We have made sure that all of their long weekends have not overlapped, so they probably see each other 4 days/month. They have spent at least a month together in the summers, as well as their entire holiday breaks. We make sure to plan family trips when they can both be there, as does Mom, for the most part. Good thing is, SS will be only an hour away from here for college, and if she is here, she'll likely see him even more. Hopefully, he'll be playing hockey at his college, and she's a big cheer-leader for her brother.

There is also alot of thought that more $$ is more important than having easy access to both parents. Ask my skids what their opinion is on this one...

Luckily, DH and SD have managed to stay close, despite the distance. If they weren't close, I have my doubts if she would want to come here. We talk by phone 4 or 5 nights/week. Email and text messaging has been helpful, too. I'm glad we have no need for excuses.

Is that a big part of why she wants to move - to be closer to her older brother? My children miss their older siblings a lot when they go off to college. In many families, the sibling relationship is even stronger than that between child and parent.

Well, it's one of her reasons...she misses her siblings.

As I've mentioned before, she's a family-oriented kid who really likes being part of something bigger. She's in her element when we have everyone home and grandparents and cousins over. At her mom's, she's been an "only child" since SS17 came to live with us for high schoool. And she has no other family members there to "fill in the gaps".

Interestingly, it seems (and she says) she's closer to her step-brother (my DS20) than she is her full-sib. DS20 is definitely more interested in everyones elses lives, feelings, school & extra-currics than SS18. He frequently picks up youngest from pre-school and takes her for ice-cream or comes to watch dance class. He always asks SD questions about school/dance, wants to see her dance routines she's working on, talks about the music she's currently listening to, etc. He's a great big brother, and she confides in him quite a bit.

So, I'm sure that's part of it, although she has been talking about being here for high school since 5th or 6th grade.

She's very convincing when she talks about all the reasons she wants to be here.

I am not implying that there is anything improper in her motivation, but what 15 year old girl wouldn't bask in attention from a twenty year old guy?

TOS,
Get a f'ing clue!

She hasn't always been 15, and he hasn't always been 20. But they've always been close, because he's always been an interested/empathetic/involved big brother. We met when she was 4 and he was 9...they grew up together. He's not "a twenty year old guy"; he's her twenty year old brother!!!

Be careful with such replies. It's very easy to sound like an idiot if you make idiotic statements. And we wouldn't want people to think that you're an idiot.

I thought she moved 10 years ago. That would have been when she was five, right? How did they grow up together, when they had only met a year before they moved? If he only met her a year before they moved, were you even married yet?

They were obviously not always 15 and 20, but he was always five years older than she.

Yes, both she and her brother were moved by Mom when she was 5-and-a-half, and he was 8-and-a-half. But both traveled back & forth on a monthly/every-other month basis since then. In addition, they spent their entire summers, and long school breaks here. So they have grown up together. And no, we weren't married yet. And yes, you can do math...and he has always been her big brother (well, not always, but most of her life!).

Again, get a clue...

Giggle-
"it is usually just an excuse when one parent claims distance as a reason why they are not close."
Seriously?
Explain to me how a parent and child who live 1000 miles apart are ever going to be as "close" as a parent and child who live in the same city or same house? Do you not understand how only seeing each other 6,7,8 weeks per year is totally different than having 50/50 or even EOW?
This doesn't mean the love is less, or the care and concern, just that, especially for the child, the "closeness" and bond are often effected. For one thing, the visits feel like vacations and the NCP is often not treated like a parent, but a pal. Does this mean that sometimes the child "likes" the NCP more? Maybe, in a child's way. But it can mean they do have a deeper emotional bond with the CP who is with them 300+ days and nights per year. CP's get to grow as parents with their children on a daily basis,get to know all the little quirks of that child, all the problems and strengths, while NCP's have to reacquaint themselves with a child who is now sometimes 9 months older.
Telephone calls, emails, and letters are all good, but do not have the same power as daily contact and interaction.
If it made no difference how far apart children and NCPs lived, then why do so many court orders restrict how far the CP or NCP (in some cases) may move without permission? For that matter, ask some parents who have kids they live with and some they do not, and ask them if their relationship is the same. Many will tell you that, sadly, it is not.

mrsmaddog, read my post. I didn't compare the parent living far away and then say they should be as close to the parent that lives with the child.

