KK, you can't be serious. There is a young child and monster hospital bills. Dad should be able to spend *his* money on adult children instead of *his* child's hospital bills without mother of *his* sick child raising a fuss?

Your logic is astounding.

He is still an adult. Its up to him. That is my logic. You're right, I dont know how much insurance covers the bills. But he does.

Are they not partners?

"There is a young child and monster hospital bills. Dad should be able to spend *his* money on adult children instead of *his* child's hospital bills without mother of *his* sick child raising a fuss?"

I think another key point here regarding DS and his illness is that--he is in remission now but could relapse. There is not assurance that there will not be larger hospital bills/expenses in the future.

As far as insurance goes, I am sure lamom and her DH have excellent healthcare, but it RARELY covers everything. I would love to know what their out-of-pocket expenses have been. Sure, the hospital stays are probably covered but let's not forget all the copays on all the meds DS has to take, all the follow-up appts, etc. Cancer puts a STRAIN on the family financially, it is no secret.

And it would seem prudent to me to plan accordingly.

SS,

If they are partners, then SM should share her money. She refers to her money as hers.

People can share or not share.

But to say SMs money is hers, and the rest is shared is selfish.

Once SM says, as LAMOM does, that they have his, hers and ours, he gets to decide where the his goes.

He is still an adult. Its up to him. That is my logic. You're right, I dont know how much insurance covers the bills. But he does.

No, actually it is not up to him. He has a minor child. He is responsible, morally and legally, for his child's medical bills. It is part of being a parent. You know, with all those "rights" that parents have comes responsibilities.

Mattie, the child is of both DAD and SM. They are BOTH responsbile for that child's care. It is not for SM to say my money.my money for some or all of her money and then to say dad can not spend some of his.

I agree KKNY. But I don't think that's what's going on. I could be wrong.

If my dad had a second child who was very ill I would not expect him to be forking over cash to me. That's the difference. People seem to think FIRST FAMILY FIRST.

By that reasoning, it should be FIRST CHILD FIRST. Second children should not get to go to the best school if first child is not already taken care of. Second child should not get new bike if first child did not get their every wish granted. Because obligation goes to the FIRST child. A parent should take care of the first child's needs completely before having another child.

I think I'm of the same age as the adult "children" in this dynamic. I do not need help throwing my dad a party. Parties do not need to cost ANYTHING. You can make a gift, you can pot-luck. At 30+ you should be able to figure that out. After all, we've lived through our salad days of college and early 20's with no money and lots of friends, and parties.

(LA mom, were your SKIDS dropped on their heads as children?)

IMO, minor children first. Hopefully you raised the adult children well enough to fend for themselves. If not, they can always come over for a hot meal and laundry facilities.

kk: They are BOTH responsbile for that child's care. My point exactly. And after their and their minor son's expenses are paid, then Dad can spend whatever he has left on whatever or whomever he chooses, as can lamom. I didn't see anyone saying he couldn't.

However, I'm still waiting for the answer as to whom is supposed to contribute towards the birthday party being thrown by the adult children, that they can't afford. Is Dad supposed to contribute towards his own party? Is SM supposed to overstep her role and contribute? Surely the seven year old shouldn't be expected to chip in?!

Both my X and I only have one parent left (both widows), but is inconcievable to me if a BBQ were being held that both of them would not have insisted on helping out. I know! BM should make up the difference! After all, she's their mother! And her babies need money for the party, so I expect she'll be sending them a check shortly. :)

"By that reasoning, it should be FIRST CHILD FIRST. Second children should not get to go to the best school if first child is not already taken care of. Second child should not get new bike if first child did not get their every wish granted. Because obligation goes to the FIRST child. A parent should take care of the first child's needs completely before having another child."

I totally get this comparison, Silver, and agree completely! It is crazy logic.

However--I already know what KKNY's argument/defense will be. She will say that in a nuclear family, BOTH mom and dad decide to have more children but that in a STEPFAMILY, it is not both parent's decision. In this case, the poor stepkids of LAMOM had no say in the fact that their daddy remarried and had another child, and neither did their BM. Therefore, they should still be entitled to whatever help they need/demand from their dad, regardless of his other obligations.

(I hope my sarcasm is duly noted.)

