Nero, I don't know how old you are or if you are financially independent, but I can tell you that the situation you are in will not get any better until this man is proud enough of you to stop hiding you from ANYONE. And that includes his children. None of us want to feel like secret concubines. Other posters said that it wasn't your place to reveal the nature of your relationship with their father to his children--but on the other hand, the fact that you DID feel that need indicates that your situation has great potential to be humiliating for you down the line.

Bottom line, the ball is in this man's court now. Can he make you feel treasured and central to his life? YOU can say all you want to his children about the nature of your relationship to their father; until it comes from him, they will probably see you as a gold digger, and it is bound to have an impact on your self-esteem.

Do his other friends and family members know about you? Have you met them? Do you guys have friends in common? Is it just with the kids that he is hesitant to claim you?

I am financially independent and don't need his money at all. That has never been an issue between us, although the daughters may want to believe otherwise. I have a great job and a great salary (I'm 53). And I have met all of his other family and have an excellent relationship with his mother and sisters and brothers. We've taken trips together and attend other events together. He takes me to his church events, and I've met all of his friends and we get along very well together. The only portion of his life that I'm not very actively involved is with the two daughters. I will admit that it wasn't my place to tell them anything, but at least now I will see which way this is going.

Well Nero, sometimes guys are clueless. You're close to my parents age. My dad was the biggest moron where my SM and I were concerned and really made things a lot harder than they needed to be. He admits that now... but the damage is done.

Unfortunately, and in my experience only, he is the ONLY one who can make the relationship start off on a good foot. It sounds like he's torn. It doesn't mean he doesn't love you or them, just that he's a poor communicator and probably doesn't want to make waves.

Bottom line: You and he need to sit down with his kids. Or him by himself. And say, Nero is important to me. I love her and I want to make a life with her. I will never forget your mom and there is no way a person can replace another person, but I am still living, and I hope you can be happy for me that I have found someone special to love. I handled this poorly and I'm sorry if I caused any distress to you or to her.

Not in so many words... but...

No matter how much I love someone, if he doesn't make the effort to make those closest to him aware of our special bond/relationship... then I would doubt the sincerity of his testament of love for me.

Seriously. Men are really dense when it comes to relationships and feelings sometimes. Give him the benefit of the doubt, but don't let yourself get shoved behind the door either.

hugs,
Silver

Given the added info from your last post--that it seems to be exclusively an issue with the daughters--then I bet it is partly a matter of guilt on your SO's behalf, and maybe partly that reticence parents usually have about discussing their love life with their kids, ha! I hate to do a kneejerk "see a therapist," but a stepfamily-savvy counselor might be able to help you and your SO work through this issue. I'm thinking that if you push the issue too much, it could damage your relationship down the road--the last thing you want is have your SO feel like he has to "choose" between his children and partner. If things go well and you do start to build a friendly relationship with your stepdaughters-to-be, it would be better not to have a history of animosity, yes?

Over the years I've come to see that the main "work" for a stepfamily is for the new spouses to separate out what is for the kids and what is for the marriage (or partnership). A person's connection to their romantic partner and to their kids are two very different spheres of their lives. The new partner shouldn't do stuff that has a bad impact on the parent-child relationship, and the parent shouldn't allow the children to do things that are bad for the marriage.

So maybe for now, just express to your SO that you understand that it's hard for him to handle his kids' emotions about someone "replacing" their mom. But that his failure to be honest with them about your relationship isn't good for them, either. And that it hurts your feelings and makes you feel like he doesn't want to take those first baby steps to have you "in the family."

So maybe for now, just express to your SO that you understand that it's hard for him to handle his kids' emotions about someone "replacing" their mom. But that his failure to be honest with them about your relationship isn't good for them, either. And that it hurts your feelings and makes you feel like he doesn't want to take those first baby steps to have you "in the family."

perfect.

I guess no one but me thinks OP should take any responsiblity for telling the stepkids what she did.

Well, KKNY, I think she'll pay the price of being responsible for years to come, whether she wants to take responsiblity or not.

--"She [daughter] actually said that they don't consider the relationship to be significant because he has never told them that it was. Well, in the conversation, I cleared up some of those things... told her the house was for us to live in together.... that we're getting married.... that it's been a serious relationship for years. Granted... it wasn't my place to tell her, but it all came bubbling out because I was offended and hurt ..."--

Things that just come 'bubbling' out in a confrontional 'let me tell you' manner certainly will not be forgiven nor forgotten easily or anytime soon. While I understand (understand, not agree with) where the convo came from on OPs part, OP might as while thrown up a battle flag and roared 'game on little girl'. Never a good way to to begin a new life in a new home with a new partner who is stuck between the ladies.