I think the rest of what you posted is subjective to not only the child, but how much the parent tries. There are a lot of creative ways to stay in touch and stay involved.

You obviously didn't read my post, yes it is in the best interest of the child to stay near both BP's. But if they cannot, then yes distance is an excuse for not being close to their child.

"I am not implying that there is anything improper in her motivation, but what 15 year old girl wouldn't bask in attention from a twenty year old guy?"

That's a very passive-aggressive way of 'implying' impropriety, a method of communication I am sure many women here are familiar with ;)

I did read it. A couple of times.

My reply was about your statement:
"it is usually JUST an excuse when one parent claims distance as a reason why they are not close."
Then you say:
"But if they cannot [stay near], then yes distance is an excuse for not being close to their child."
Which is it? A reason (excuse) that is acceptable or JUST an excuse?

I mentioned various creative ways to keep in touch, did I not? Keeping in touch is not the same as parenting. I can keep in touch with my friends by email, phone calls and letters, but am I really involved with their life? Being INVOLVED doesn't mean listening to the child as he talks about his camping trip, but BEING THERE to build the tent, catch some fish, and roast some marshmallows. Am I INVOLVED if I watch a video of my child's dance recital, or if I sew her costume, take her to rehearsal, sit in the front row and hand her flowers on the stage?
Now, I know many CPs do not do these things, nor do a lot of NCPs who live a mile from their kids. Some parents' involvement is little more than "goodbye" in the morning, and "go to bed" at night or (as in some EOW situations) "here play with your stepsiblings, while I hang out with the new wife." In these cases, the child may not be close to either parent, or only the one that shows real care and concern regardless of distance.
I felt like you were dismissing the reality of distance being a barrier to having the type of closeness parents and children enjoy in a healthy custodial or 50/50 or even EOW situation.

of course distance is a barrier. DD lived wiht me away from dad, they did manage to have close relationship seeing each other regularly and talking, but it cannot be compared to living in the same household or close by. Just actual intercation is less. not spending time with kids at all or not talking to them is unexusable no matter what distance. but one cannot possibly be as close when he/she lives thousands of miles away.

Nicksmom.... find a wall and run right at it ...and keep doing it because you will not change their minds it might make you feel better than trying to reason with the unreasonable. It might be more productive.

Children of divorce belong with their mothers no matter what dad should only be a wallet and driver.... he should have no opinion on how his children should be dragged up.

Guessing every male between the ages of 18-23 is a predator?

How disgusting of you to distort a sibling relationship and demote it to the teenage girl being molested by her brother. Why else would she want to be with her dad.

My DD23 take my DS16 every where ... concerts, vacations, driving, would you suggest that their relationship is unnatural? You truly disgust me!!!

I thought it wasnt her brother, but a step brother.

pseudo-
I hope I'm correct in assuming your post/response was directed at TOS, not at ME!

And it is her step-brother, as if it matters. None of the kids consider themselves "steps". When they talk about each other, it's "my brother(s)" or "my sister(s)". Again, they've grown up together.

The post was directed at TOS yes ....

Did you pick out a wall yet?

Take the pictures off of it ... this way nothing else gets broken. :)

My bet is dad says he will keep paying CS while daughter lives him with mom would be all for it!!!

I think all custodial BM's are only after the money.... if there wasn't any money involved they wouldn't want their kids.

Just as ridiculous all males between the ages of 18 and 23 are predators.

Guess what they are going to say now!!!!

How could they have grown up together if they visited at different times. Its going to blow up again.

Don't waste your time or energy on these people so not worth the aggrevation.

WTF? How could anyone accuse a brother (step or bio) of wanting to be around his sister for any other reason that because she's his sister? ESPECIALLY without any suggesting factors in any post on this site that there would be anything improper going on? That is so sickening! That's like saying FSD13 will do something disgusting to DS9 in a few years. How in the hell would you ever come to a conclusion like that?