No, I am saying that for the Nth time that if SM gets to say my.money.my.money than so does her DH.

sarcasm duly noted :)

Fine. But the first child has no choice either. So why isn't it the same?

Mommy and Daddy have Kid 1 and then Kid 2. Kid1 does not get to do a summer abroad because Kid2 needs braces.

Mommy and Daddy divorce and marry again. Mommy and Daddy2 each have two kids. Because one of Daddy2's kids needs an operation, Mommy1's Kid1 doesn't get a down payment on their house.

How is Mommy1 Kid1 shorted any differently?

Bio younger sister needs braces = I don't get what I want
Non bio younger/older sister needs operation = I don't get what I want

Either way, KID DOESN'T HAVE ANY SAY!!! (and pity kid #2 who always has to listen to "before YOU got here, I got everything I wanted, I wish you were never born")

kkny: Fine, Dad gets to say my money, my money.

Both my X and I only have one parent left (both widows), but is inconcievable to me if a BBQ were being held that both of them would not have insisted on helping out. Why is your DH not allowed to help his kids? Is it your money?

So again, who is supposed to "help" with Dad's birthday party? Should Dad be expected to hand over money for his own party?

Actually, yes, when my XFIL was alive, until the very end he paid for dinner.

I dont think someone should be so annoyed at request. But given LAMOM's complaints re spending on kids, ala "However, SD is getting much needed work from DH and DH broke down and told me that he recently gave SS the bobillionth handout recently. " it happens.

My dad pays for everything too, if I will let him. But there comes a time where children, if they have ANY CLASS AT ALL... start to pick up some of the tab. At least every once in a while.

My dad and DH (fight) over the bill by sneaking over to pay the bill before anyone else has a chance. It's a game to see who can pay first, without making any sort of fuss about it.

I would never dream of asking dad for money to throw him a party any more than I'd ask him for money to buy him a gift. Tacky.

Thanks! My mom's birthday is coming up and I wanted to get her a really nice present, like a diamond necklace, but I can't afford it. So I wasn't sure if my SF should pay for it, because he's her husband; I was worried because I was pretty sure he'd be really annoyed if I came to him with such a request. But now I know my mom should pay for it. She's going to be so excited when she opens her present this year! But maybe not so much when I give her the bill for it.

"Fine. But the first child has no choice either. So why isn't it the same? "

It is the same IMO. I totally agree with you, Silver!

But back on the party subject..

"I would never dream of asking dad for money to throw him a party any more than I'd ask him for money to buy him a gift. Tacky."

I guess I think this is somewhat different because Lamom called and asked SD what she was planning, SD agreed to host BBQ for her dad's birthday; BUT lamom is also his wife, and I don't think it was totally out of line for her to ask lamom to chip in a little bit. I think it was very generous and kind of lamom to agree to do so, but like I said, not out of line for SD to ask. I am saying this just because it does sound like SD usually does "do" for her dad and nephews and I don't want to lump her in with her deadbeat brother. This is a woman who at least has made some effort with lamom and her half-brother; and she genuinely is in a tight spot, as she is unemployed through no fault of her own.

I think it's okay that she asked for the help in throwing the party---and I think it is really kind of lamom to chip in financially.

Handouts to SS are a totally different story!

SS, yes my X was the same. At the end he and XFIl would fight over bill. But see here's the difference. Dad and DH can fight over bill. SM can not say my.money.my.money and say Dad should not pay bill.

lamom said "She did ask me to 1. Chip in financially which was not my plan..." That's a far cry from saying "my money my money and Dad should not pay the bill".

Honestly, if it were me I'd probably either contribute some money or bring some food or something - but then that's what my family does for all parties. If someone is really short on money they do more when they are able to, or do something that requires effort but less money (like the organizational or labor part) and it all works out in the end. But that only works if everyone is equally generous and giving with what they have; not where the burden falls on the same few people over and over.

Love, I agree. LA called, asked if they were planning party, so all "hostesses" should plan to pay what they can. Because LA initiated phone call. But she should not have had to do that (I wouldn't have done it:)

KKNY, you misunderstand. MY DAD and MY DH both try to pay the bill. It's not DH and FIL.

The whole my.money.my.money thing is really irritating, but I expect that was your intention.