I don't understand how these daughters have been left in the dark for so long...been together 3 years, trips together, whole extended family/friends know, ect...yet the daughters have no clue? Just what IS dad telling these daughters? Dad is either to have been seriously downplaying your importance in his life to these daughters, or these daughters haven chosen to live the last 3 yrs in total denial. Curious, do the daughters live in the same town as dad?

I'm surprised if OP and future husband have been house seeking and discussing marriage that OP did flat out not also discuss with future husband what he's told the daughters and how they were taking the event, prior to signing on the dotted line. There seems to be a huge communication hole in this relationship and OP has every right to be questioning and wondering about trust and honesty issues between herself and possible future husband. Curious, is the OP on the mortgage and/or title to this new home? I ask as while OP says she's has her own money (does not need/want his) I read in initial post only dad bought house/he bought house for 'us'. I'd be leary of saling my own house and moving into this new one unless I was indeed a co-owner of new house. I'd hate to think OP got set out the door if things don't improve.

I agree with Silver. Also I am curious, how old are the 'adult' daughters? No one can ever replace their mom and I can understand that they might feel some animosity toward another woman that their dad is dating. But where is their maturity to try and move forward and be happy for their father's happiness with another woman? It's been 6 years since their mom passed away. I think it's been long enough for dad to have grieved and it is now time to go forward for everyone. Dad should not allow his daughters to dictate his happiness/future. I do agree men are dense when it comes to communicating their emotions, but these daughters are adults and should not be acting like children, no matter who told them what. And the fact that Nero has a good relationship with the other family members, including dad's own mom, makes it more baffling.

I do believe the father should have told his children he was getting married and purchasing a home. He may have had his reasons knowing his children may have not taken it well. Granted the children may be adults but they have also loss their mother. However, the Dad has moved on - he is an adult and has a right to do so. Communication is the key in this situation - and the father greatly missed the boat on having the girlfriend accepted in this. The girlfriend made them aware out of being offended instead of respecting his wishes. So now, This situation is a little messy at this time. BUT the bottom line of it all is this: DAD is an adult, Girlfriend is an adult and the daughter's are adults. We don't always make the best decisions in life - but have to live with our choices. Communication may be able to help this situation out. BUT I would let the girl's father deal with that situation with his daughter's in this case. Hopefully, time can help the adult daughter's come to accept the situation better..... BUT if not - they are adults and their father is entitled to live his life just as the daughter's live their own lives.

I agree!

JMT - "I read in initial post only dad bought house/he bought house for 'us'. I'd be leary of saling my own house and moving into this new one unless I was indeed a co-owner of new house. I'd hate to think OP got set out the door if things don't improve. "

In my circle of people (slightly or not so slightly older than OP) it is extremely uncommon for a new spouse to immediately (if ever) get 1/2 ownership of a house. At best, new spouse may get right to live there after death of dad. If new spouse is appreciably younger than dad (say 10 years or more), it is even less likely to get that -- more likely to get 6 months to a year to move out. In short parents of a certain age are not quick to fork over house. Both sexes expect that. As to OP being disadvanged, if she didnt cough off money for house, at worse she is getting free digs while she is there. Presumably she had living expenses before married and can now bank money.

In any event, I dont think her outburst impressed dad. He may be the type guy who for years relied on a wife to smooth over social problems, not make more. Yes the father is entitled to live life as he wants. Which may or may not be with a bubbler. Just because something is true, doesnt make it the right thing to say.

KKNY, are you deliberately taking only part of what I post because you're half reading this morning, or are you taking only half because it 'fits' what point/agenda you want to make? This is the 2nd posting this morning you've taken 1/2 of what I actually said and turned it into what you want it to say.

I aksed if OP was on mortgage. Meaning is OP paying for part of this house aka is she on loan payments? Were her finances and credit history any part in obtaining this home? Then tossed in 1/2 owner on title as she very well may have paid half of the cost of this new home from the sale of her current residence (other half from sale of his previous home) and there may be no mortgage loan, just a totally paid for and owned house, a co-owned home.

I asked as OP was not clear who and how, her wording "HE" and for "US" makes me assume OP has no real interest in this house, I was asking for clarification. You on the other hand took the words and ran with I imply the woman should automatically hold interest in a home she had nothing to do with purchasing.