There's a parenting board that maybe some folks here should go to...instead of this stepfamily forum.

As for the CS/money thing...that's not the motivation here. Since we have son, and mom has daughter, nobody pays CS. HOWEVER, since son just graduated from HS, and will no longer be living here at home, I imagine that Mom would want CS if daughter remained w/Mom.

DH has offered an alternative for CS if daughter is allowed to come here. It includes Mom paying for all travel costs (since she's the one who moved 1000 miles away), 50% of medical/dental not covered by insurance (he's a teacher so has AMAZING insurance, so this would be near $0) and 50% of extra-curriculars. Actually, DH's attorney said he would recommend just using our state's CS calculator...we'll seewhat happens.

Her motivation here is that she (Mom) can't believe that both of her kids think that spending a few years with Dad is more important than step-dad's big $$ job (which really isn't that big, but whatever). She's devastated, because of course, she loves her kids, and can't imagine not seeing her daughter daily...kind of like DH has done for 10 years! Having to explain to her parents (blue blood Tulsa socialites) and friends why both kids moved...unimaginable for her. I honestly don't think it's the $$$ this time.

But I get your point completely...some people are just too *duh* to get it.

Pseudo-
That is so funny, esp. because my Ex's SO always used to talk about how all I wanted was Ex's money! Ha, yep let's see, $50/week per original order-I asked for $40, the judge said $50- and he's over $25K behind, at this moment-It reached $28K before he got tired of county jail vacations. Yet his SO believes I am just raising the kids for the money and waiting for my big payday LOL.
Would I give my kids to him if he offered to pay me $500 per week? Nope. Although there are moments...jk!
And I truly believe my DH would keep paying CS if his EX would let him have (and his kids wanted) full custody. He never once asked for a dime, even when he had the kids with him full time or 50/50.He helped pay BM's rent while she shacked up with her SO (TOM), because he didn't want her homeless.This was during 50/50. Then she gave him full custody while she "figured things out." He went from full time Dad to just being a paycheck and not a parent-in her mind-as soon as BM made up her mind to stay with her current SO/DH (No one knows for sure if she really married SO!) Funny, because she was also collecting CS from her SO for their kids, even though they lived together.And, I mean for several years. Does that sound like something sneaky/illegal to anyone else? It does sound like money was a huge motive.

Nicksmom.... its doesn't matter about the money

It will be twisted around to say ... he is offering to bribe the girls mother .... so the males in her life can have easy access to her to molest her .....

God forbid a dad want to spend anytime with his kids .... he only wants them closer to molest them

Sick twisted b*^*&&*(

The only reason Dad's want custody is so they don't have to pay support

All SM's want custody so they can have weekend free.

Just total stupidity

Neither dads nor SM's every want what is best for the kid only mom want that .... give me a friggin break

I could go on but they are not worth my time ....

All SMs and their kids want to take Daddy away, take his money or abuse his kids, because they are his "old" life, and only the new one matters. BM is always right, and her kids always tell the truth.BM can yell, scream or swear at or even hit her kids, but heaven help SM if she acts in defense of herself or her children! All "first family" kids have the right to say or do whatever, whenever, because they are victims of divorce, which is never in any way BM's fault. All SC/SM problems are SM's fault, and the solution is for Dad to divorce HER TOO.
Thanks Pseudo for the rant-spiration.

Wow girls...you CAN get riled up, can't ya?

ashley,
YOU GO, GIRL!!!

mrsmad,
What a story! I guess we all have some "you wouldn't believe this, but" stories. However, I really don't think CS/money is the motivating factor, here.

I'm just hoping SD has not been coached this week by Mom (or anyone else that mom may have appointed, so *she* didn't violate the court's instructions!. I hope she can go in there and be totally honest with him, and stand firm in her resolution.

We have a piece of artwork that hangs above our front door. It reads, "TO THINE OWNSELF BE TRUE". We put it there so it's the last thing everyone sees as they head out for the day. I'm hoping she's able to do that, and not fear repurcussions from anyone.