"But she should not have had to do that (I wouldn't have done it:)"

Ditto again. I don't think lamom was obligated AT ALL to call SD or SS and remind them of their father's birthday. IMO what would have been ideal would have been for SD to call lamom and say "I've been thinking about hosting a casual BBQ for Dad's birthday. What do you think? I'd like to have it at my house and do all of the legwork---invitations, cooking, etc." And then lamom could have (and knowing her kind heart, probably WOULD HAVE) offered to split the cost of the food or whatever, knowing that SD is in a tight spot financially. I think people always prefer to OFFER help instead of be asked to give it. JMO. I think that is continually lamom's issue---that these stepkids, primarily SS, continually ask and ask and ask, expect, expect, expect.

We all like to DO things for other people just because but when those things become EXPECTED that's when it becomes a problem.

Exactly Love.

Sorry, I meant my X and XFIL (father and son) used to fight each other for bill. Same thing. The point is THEY fought, not third parties.

It's not the same thing KKNY.

My DH would fight My father for the bill. That IS third parties.

Wow. On hospital bills, we do have excellent health insurance coverage, thank God. But as Lovehadley pointed out it does not cover 2nd and 3rd opinions which we pay outright, co-pays for expensive testing or the complete bill on lengthy hospital stays just to start. Let's not talk about the drugs. There is a lifetime cap which we have to manage towards so we can't burn through DS7's policy at 7 years old! It is no lie that medical bills can break you financially. We were fortunate to have resources to pick up the slack but it has made a serious dent and continues to do so.

DH and I pay those bills from all 3 incomes/assets, his, mine and ours. We are partners for sure on that.

For the third time, I am chipping in on paying for the party since I know SD's money is tight and she is underemployed. Plus she asked me directly and it was hard to say no. DH would be very happy with a potluck, burgers and so on. But, I'm not planning the menu or the party so I'm not giving input. Input equals responsibility.

When if ever will these grown children act grown? I love what Silver wrote, they can't compute that as adults, the resources just aren't for them anymore, they are diverted to a little boy. Why is that so hard to accept?

I must have missed where Lamom wrote "I forbid my DH to give any money to the sks".

Or maybe it's the usual case of agenda driven posters putting words in somebody else's actual postings.

KKNY, I think you're being unduly hard on Lamom here with the 'my money, my money' droan and making it appear as if she hoardes all the money of the household and makes Mr. Lamom beg her to give a dime to the older kids.

Obviously Mr. Lamom had no idea those were the rules and made a very recent choice all on his own...his decision... to give a handout...his money... to the SS and he did it all without Lamom even knowing he'd done so if the SD had not mentioned it. Nobody stopped him.

That hardly sounds like a woman who controls all the purse strings.

I also must have missed the part where Lamom stated she was taking funds out of Mr Lamom's personal account to chip into the BBQ expense. My read was she agreed to chip in and goes on to state she does have her own money via investments/inheritance...I will assume her gift to her husband and/or cost she puts forth for his party is indeed her funds.

--"Lamom, my question was why is he not allowed to help out his kids as much as he wants? Which you object to?" [KKNY]

Obviously any objection on Lamom's part does not stop handouts, and again, I have never heard Lamom state she has forbid a passing of money. As to 'why is he not allowed to help out his kids as much as he wants'...a far more suitable agrument here may have been 'why is he not allowed to help out his kids as much as he is able to afford to'. But then that seems to be a mute debate too, as Mr. Lamom does indeed help his kids.

I think normally people in their 30s could afford parties for their dads, but SD lost her job and had difficulty even paying her mortgage and bills. Unemployment is a huge problem in my state, people are out of job for several years. It does not matter how old one is, if you lose your job you are in big trouble.

"When if ever will these grown children act grown?" I am under impression that SD acts as an adult, she just has temporary difficulty, i also remember she does things for her nephews, which is nice of her.

This conversation has gone so far off from what I asked originally. Just to clarify:
1. I did not ask SD to throw a party. I just reminded her of her father's birthday and asked if she and her brother had given it any thought. Answer was no she then decided to give a barbecue and asked me to chip in all in the same conversation. Not my job but I did it anyway.
2. I have agreed per SD's request to help pay for the barbecue. Also not my job but I did it anyway.
3. I do have a problem with people in their 30's still getting parental handouts on a regular basis. I do not control in any way DH giving cash handouts to SS. I b*tc* about here but DH does what he wants in that area.

