Hon - you are not getting it, we all went into the relationships caring allot about the children, we bend front over back wards for these children and we got nothing in return, no respect, we where told we are bitches, whores... we get called names, our husbands does not support us, they drop their children off with us and enjoy life without worries, the spend way to much on their children and can't support us financially or emotionally...

After a couple off years of being the salve/doormat/maid - we disengage....

We have posters here, with good skids, and we never tell them disengage... we get hope that maybe our skid will change, we know there's some good children out there..... just not in our homes...

Tell me this, if you where with a man for 14 years and he never parented his child, he wants you to buy the child things and drive the child around, but you are not allowed to tell the child NO, or please pick up your toys....then why should you not disengage, he leaves the parenting to you, you are not a bio parent to this child and therefor you are not allowed to teach or discipline the child, then this child starts drinking and having sex at the tender age of 13... you are not allowed to say anything, this child starts swearing at all adults using file words, you are not allowed to say anything.. this child assaults you physical and you are told it's your fault.... why should you then go out of your way to please and care for this child?

Don;t judge people who disengage if you do not know why...

What Acrat says is true- we SPs really do fall over backwards and further to accommodate our skids. People in this situation do plan to work together, and the hope is that everyone, including the children will adapt.I would say every time. This adaptation is far more complex than you give credit for, however, especially if you have a BM who is incapable of adapting, and a Disney dad who refuses to stand up to her and when things go wrong it is SM who gets the blame.
Disengaging is the end process of failure; the failure of the birth parents to adapt to new partners/spouses being on scene. Step parents are doing just that, stepping in to a situation that has already been created, often in a very insecure and troubled way, and they are expected to undo that?
Disengagement is often done for the benefit, not the detriment of the child or family. Without it steps would walk away and further insecurity would ensue.
Some SMs only disengage after years of martyrdom or mistreatment, suddenly realising that all their effort counted for nothing- they lose their self worth, their energy and often their partners.
It took me seven years to disengage, and I did it only because there was nothing else for me to do. My skids were adults, I never believed three adults could cause me so much heartache- but in the end it was DH's parenting skills and his lack of ability to accept that his kids were grown-ups that did it for me. I was labelled 'evil'long before I disengaged, even though I did all the things you outlined above for his grandkids.
I thought my DH and I were perfect for each other, I still believe that- but he doesn't, because I dared to hold up a mirror to his messed up family,and he couldn't bear to see the truth. Now the mirror has gone, and he's looking at them head on without me at his side. That is very sad.

In short... to avoid jail for murdering some one, we disengage after years

I not only disengaged , I divorced. I was being used plain and simple. And treated like crap. My kids were expected to be second place to his brats and I was expected to take care of them while the bio parents did nothing. No thanks. I won't live being tormented by assholes. Some folks choose to stay so they do what they can to survive. Don't judge.

Bravo to you ladies that explained disengagement was necessary. I was used and treated as if I do not matter. I tried very hard and to no avail they still treated me with disrespect.

I now realize after being in this forum for a few weeks that DH is to blame for lack of parenting. For my sanity and marriage disengaging was the best thing.

Sometimes disengagement is what's best for the child, too. When DH and I first got married, he travelled out of the country for 6 months. I stayed in town and tried to blend the family by having the skids over to my place and showering them with gifts, meals and fun trips. SS soaked it all up and played friendly to keep the gravy train rolling. SD was more in a loyalty bind and, even though her mother pushed her to spend time at my house, would go into panic meltdown mode. She would put her hoodie on backwards and cover her face with it, sit in a corner and try not to cry. I offered her a couple of expensive and popular dolls that she liked and always talked about. Her response? "No, thank you." SSmentioned it was because BM told her not to take anything from me. So, even if I was buying her basic things like school clothes and hair ties, she acted like I was a stranger offering her candy. "Gosh that's nice but no, my mom would be upset." I disengaged because of the sheer panic that would ensue when she finally accepted something. It was kinder.

I posted this on another forum recently, but it certainly applies here as well:

The role as a SM does not include pandering to the family or being their servant. You should be acting like your DH's wife and your husband should be dealing with BM pretty much most of the time. Think of it this way--anything you do for BM and DH regarding their children is a gift. Doesn't matter what it is. Driving SK to appts., a gift. Putting dinner on the table for SK, a gift. If someone else had to do this, not only would it be appreciated, but they'd probably be getting paid as well. Throw the term SM in the picture, though, and for some reason logic goes out the window. Sometimes gifts by SMs are appreciated, and sometimes they are not. Sometimes you are punished for your gift-giving. Now, if you kept giving someone a gift, and they kept spitting in your face, so to speak, would you continue to give that person a gift? Stop.

Sorry, but I just hate this to no avail.!! Gone thru it myself. SM does everything she can to smooth things over for the family, and in turn she gets treated like a concubine. Manipulative, controlling BM and weak, enabling DH = step hell. And, who is left holding the bag--SM. Idiots divorce and SPs and SKs suffer. BM needs to move on and DH needs to grow a pair.