Anyhoo ... :)

Nicksmom, all the best for the next hearing and the outcome. I hope it all goes well x

We have two signs that hang in the living room for all who enter ... the focal point of the room :)

BE NICE OR BE GONE

&

NO WHINING

:)

You're welcome Mrsmad

mrsmaddog, you quoted me wrong. I said this:But if they cannot, then yes distance is an excuse for not being close to their child.

I didn't say "cannot stay near."

I'm not dismissing anything, I'm not sure what to say about what you feel about it. It is quite strange that I've already said I believe it is in the best interest to stay near both parents.

I think it is a piss poor excuse to claim distance as a reason why you are not close to your child, FD gives a good example of her situation. Just because I haven't jumped up and down about not staying near both parents doesn't mean I am dismissing what happens when they move.

giggle,
Well, if you are 1000 miles away from your child, what would be a "good" excuse? Luckily, SD and DH are close, but I imagine they'd be even closer (? more close), had she not been moved 1000 miles away. Get it?

You stated: "You obviously didn't read my post, yes it is in the best interest of the child to STAY NEAR both BP's. But if they cannot,[cannot what? stay near?---see your own sentence!] then yes distance is an excuse for not being close to their child."
First you said it was JUST an excuse, then yes, it is an excuse, now you call it a piss poor excuse!
I am sorry you don't know what to say, because I am not sure what you mean is being interpreted clearly.
How I feel is simple: Any parent who sees his/her kids for only six weeks in the summer and every other Christmas cannot be as close to his/her kids as he/she would be if they lived 5 miles away,no matter how great a parent they were before the child was moved far away.
Daily or at least semi-daily contact makes a huge difference!It in no way implies that they don't love their kids, but rather that the relationship is altered, and it hurts both the parent and the child.

monster,

Again, if you are 1000 miles away (ie; distance), why is that a "piss poor excuse"? What would be good excuse?

How can it be that the SD and her stepbrother "grew up together," yet the distance was something of a barrier to closeness with her father? It was either just like living together or it wasn't.

I wasn't thinking that the twenty year old might have a prurient interest in his SS - I was actually thinking that it would not be unusual for the SD to develop a crush on him. I don't think that is immoral - it is no more immoral than developing a crush on your older brother's best friend, who grew up hanging around your house. That sort of thing happens all the time. That is not to say that I would want my 15 year old daughter dating any twenty year old, of course.

TOS,
Don't you have somewhere else to go? There has to be a forum for you with people like you...somewhere.

Clearly, you have no ability to grasp anything that isn't black & white...like your world must be. IRL, most things are predominately gray...not B & W. Rarely is there an "all or nothing" situation, especially in blended/step families. Your comment "It was either just like living together or it wasn't" shows your complete lack of any understanding of such circumstances. She is very close with all of her sibs, her dad, her grandparents here, her friends, etc...but again, I bet her relationship with all of those people would be even closer, were it not for the distance.

You really are teetering on the brink of sounding like an idiot...you might want to quit while your ahead. Or continue, and give us all a good laugh tonight...there's nothing funny on TV on Saturday nights anyways, so maybe we can get our chuckles here. Thanks in advance for the comic relief...I'm gonna quick go pour myself a little beverage and come back and see the show here. Should be a doozy.

Oh yeah, I forgot the rest...

I don't think I EVER said SD and DH lacked closeness. I'm sure they'd be even closer had Mom not moved, but all are very close, despite the distance.

As for the brother/sister crush thing...
It IS SIGNIFICANTLY immoral, and NOTHING like having a crush on your older brother's best friend...because it's having a crush on your older brother!!! Get your head out of your....

TOS said - "That is not to say that I would want my 15 year old daughter dating any twenty year old, of course"

Where is this crap coming from????? I'm sorry, KKNY and TOS, but you have both veered off the subject and wandered into odd territory. TOS - why would you even say the above statement? It's NEVER been said that SD wants to date her SB. Not only is it an assumption, but's a a weird one and one no one else would come to ever in the world based on this thread. If you would like to discuss this crap further, why don't you go start a forum for people that are in love with family members.

ashley,
Can you believe this crap?

I find it interesting that niether of the fine contributor aforementioned, have responded to anything....