By the time I was 30 I was completely independent of my parents.

"By the time I was 30 I was completely independent of my parents. "

Me too, but I was lucky to never lose a job.

In SS30's case ... he would have had to have A JOB to lose one!

I'm cool with the losing job thing. It happens. Parents help.

These kids are not self-sufficient though, even when they had jobs (from what I can tell). And a party does not cost money. One can throw a party with nothing. It's called POT LUCK, a bunch of CD's from his genre, some kind of theme, asking his friends for ideas/games/toasts/roasts... etc.

I have lost jobs. I got laid off at 20. My dad helped me for a few months. He paid for some bills. I didn't get cash handouts. From what I can tell, it's pouring money down the drain. Nothing wrong with parents helping kids. But ........

Mr. LA knows LAMOM wouldn't be comfortable with handing out more cash. He (IMO) feels guilt. He is handing cash under the table. Again, IMO, this does not service the kids. I lived very frugally when I got help from my father, and I found another job within months with a temping agency. There ARE JOBS OUT THERE. Yes, relocation may be necessary. In my case, the entire industry changed just as I got my degree. Whoops. No job. And no real skills or training for anything else. I changed, I looked, I found something better.

One would think by age 30 (basically the age I am now) these "kids" would have it a little more together. I have a degree (paid for by myself), I own a home (mortgage), I own my car (outright). Hopefully I would never need help from my dad or mom again. But if I do, I've proven to them that it would be temporary, and not a bleed-out of their finances.

That, IMO, is the problem here. These "kids" are not acting responsibly. Dad feels guilty, LA feels pinched.

SD is self-sufficient, she even helps her nephews, her crazy brother's kids. Lamom never said she is not responsible.

Lamom even complained that SD financially supports/helps her nephews yet does not help DS. I remember the whole argument, how SD spends money on her nephews rather than DS. I remember defending SD because my brother spends bunch of money on my SIL's nephew and nothing on my DD but I don't really let it bother me because DD has two able-bodied parents, while SIL's nephew has no mother and dad is a drunk.

SD lost her job. I actually did ask how come she has no savings, and lamom answered that she did but economy is so bad and cost of living is high in CA, one cannot afford anything if they lose their job.

Now all of a sudden she is not sufficient or responsible?

and who knows she is resentful about her father maybe that's why she does not want to host party for him on her own. She hosted parties for the kids in the family all the time and didn't ask for money.

It makes me wonder if there is a pattern, when it comes to her dad she is reluctant to host or spend, yet supports plenty of other people, runs around for her mom, grandma, brother, nephews.

I think that besides having financial troubles, she is not too happy to spend on her dad.

I think she and her brother, from what i gathered from lamom's posts, are completely different people. they both resent their father but SS is a loser while SD is not.

silvers, I think you confuse both kids. SS is the one with nothing, no job, no skills. SD has everything and did not appear to ask for money from her dad or lamom, she only recently lost her job and still neither lamom or her dad helped. she just asks to help with the party. in previous posts lamom said they are not going to help with mortgage payments or anything else. so it is not the case here.

not wanting to pay for the party or host the party for dad is not being irresponsible.

not wanting to pay for the party or host the party for dad is not being irresponsible. I agree completely, but it sounds like SD chose to host it but asked for or expected lamom to help pay for it, which is somewhat irresponsible. As other posters have said, a party does not have to cost much money at all, and if she chooses to host a party then it should be within her budget. If her budget is that strained then she should not have offered to host.

I don't feel that any family members are obligated to help out an adult who has lost their job. If it really has come down to dire straits (someone is now working two part-time jobs, has turned in their car for an old beater, cable and internet are long since gone, etc.) then one would hope that family members would help if they are in a position to be able to. But that still doesn't require them to. And I've seen way too many people who've lost their jobs and keep living the exact same lifestyle that they had been, up until unemployment run out, and "suddenly" they're in desperate trouble and want everyone's help, when they should have been planning for that possibility for months. (I'm not talking about those people who are way underwater on their mortgages, and who have been scrambling for years and there simply is nothing where they live, yet they can't afford to move.)

If I were laid off and asked an adult step-child for money for a party I was hosting would that seem responsible?

Exactly Mattie.