Typical around here, read what you want and run with it, but I don't think I need a lesson on the ins and outs of something I didn't actually ask or imply. But yes, just in case OP did not help purchase this home or is not part of the loan history of this home, I was warning her she could find herself homeless shortly.

Well now I am really confused. You ream me out for saying I misinterpreted what you said then end by saying yes, just in case, she didnt help purchase she could end up homeless. Do you honestly think a new maritial partner should get half of house on day one? How did she live before this guy? How else can someone interpret what you are saying?

Now honestly my Xs SO is in a pretty similiar siutation. She sold her condo, moved in with him, and then quit/lost her job. Upon his death, she has a reasonable period to live, then my DD gets house. If she has a brain, she will have saved money from the sale of her condo and be in great shape.

"He may be the type guy who for years relied on a wife to smooth over social problems, not make more. Yes the father is entitled to live life as he wants. Which may or may not be with a bubbler. "

If that's the case, his deceased wife must have had her work cut out for her, cause it sounds like he's a horrible communicator who starts social problems right and left.

I dont think her outburst impressed dad.

I'd be less worried about impressing this guy and more concerned that he's emotionally selfish and not committed to our relationship in the ways he's led me to believe he was. Something tells me OP had a life before him just as he had one before her, and they are both adults with a past and expectations rather than OP finding a sugar daddy to latch onto and milk his DD's inheritance dry.

Something that never fails to amuse me is people expecting that children deserve or are entitled to their parents money upon death. The story about Yu recently really touched me... you can read it here:

Real-estate tycoon Yu Pengnian has now moved his entire $1.2 billion fortune into his charity to help China's poor....Yu has several children, none of whom will inherit any of his fortunes, a move he says his children agree with. "If my children are more capable than me, it's not necessary to leave a lot of money to them. If they are incompetent, a lot of money will only be harmful to them," he said.

I never said OP didnt have a life, I just said in response to JMT that expecting to go on deed on day one of marriage is well, a little unusual where I live. But if you're calling people entitled, I think a spouse expecting to go on deed on day one should be up there.

KKNY, I never said you said she didn't have a life.

I also didn't read that JMT said she expected to go on deed on day one. JMT was asking for clarification. Is she on mortgage papers, or is she on title, or is the house solely in dad's name?

Unusual in your neck of the woods, perhaps, but conforming to the norm is not the perogative of all. Who knows what the arrangement is, and that's dad's business. But JMT was making sure OP was clear that if she's not on mortgage (ie, paying for house too) or on title (ie, already paid for house too, or dad just is generous) that OP could be on the street.

"But JMT was making sure OP was clear that if she's not on mortgage (ie, paying for house too) or on title (ie, already paid for house too, or dad just is generous) that OP could be on the street. " This woman is 53 years old, and has a great job and you think she needs to be told that?

LOL, KKNY, I don't know what OP needs to be told, 53 and a great job or not. She seems to have had to have the daughters tell her dad is not playing straight up with her.

Probably. JMT was most likely stating the obvious, which is why we were surprised you were acting as if she were expecting new wife to be automatically 1/2 owner of dad's stuff.

kkny,

it is not like OP is moving into the house that mom and dad lived together, kids grew up in and so on, and kids might have claims for that.

this is a new house that was purchased for OP and dad to live together, nothing to do with adult kids. no matter who bought the house. when i buy something, anything, it has nothing to do with my DD, and I don't need to answer to her.

discussing marriage does not always mean that people actually plan on marrying. This man might not even be that serious about OP.

i knew a girl who was madly in love with a guy who was "discussing marriage". It turned out he was actually married to someone else the whole time. When it all came out and he was confronted, he said he was having marital problems and was upset and was just "talking".

OP is not engaged, they don't live together, dad does not say anything to kids. He really might be apprehensive about the whole thing. Women sometimes assume men are serious when they really are not.

His daughters actually make sense by saying: "if he was serious we would know about you."

Good points FD

Yes fd, but if you bought a house, would you put it 1/2 in new spouses name from day one??

kkny, if I bought it together with my spouse then both names would go on it. But if I bought a house by myself and paid for it by myself 100%, then it would be silly to put someone else's name on it right away. I cannot afford such luxury. But it does not mean it belongs to my child either.

But I don't think it reflects OP's situation, she never said anything about the house situation and who actually paid for it and if her name is on it.