Disengagement isn't abandoning the child. Disengagement is an attempt to put the responsibilities where they should naturally lie--on the parents. By the way: You cannot even begin to compare being a foster parent or adopted parent to being a SM. It is COMPLETELY different. I see where you are coming from, to a degree, "Don't feed them, don't bathe them, don't dress them" does sound severe for a young one, but most SMs don't go to that level of disengagement. Disengagement isn't an either/or thing. It involves levels, and not everyone needs or wants to go to a level 10.

I think there's a big difference between making sure a child is safe and has what they need and bending over backwards to make sure a child is catered to and happy all the time.

One of my biggest challenges as a SM is that I'm expected to allow my SSs to behave in ways that I would never allow from my own children (e.g. being rude when someone gives you a gift, leaving a huge mess wherever you go, not handing in their homework, blaming others or acting as if everyone is picking on you if things don't go your way) and I'm also expected to provide things for my SSs that I would not provide for my own children (e.g. their own car, fancy vacations, expensive hobbies). The only way to maintain my sanity in this situation is to remind myself that they are not my children and I am not responsible for their behavior or how they present themselves to the world.

Also, I have some very well-educated, well-adjusted, compassionate friends - friends who tell me that I'm a great SM and my Skids are lucky to have me in their lives - who as adults can admit that their stepmothers were actually nice people, but they don't really has much regard for them - they don't actively dislike these women, they just think nothing of them. It can be difficult, knowing what likely lies in store for me as a stepmother, to really put that much effort into the relationship. If you knew that after years of effort to serve, support, and build a relationship with someone that they were likely to be indifferent to you, at best and outright hostile to you, at worst, how would that impact your relationship with that person?

If a man was that perfect in his parenting and communication he probably wouldn't be divorced in the first place.

"if both adults are on the same page, it can have a very positive effect."

IF. Key word is IF.

Read our blogs and you'll see that none of us have that all important IF. No one is on the same page.

We are dealing with our DH's who are Disney Dads and wouldn't tell his own child no or parent them or discipline them if his life depending on it.

We have the BM's of the child/ren who is either not involved at all or doesn't parent the same as our DH's or is trying to poison the child/ren against the SM.

You have our DH's that want us to do all the work for his children while we have no authority so we just become working, disrespected doormats in our own homes.

IF works if there is a Mike and Carol Brady and the bunch situation...fabulous. You're speaking about the Brady Bunch situation or, at least, somewhere in the close neighbourhood.

However, our situations here on StepTalk are so far from the Brady Bunch, they're not even on the same planet.

Nearly every single one of us thought and acted like Carol when we first married our DH's. Reality was far different so we had to adjust. Read our blogs.

Yea, no, I tried that and it blew up in my face with both DH and BM. Now they get pissy because I disengaged and refuse to change my schedule and plans up for their convenience. Oh well, should of appreciated it when I actually gave a damn. I'm not a "third" parent, as some of the pinterest sancitmommies like to refer to step parents as.

Are you comparing being a school bus driver for disabled children (6mos-4yrs) to being a SP? Personally, I have never heard of any SP disengaging fully from a child that young. And, this was not clarified in your original post. Regardless, people did answer your question even at that.

--People in this situation do plan to work together, and the hope is that everyone, including the children will adapt. This adaptation is far more complex than you give credit for, and, especially if you have a BM who is incapable of adapting, and a Disney dad who refuses to stand up to her. When things go wrong it is SM who gets the blame.
--After a couple of years of being the slave/doormat/maid - we may disengage. And, just like the role of a bus driver does not include pandering to the family or being their servant, neither does the role of a SM.
--Disengaging is the end process of failure; the failure of the birth parents to adapt to new partners/spouses being on scene. Step parents are doing just that, stepping in to a situation that has already been created, often in a very insecure and troubled way, and they are expected to undo that?
--Some SMs only disengage after years of martyrdom or mistreatment, suddenly realizing that all their effort counted for nothing- they lose their self worth, their energy and often their partners.
--Sometimes disengagement is what's best for the child, too.
--Disengagement isn't abandoning the child. Disengagement is an attempt to put the responsibilities where they should naturally lie--on the parents.
--I see where you are coming from, to a degree, "Don't feed them, don't bathe them, don't dress them" does sound severe for a young one, but most SMs don't go to that level of disengagement. Disengagement isn't an either/or thing. It involves levels, and not everyone needs or wants to go to a level 10.
--A lot of SM's have kids that are so PASed by their other parent that it's impossible to forge any positive bond. And, yes, this can occur even with children under age 5.
--There are also situations where the SM is the root of the issue, but this should never be the assumption without knowing the facts.
--I don't think there is a whole lot of disengagement in those under 5 situations unless there is extreme behavioral issues.. or the situation where the dad thinks that his new wife should just assume all parenting duties. SMs, have a lot of responsibility, but they are expected to have no authority, even in their own homes many a time.

In other words, easier said than done.