FD, it's just my perception. I now remember LA saying that SD paid for skiing (or was willing to pay for skiing) for SS but not for DS. Sounds like you're right, she is willing to pay for whom she wishes to pay.

Doesn't sound like she has "everything" to me, but again, just IMO.

LA also said that she realized that her DH has done much more for her child (with him) than the earlier ones. Perhaps SD is trying to make up for her brother.

Actually this is not what Lamom said, finedreams, as usual as with what happens to many here when they state something, words are being twisted and/or completely taking on a life of their own.

Finedreams take: "in previous posts lamom said they are not going to help with mortgage payments or anything else".

What Lamom actually said: "No, DH and I don't have the reserves to carry her mortgage for who knows how long."--

If Sd can not pay the mortgage she may end up being one of many people across America to lose their home and be forced to down size living styles in this recession from h#ll. While it may not be due to a lack of being or not being a responsible adult on Sd's part, she is not alone in this situation.

Sudden unemployment, investment loses, pension funding loses, extreme tight loaning conditions blah blah blah...furloughs, hour cutbacks, wage decreases, benefit take aways, blah blah blah.

Falling behind and/or completely down is happening to people who have worked and worked hard their entire life. Even people in their 40's, 50' and 60's. Many of these people don't have anyone to help and/or bail them out, or have family memebers who themselves may be a hair away from maybe being next to get hit.

I'm not going to judge someone for 'failing' to help nor someone forced to reach out and ask for help. There is likely not a one of us here that is totally true foolproof safe, no matter how prepared we think we currently are that might not face unexpected events beyond our control . Life happens and it happens to all of us, even to the best most responsible people out there.

"I agree completely, but it sounds like SD chose to host it but asked for or expected lamom to help pay for it, which is somewhat irresponsible.

I think she didn't really want to host the party in the first place, possibly felt pressured to do something about dad's birthday, felt guilty and now stuck with the party. Just my opinion.

It is easy to judge who is responsible and who is not. most people on this forum have two incomes or rely on someone else's income for everyday's survival. it is not the case with everyone on this forum and IRL.

I have savings, not much, but it will keep me for some time in case of upcoming major salary reduction and even possible unemployment, but trust me I am not hosting birthday parties if I lose my job. and trust me my family would not want me to. If anyone in my family loses their job, i don't want them to host anything. birthday party for an adult is not that important in my opinion.

I haven't posted about this because I just don't understand the argument. The party did happen, very small, a very casual barbecue for which I paid half per SD's direct request. DH knows I chipped in but not how much. SS as usual chipped in no cash but did man the barbecue grill. SD was not pressured to do anything at least not by me. She wasn't asked to do anything by me or anyone else. Maybe she pressured herself!

Surprise, surprise BM was invited and showed up. I completely avoided her, only saying Hi which I think is all I owe her to be polite. She looked out of place and she was.

SD is an adult. She made a decision to host a very small cookout for her father. Give me a break. When will people on this board realize that stepparents are not responsible for everything that stepkids do or don't do? Out of one side of the mouths here there is constant handwringing about stepparents "overstepping" their proper roles. Out of the other side there is an expectation that stepparents will accomodate and bankroll almost anything related to stepkids, child or adult. Not to mention the ongoing accomodations for the exe's.

It's enough.

how stupid to invite ex for the party! how ridiculous for her to show up! what the heck? dad's birthday? ex is invited? LOL

I agree you shouldn't be doing much for them, it just seems when you called to remind about dad's birthday and asked what are their plans they figured you want them to do something. maybe I am wrong. don't remind anything next time. otherwise you'll celebrate his birthday with his ex every year. what a joke! ex showed up hahaha

Who in their right minds would want their Ex at their birthday party?

(Well, inside a pinata maybe...?)

@FD, SD invited her mother although DH seemed OK with her being there. I don't get it but like I said, I basically treated her as an invisible woman. I think at this point the skids, BM and DH want everyone singing kumbaya (sp.)DH's ex-SIL with whom he is still friendly was there too and we had a lot of laughs together. SGS9 got a splinter and I helped to remove it, fetched the tweezers, rubbing alcohol and so on. No big deal but they seemed impressed by that.

Father's Day is Sunday. I don't plan on any reminders this time. DS7 has already made a gift, we may do our own cookout if skids don't do anything.