I think the whole situation also depends if dad is generally a good father or is a neglectful one. If he does not give his daughters enough attention and is not supportive (just if), then i see how they feel he will give (not money per se) even less now.

If you get married in California and you don't make some other stipulations it automatically becomes common property.

But why should it matter who does what? That's why we're all individuals, and adults! It's no one's business :)

exactly, maybe dad is wealthy and can afford buying new houses and put women's names on it or maybe he believes men should be sole providers.

Totally. When my dad dies I'm not getting his house, his wife is, even though she didn't pay a dime for it. It's his house. It's his choice. I didn't pay a dime either, why should I get it? ;)

"She actually said that they don't consider the relationship to be significant because he has never told them that it was. as well as her implications that it couldn't be a serious relationship because their father never even mentions my name to them." I have a suspicion that daughters might be right....

That's sad. How on Earth does someone spend so much time with a person,to the point of moving into a home... and not know their children? I agree, the red flag is waving...

silvers, it is possible if people live in different cities, states or countries. My DD and her SO have been together since fall 2007, they are a couple and live together. But there are people in both mine and her dad's families, as well as her SO's family, that do not know anything about it.
Maybe in OP's situation dad visited his kids in different states by himself or when they visited OP stayed in her own house. And if kids asked, maybe he said he is just casually dating, nothing serious. I just don't understand why he would do that, but it is doable. If people live next door then of course not, but far away? easy.

Posted by silversword (My Page) on Thu, Apr 29, 10 at 20:58

If you get married in California and you don't make some other stipulations it automatically becomes common property.

Is that right, even if property bought before marriage?

kkny,

Yes, in California everything becomes community property after death of a spouse unless things are stipulated before the marriage or death. Property bought before the marriage is exempt IF the spouse/owner makes a point of exempting it. If not, everything that is there goes to the spouse. I once sold a piece of property that was mine solely but my DH had to sign away his rights of survivorship to close escrow! Most people who are established and want to leave assets to someone other than their spouse make a point of creating a will and a trust, transferring the assets to the trust with directions on how the assets will be allocated. No will, no trust, it all goes to the spouse starting the minute their marriage certificate dries. From I Do.

My DH did not communicate that well with his kids when we became engaged and made wedding plans. As I have posted before both of the adult skids boycotted our wedding and reception. I was very hurt by that. DH played a big part in it by not making sure they knew how serious our relationship was. OP may have overstepped by telling the daughters what was going on but heck, the man hadn't taken care of it!

Given my experience, she needs to slow down and see if her fiance is going to help integrate her with his daughters before taking the step of moving in together. That my DH did not do that caused a lot of problems for me that lasted for years.

Lamom, I think you are combining a variety of different concepts. Every state except LA, unless will and or/ trust and prenup, suriving spouse inherits all in event of death. A right of survivorship is a death related concept. Rules on who gets what in event of death are different that who gets what in event in event of divorce. I agree with planning, communication, discussion.

To give OP a free ride for "bubbling" to the daughters (as in oh heck), is imho, unrealistic.

In my state without an ironclad pre-nup, premartial property can become considered martial property unless spefic guideline would be extremely carefully met.

For example, man bought house, took out mortgage loan and a month later married. Man would have to pay the mortgage back with no money earned from employment income during his marriage. He would have to be able to prove he was paying this mortgage with premarital funds such as premarital investments or inheritance money.

So in my state basically he could keep new life without pre-nup from interest in home only if no funds from marriage was used to pay for house after marriage. Laws vary from state to state.

What state, becasue in my state, if either spouse keeps earnings in a seperate account, it stays seperate. Of course I do not live in CP state. But I agree, care must be taken to keep seperate property seperate.

To give OP a free ride for "bubbling" to the daughters (as in oh heck), is imho, unrealistic.

She's not getting a free ride. I told her I didn't think it was her place. But I think dad caused this, not her.

OP was in a relationship where she knew the relationship with the stepkids was not good. Rather than discussing with dad and reaching a resolution, she apparently accepts it when he says he will handle it his way. If she couldnt live with that, she should have told him, not bubbled at his kids. I think it is very selfish what she did.

kkny, OP admits in her very first post that it wasn't her place to tell them. I didn't see that anyone (so far) has given her a free pass, but what is the point, exactly, when someone admits from the get-go to having made a mistake, for everyone else to then point out that she made a mistake?