Maybe the BM does not want or expect an SM to be doing this stuff for her child? Maybe she expects the father to be doing It? He should be. After almost ten years of step parenting I wish I had been more 'hands off' from the beginning.

Even as a stepgrandma I see how the unconditional love from a child is molded then directed by his parents. sgs4 is a darling boy and comes over shouting, "grandpa!" he'll then come see me and call me by my first name sometimes and grandma other times. Then there are the times he calls me "Grandma BM" and his father laughs thus encouraging the behavior. The kid is already confused about my role in his life even though I was married to grandpa before he was born. I love the kid and treat him well when he's over but in my heart I don't get too attached. I know I'm not really grandma and there are already sublte digs and messages sent through him that I'm an outsider.

I think it would be hard as a full time SM of a young child to deal with these same subtle (or not so subtle) passive aggressive dynamics encouraged by the parents. Luckily ss's were grown men when I came into their lives so I didn't have to deal w/the BM dynamic and their physical needs 24/7.

From the book Stepmonster it pretty much said that in order for SM's to have a good relationship w/skids the stars have to align just right.

Though I understand why you have the perspective you do have I think that there is a significant risk in that perspective if it is taken past the point where a child should understand the basics of right from wrong.

I do agree that infants and young single digit aged children should be cared for and the responsibility for that care falls on the adults in the picture. However, I struggle with the word "deserve". Once a child is of an age to understand the basics of right from wrong they no longer "deserve" they "earn" with appropriate behavior, efforts, and decisions. If the adults in the situation are toxic and a child does not see those toxic adults being crushed with accountability and consequences for their own inappropriate decisions the child will think that behavior doesn't matter and far more often than not will duplicate those inappropriate decisioning methods modeled by toxic adults.

Kids need to be held accountable in an age appropriate manner just as adults should be held accountable appropriately.

Once a child is at the age where they should understand right from wrong they "deserve" decreasingly less of anything that they don't earn with appropriate behavior.

IMHO of course.

I would have never married a man with minor children. Call me a selfish bitch if you want. I prefer to think of myself as someone who knew what I could not deal with.

Much better to not deal with minor children than to deal with them badly. Grandchildren are another issue. I am so sorry that my DH's grandson has sh*tty parents but it is not my responsibility nor is it really possible for me to step in and save the day.

I would get involved with any child in danger if i could help. But all too often most people cannot fix crappy situations with children that are not ours

I am in the same boat. My husband's daughter is married to a menace to society (who's not the father of her children). She lost permanent guardianship of her youngest to his father. The father of her 13 year old twins is not allowed to talk to his kids so the twins are with us. These kids have had no discipline or structure in their lives. My husband doesn't belive they need to work priviledges. I just caught his granddaughter talking to a snaggle toothed woman asking where we lived and wanting $1500 from her. Granddaughter was talking to her son on a cell phone that was taken away.
The whole story is one big tawdry tale of jail house smarts and criminal court stupidity!

i can see the op does not have a clue about what some of us have been forced to endure.

a child is a child and deserves to be shown he is valued.

BUT if he is pouty, spoiled, selfish and tries to cause a divorce with the step parent he should be given boundaries like every one else. in some cases husbands dont have a clue on how to parent, are led around by the nose by the x wife, or are too cowardly to step in and take the role of parent.

consider it a form of life lesson for a child that you need to be nice and cooperate with some people.

think of it this way. the skid will some day grow up and have to deal with situations he does not like such as grumpy boss.

allowing a child be a brat is another form of child abuse. allowing a husband to abdicate his duties as a parent is abusive to his wife.

and sometimes you cant meet every ones needs.

young children enter a marriage but they can grow to be bratty teens and toxic adults.

you are aware that each situation is different and yet you disapprove of some very important tools we have in our favour.

Oh, Good Grief, OP. I just read the below. You truly are one who likes to throw another piece of coal on the fire. I don't know if what you say below is true or not, but really. . . .

You admit that you knew you'd be poking the bear when you wrote what you wrote, and then every time someone attempts to answer your questions calmly and rationally, the REAL issue or question is changed, and then you try to compare being a bus driver for a couple of years (or months?) to being a SP, which is even further off the mark than foster parenting, and then now you are coming up with something again completely new and never mentioned. Are we all supposed to feel like shiatsu now or what?

If it is true, I certainly feel for you and the child, mother and the father. But, what the H- does that have to do with being a SP? Nada. I'm too old and too experienced to fall for analogies and guilt trips being thrown my way, ones that are completely off-base.

I think 'maternal drive,' can be interpreted as, 'some women have so little control over what happens in their lives that they use their one sphere of control, ie the domestic, to wield the only power they have ever had.' My own mother (whom I miss acutely) was like this, but she grew up in a different time and culture. This can often be the problem for both BMs and SMs too. I feel this is the reason my OSD doesn't want to go out to work, she would have no control there. And yes, there must be very many happy couples with well functioning step-families, indeed until very recently I didn't know that I needed this site either. I thought we had the perfect relationship...!