@sweeby, LOL, I'll remember to pick up a pinata the next time!

I was wondering how the party went. I can't believe they invited the EX, but I am not surprised either. I still recall when the ex told you sometime last fall that you weren't a part of the family, so stop trying...and there she is. Amazing.

"Surprise, surprise BM was invited and showed up."

That is just the weirdest thing. Who wants their ex at their birthday party? I get that SD is the one who invited her mother, and that's even weirder!

My parents have been divorced for 11 years now--since I was 18. It was a nasty split at first, mainly because my mom was in the throes of her alcoholism. She was really hard to deal with and the more things were delayed, the nastier it got.

They still are not on good terms;they can be around each other minimally at functions for my daughter (their granddaughter) and it's more civil than it's ever been in that they will at least say hello to each other, etc.

But my dad celebrated his 60th two years ago, and my mom celebrated her 60th last year. We had a surprise party for my dad and he would have died if I had invited my mom! HAHA. I am picturing the expression on his face to walk in and see my mom at HIS bday party.

NEVER.

I get that some people are on much more amicable terms but STILL. An EX at a birthday party? Curious.

...a very casual barbecue for which I paid half per SD's direct request... Maybe BM was invited because she paid the other half! I still say it would be more suitable that BM should chip in towards an adult child's expenses than for a SM to do it, and certainly if BM was apparently close enough (in daughter's mind) to be invited to his party she should have.

The part to me that is even weirder than her being invited is her showing up. When I got married an ex-boyfriend of mine was invited (we hadn't dated for fifteen years but remained friends) and his current girlfriend called me just to confirm that it really was OK for her to attend too; she said she knew that he and I were still casually friendly but she and I didn't know each other that well and she didn't want to "impose". I told her that I really hoped that she would come too and thanked her for her thoughtfulness in even worrying about it.

"I get that some people are on much more amicable terms but STILL. An E at a birthday party? Curious."

I am on amicable terms but would not invite my ex to MY birthday party. What for? One thing is to attend parties honoring our daughter, completely different story to attend each other parties. My ex would feel just fine, that's how he is, but what would other people think? How would his wife feel if i show up at his party or invite him to mine? I would worry about making people feel uncomfortable.

I don't understand SD. My DD would never do it to us, this is just not appropriate. On the other hand my ex is crazy and could do something of the sort, but I would not attend. I would honestly tell him that I am uncomfortable.

I don't understand why BM attended? I actually changed my mind about SD. Why did she invite her mother? To make it uncomfortable for everyone else especially lamom?

@gerina, lh, mattie and FD,

First, the bday party was fine. No fireworks, no confrontations, like I posted above, I treated BM like an invisible woman. It was held at SD's home so she invited whom she wanted. Yeah she paid for 1/2 of the party but so did I! Not my place at all.

I'm sure SD invited her because she is trying have us "all just get along." Why BM keeps showing up is a mystery to me other than these functions are being held at her daughter's home, which is not a good enough reason.

I basically told DH afterwards that I will not go to any more functions where BM is present unless they are major like a wedding or a funeral. They don't understand boundaries and why BM keeps her hand in is the weirdest thing to me. DH clearly doesn't want to rock his adult kids boat. Why they want to keep her in OUR mix is beyond my understanding.

Father's Day was a whole different situation not surpisingly. I did not call his adult kids or even text them about it. DS7 had a gift he made at school, I gave him a gift and DH even got a joke gift from our dog. No gifts or cards from the adult kids. Just a text from SD and a call from SS. DH later called SD. I'm not family soooo...I left my two cents out. DH was happy with the gifts from DS7, me and the dog, we went to a nice lunch and kept it moving.

no card? no gift? and a text? didn't even stop by? how rude! how far away do they live?

I am glad you told DH about BM. it does not matter whose house, you don't invite divorced spouse to your dad's birthday. to your own birthday, OK, maybe, but not his. It was rude of SD to do that. and it was rude of BM to attend. just unacceptable.

If they still hold resentments, they better get it in a open with him and move on. they come across passive-aggressive. Honestly for me BM attending YOUR husband's birthday party would be the last straw.

lamom, I said Maybe BM was invited because she paid the other half! I was kidding, I meant maybe you paid for half the party and BM paid for the other half.

The SKs sound like teenagers in the bodies of 30 - some year olds.