I, however, actually will give her a free pass. They've bought a new home which they are moving into in a few weeks and dad is lying to kids about it. He is also lying to her about what he's told them. She discovered in a conversation with daughter, that dad had given daughter untrue information about their new house. It is a perfectly normal reaction so say, "well, no, that's not true, we're moving into the house together". If dad wanted her to lie to his daughters, he should have 1) explicitly told her he was lying and what the lie was, and 2) gotten her agreement to keep the lie.

Of course, if all that had happened, OP had lied as dad wanted, daughters eventually realized the truth and realized that both dad and OP had lied, and became mad at OP for being an untrustworthy liar, you'd have blamed her for that, too. Because as future SM, she has no right to lie to his daughters, and if she does, how can she ever expect them to trust her.

Her fiance put her in an impossible situation. Whatever she did was wrong, and her relationship with his daughters is going to suffer-no matter what she did, or does now- because of the position he put her in. I'd be furious with him, if I were her.

Illinois, kkny.

Premarital funds can be totally seperate and never put jointly; say a vehicle you owned pre marriage and it is paid off pre marriage. After marriage you can sell this car and the money would be just yours, but if put in any type of a joint account/investment, it ceases being premarital. Some gifts are considered seperate, inheritance...

Illinois considers money or property acquired during the marriage as belonging to the marriage and we have an 'equitable division' if divorce. That's not necessarily a 50/50 split, there's a guideline so to say to value the worth of contribution of the marriage by each spouse along with many other factors playing in.

It's much more involved than the above simple nutcup, but that's the basics of how division begins here. And no, if a hubby goes off to work all day and the wife bakes cookies and raises the kids it will not produce a judge to think hubby can hoarde away his employment earnings in a secret account and not have to divide it up, in fact if hubby is a cheating pig and spending assets on a lady friend while awaiting divorce the courts can make him payback the missing wasted funds on settlement.

You'd have to look at it all to get a true idea, kkny, of course there's loops and potholes to hide in with prenups, assignments and agreements that a good lawyer would have no trouble finding and pursuing.

Quirk, everyone here seems to say he is terrible at what he did, and may or may not note what she did, but in an oh heck wy. Also it does not appear "they" bought a house but OP notes twice, the house was bought. Twice. In the passive tense. For them to live in.

JMT, I agree with you IF pre-marriage assets are put in a joint account, they cease being seperate. Which is exactly what I said. Yes I agree, if put into a joint account, they become joint.

kk, I really donÂt care who bought the house, "he" or "they". I am talking about the conversation with the daughter, where she "overstepped her place" and told the daughter whatÂs going on. She was put on the spot, unprepared, where there was not a "right" action. I am talking about the conversation I had with one of the daughters last week revealed that he hasn't quite been honest with the daughters or with me about what he's been telling them. She had two options at this point; tell daughter the truth, that they are moving into this house together, or perpetuate the lie. Either of them is wrong. Her fiance, not her, is the one who created this situation by lying to daughters, and lying to her about what heÂs told daughters, so she didnÂt know what to expect. No, it was not her place to tell his daughter about their plans. However, it was equally not her place to lie to his daughter. He created a situation where she was forced to do one or the other. His bad, not hers.

Do *you* think she should have perpetuated the lie to the daughter? If she had, and a month from now wrote in saying how furious daughters were for having been lied to right up until practically the day they moved into this new house, and admitted that she had been party to this deception, noting this conversation in particular only where this time she supported her fiance's deceptions, would you absolve her of blame? Or say, well of course daughter is furious, you lied to her!

No I think she had a third option. Go back to her FDH and say, you must speak to your DDs before I move in. Then he would be the one to tell them. And I suspect, would have been more gentler than the bubber, but in any event, the discussion would have been between them, and it would be easier on the entire family.

While I understand what you're saying , Quirk, with the being totally caught off by the sudden knowledge of what daughter was telling her, I think OP had additional immediate options, and the 3rd option might have gained her far more insight.

--She had two options at this point; tell daughter the truth, that they are moving into this house together, or perpetuate the lie".--

A third option would have been to politely end convo with daughter until she could get a better grip of the situation or politely sit there and just listen. She did not have to 'clear up a few things' with the daughter right then and there.

I get she was upset, hurt, stunned, surprised whatever ...but if I just had a FDH's daughter tell me what was being told to OP, I'd of first shut my mouth and regrouped.