No I can't believe it! Why would they take a perfectly normal brother-situation and make it into a Jerry Springer episode? Gross! And insulting to your (collectively you, DH, BM and SF) parenting! Ugh!

BTW, I too went and got a tasty beverage so I can enjoy the one-act broadway play.

I also find it interesting that no one has apologized for the degrading things they said.

If she grew up living with her stepbrother, then she grew up living with her father, too. If she didn't live with her father, but just visited frequently, then she didn't live with her stepbrother, either.

You are the one who is seeing things in black and white. Many people, probably the majority of people, don't think there is anything immoral about having a crush on your stepbrother or stepsister. Why should there be? - they are not blood relations, and they are not even related by adoption (usually).

What about people who marry their brother-in-law or sister-in-law after their spouse dies - is that immoral because they are brother and sister?

What about cases where two people fall in love, and then their parents marry and they become stepsiblings?

If you claim that is different because they didn't grow up together, how many years do they have to grow up together to make it "immoral?" One? Five? Ten? Fifteen? Where do you draw the line, and why do YOU get to draw it?

And how much time do they have to spend together for you to count it as growing up together? What about just EOW? What about 3 weeks in the summer?

This is definitely NOT black and white.

They won't either they will come up with more off the wall craziness .....

Enjoy your beverages :)

DD is close to her brother but they did not grew up TOGETHER because they lived in different households. They have relationship, they are close, they see each other etc but they did not grow up together. They did not even live in the same town!

you cannot call "grew up together" children who were raised in different houses, towns, states no matter how much they saw each other.

I say "I grew up with" my best friend. We didn't live in the same house, but we definitely grew up together...from 4th grade onwards.

Seriously, nobody here gives any credit to anything you post here. At most, you're worth a good laugh....

You both need to get a clue.

You'd be better served at starting a forum of your own...one for clueless people like you...instead of hijacking this one since you clearly have nothing of substance to offer. There are lots of forums out there already that will serve your needs better...go find one.

So everyone who doesn't agree with you should leave the forum. That would make for some really boring discussions.

Actually, what you said reinforces my point. Say your best friend was a boy. You would say that you "grew up together." Yet there would be absolutely nothing wrong with the two of you falling in love and getting married. Growing up together does not mean your relationship as adults has to be platonic.

No, not everyone...just you and finedreams, because at the moment, the two of you are the only ones I can think of that have NOTHING to offer...

And, my best friend wasn't my step-brother, dumba$$

And according to you, we DIDN'T grow up together, since we didn't live in the same house...

Which is it? Did we or didn't we grow up together? Even you should be able to answer that...it's black & white!

why are you so angry?

Because there are some people here who take up lots of space and have nothing of substance to offer.

Forget about the picky arguments and just move on with the subject at hand. Pedantic semantics ... someone should write a song :)

yeah, good idea...now what was the subject at hand?

Growing up together means knowing each other since childhood, regardless of where anyone lived. It is much different than becoming stepsiblings as teens. I am sure that is is possible for DS15 and SD16 to have undesirable feelings toward each other since they just met 3 years ago. They get along like gangbusters, ususally. They each dislike the other's BP, so this gives them something in common! (I know for a fact that SD16 has her eyes on older and faster boys-not to mention boys of a different ethnic background; and DS15 likes much calmer, quieter and sweeter girls... but I digress.)
It is how they would act upon those feelings that would be distressing to me and DH.
If two kids have known each other since they were 5 and 10 years old, call each other brother or sister, and each of them has age-appropriate girls/boys to be interested in, how can anyone think they are any more likely to be attracted to each other?
I think I know the answer:
This is all a sick mind projecting its own thoughts onto normal peoples' situations.
Grow up.

Amen, mrsmaddog! No one who didn't experience this would draw those conclusions from what was posted.

You hit it on the nose, mrsmaddog. They grew up together...not always in the same house, but frequently. They have as close a relationship as all brothers & sisters, and drive each-other nuts like all brothers & sisters. But, because of the age difference, she does look up to him and seeks out his advice. So does SS18, for that matter. DS20 is just that kind of kid...always helpful & full of advice.