnant and who was furious when she realized he was marrying someone else, and who will only get him visit his daughter alone in her apartment when her son is gone--would also insist on support, because support officializes a ties she seems to want. I don't know the particulars, but I do believe that you have been mislead. The story doesn't make sense. I know yo have to defend him, have to believe what he's told you. It must have been very painful for you to know he cheated on you with her just before you became engaged. This can't be fun and you seem to be making the best of things and seem to be trying to be a good sport. I just fear that you are gullible and are likely to be hurt.