First, the daughter does not like OP and OP is well aware of it and well aware that FDH has been telling OP something different than what daughter is stating. Whose to say daughter is telling 'me' the truth. How would 'I' know daughter is not just feeding me crap to cause trouble? Yeah, seems strange daughter would and 'I' really don't want to think the worse, but somebody is feeding me crap and it either has to be this daughter or the FDH.

I would have kept my mouth shut, maybe even listened to what else daughter had to tell me I might not know and then made a big straight path cut right to FDH and asked him what the heck was going on. I'd be real curious as to if FDH was going to feed me more BS or man-up and own he has been playing both parties (the daughters and me).

OP says the daughters are talking to Dad. Must mean they are up and up and okay with him and whatever he's doing or not doing. Op goes on to say FDH is mad at her and barely speaking to her.

Say what? The girls are not upset dad has supposedly been lying to him, but he's mad at OP for telling girls the truth? That really does not make a lot of sense. So...is anybody telling each other the truth now? Do we assume now that the girls have been told the girls have decided to just accept it all, no big deal daddy just lied for three years, but we'll still be mad at OP for telling us the truth.

I seriously think some of this story has been left out and I think if OP had shut her mouth instead of 'bubbling' she might be closer to learning just what kind of future she really can look forward to with this man.

But that's all just my opinion and me and what or how I would have handled the sudden newsflash.

I truly hope OP the best, but this moving next week into what she thought was her happy new home is sure looking like it's getting off to a pretty bad start.

Hi Nero,

Here is what I would focus on:

1. He lied to his daughters for years about the nature of your relationship.

2. He lied to you for years about what he told them.

I agree with you that it was not your place to tell one of the daughters the true story. She must have been shocked and very hurt by this. The Dad should have told her.

I think that when she said she did not consider it a serious relationship, you could have ended the conversation politely without challenging her assumption.
Then you could have contacted her dad privately to confront him about his actions. By making light of your relationship, he has been treating you in a very disrespectful way. Based on what you have said, this has damaged your reputaion with his daughters.

Your boyfriend does not have a very good track record of "making things right". I think that the best face saving action for you is to call off the movers and stay put for now.

Take a lot more time to work things out and make sure he is being honest with everyone before you consider a living arrangement or marriage. You should think about other things he has told you over time to evaluate whether they are truthful or not. You cannot have a happy living situation with him under such a dark cloud of deceit, and you could suffer from more unpleasant surprises down the road.

Ok, I get your point, she could have handled it better. But that still amounts to "she could have done a better job dealing with the mess that he made". And ***he*** is barely speaking to ***her***? Please. He is primarily culpable for the situation; he has no business being mad at anyone. If you're going to go around telling lies to your friends and family, telling some people one story and other people a completely different story, you really have no one to blame but yourself when you get caught.

(and if this is how he handles his daughters now, ya gotta wonder--or at least I have to wonder-- if their poor reaction 3 years ago was because they were against the relationship or because he he handled the situation just as poorly back then).

Quirk, I am in agreement with you... Nero, If these grown girls had said to me WE dont consider your relationship with my dad serious, my blood would have boiled (or Bubbled)and I def would have popped off, really none of their business, if they are out of school and on their own... If I am an equal partner with my SO , I would assume I do not have to EDIT my comments...Sounds like if he was ticked off, you walk on eggshells with him...

I agree with Quirk. I can see how something like that would be shocking and your first reaction would be to say something. Not that I think that it will help OP's relationship in anyway with the daughters. She'll be paying for that for a long time. But it's definitely understandable.

However, OP has known for 3 years about Dads reluctance to come clean about her. I'd think the same thing the daughters thought if I was the OP, he can't possibly be serious about me if his own children don't know. OP has had the time to take stock of the situation and she know has even further proof. If Dad is reluctant to proclaim to the world love for a certain woman, I think you need to pay really close attention to that.

Dotz,

You say " If I am an equal partner with my SO , I would assume I do not have to EDIT my comments"

Of course OP should have right to say anything to SO, but with all due respect, I still think each partner "owns" the relationship with his or her own kids. Its one thing for OP to say oh, please move the car. Its another for OP to say we're getting married (especially when first post said they were "talking" about getting married).

I agree with KK, big difference between "discussing, talking" marriage and actually getting married as being engaged and have a set date.

Lets say hypothetically: I discuss with a man that if our relationship keeps going strong and things are working out, we might be one day considering marriage, then he picks up the phone and calls my DD and tells her your mom and I are getting married. What? that would be inappropriate and overstepping!