Dr. Phil is fond of telling the biological parents that they need to grow up, take responsibility, and work together for the sake of the children. I submit that it does not take a PhD to suggest that approach. Similarly, Dr. Joy Browne likes to tell stepmothers that their role in a stepchild’s life is to be a good hostess when they are in their home. Again, sounds practical, but lacks any real understanding of the reality of stepliving.
When a couple divorces, they admit that they can not get along, they can not come to resolution of major issues, they no longer like or love one another. They might be in enough denial to not say these things out loud, but the message remains the same albeit subconscious.
The ”experts’” recommendations are therefore founded on faulty thinking. If these two previously married parents could get along, reach agreements, and put their children’s needs above their own….they would still be married.
A natural consequence of a divorce is that one or both of the original parties will get remarried. This person will become not only the spouse to the parent, but also the “step-parent” to the minor child. If this happens when children are adults, this is a different dynamic entirely. But when it happens when a child is still a minor, then the ”new” spouse has a role.
The million dollar question is “what role?.” I subject to you that the role varies greatly based on circumstances and can not and should not be dicated in the cookie cutter way to which the popular culture and its icons seems to want to default.
I focus my attention, here, on stepmothers. I don’t wish to disregard the contribution that a stepfather has, rather I chose to discuss that which I know most about.
I know stepmother who have entered a marriage as a custodial stepmother and as such have signed up for nearly 24/7 parenting responsibilities. They become a surrogate mother to children whose mothers are not up to the task. These women deserve the respect and admiration they have earned by taking on such a role. We freely give this respect to adoptive or fostering parents; why not to stepparents?
I know stepmothers who have entered into marriage as a “50/50″ stepmother and as such have signed up for half-time responsibility for stepchildren which almost always includes a ridiculous amount of organizing, negotiating, scheduling, and assisting with the ins and outs of children moving between two homes. This is no small task and requires perpetual adjustments in the dynamics of the home, yet again…stepmothers are expected to cooperate, never complain, and take it on as they “knew what they were getting into.” That is a lot like saying that we all knew what we were getting into by going to college, getting married, or moving to another state. It’s simply not possible to know “what one is getting into” until one gets into it. Complaining is reserved for the bioparents, apparently, and stepparents should just put up and shut up with the challenges of child rearing.
There is the additional population of fathers and stepmothers who have “visitation” or defined “parenting time” with the children. It is this stereotype of stepmothers that tend to dominate popular culture’s idea of a stepmother. It is this group who Dr. Joy Browne tells to be the hostess with the mostess. Heaven forbid she actually experience what it is like to have a child whom both you and your husband love to come and go like a visitor. Is she possibly suggesting that over the long term, a stepmother is to be as aloof and distant as Martha Stewart putting on a party?
These non-custodial parents see and experience so many things regarding these children that they can not help, if they are caring people, but to love and want to support and guide the stepchildren. They often cook, clean, shop, manage, and assist the father in caring for the child(ren). Yet they are expected to be a mere hostess?
Look, house guests come but once a year for a pre-defined period of time. They are adults. When it comes to stepchildren, they are not guests but family members. They come at a great frequency. They often have their own rooms, their own toys, their own clothes, their own domain in the non-custodial home. House guests are old enough to behave as guests (ususally). Stepchildren require guidance, teaching, supervision.
Stepmothers are a part of providing all of the above needs for the stepchild. To treat her as or to suggest that she behave as anything less than a co-parent to the father is insulting.
We praise our adoptive and foster parents in this country, yet we demean and limit our stepparents. The only thing I can attribute that to is our tendency to place mothers on a pedestal, even when they have not earned the position. We need to seriously re-think how we consider a stepmother, her role, and the appreciation that she deserves.
Remember also, that the "significance" of the SM is often a negative significance. She doesn't always contribute positively to the stepchild's life.
and usually when she contributes negatively, it's because she has been trying to fit into an inappropriate role. So we do SMs a disservice in general, when we try to tell them that one role or another is the right role for them, rather then just letting them settle into the role that their situation supports.
Your BM does have visitation, right?
The word "parent" doesn't apply to steps and bios equally. Bioparents start out as parents. Stepparents never start out as parents. They *become* parents (sometimes) over time as the relationship with their stepchildren develops. That's not the case with bioparents.
For some reason you still want to equate "parent" with "impact." why is that?
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
BM in my sitch doesn't play the role of a parent. Does that mean she's not a parent? SF plays even less of a role than BM! The skids still see him as a parent, respect him that way, vie for his approval and time etc. He is a parent. His level of authority or role that he plays, that of a friend does not make his impact any less then the other 3 parents in the skids lives.
Quoting whatIknownow:
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
No matter how big or how little of a role the SM takes in her skids lives she is still going to have a major impact on those skids(adult skids not included). SMs role is significant even if she is disengaged. Even if a SM steps back and let's BD do everything she is still a significant part of the family. Her role will still have a significant impact on the skids. I don't understand why anyone would down play the role of any SP. Pretending SM is irrelevant, insignificant, or invisible is damaging to the skids! Refering to SM as nothing more than a hostess, maid, nanny, aunt etc. Does not down play SMs impact on the skids. It just sets the stage for that impact to be negative. Or how about the "just dads wife" role.... Not only does this down play SMs it also insinuates that dad is insignificant to the skids! It's just as harmful to the skids as calling mom the 'egg donor' and just as ignorant and untrue.I agree with this, BUT saying she isn't a parent (in a certain situation where she does not, in fact, play a parental role) is not saying she's insignificant. It's not downplaying her role at all.
Why do you have to add the words "nothing more than" to "hostess, maid, nanny, aunt?"
(although I have never heard ANYone suggest that a SM should have a maid-like role, but we often say she should [when appropriate] have a nanny-like role or aunt-like role).
These roles are not insignificant.
Sometimes the SM really is "just dad's wife." What about a SM who joins the family when the kids are grown already? Wouldn't "just dad's wife" apply to her? And is that so bad? As "dad's wife" she can have a wonderful adult relationship with his kids.
I think the problem is, people refuse to recognize that there are many, many roles a SM can play that are not parental, but still significant. You don't have to be parental to be significant.
-dad is also insignificant
-SM is not responsible for her impact on the skids
-SM has no impact on the skids
-SM does not need to be respected by the skids
-SM does not need to respect the skids
If there are children living in your home (even if it's just EOWE) you have a responsibility to them. If you don't want that responsibility, don't marry a man with kids. If nothing else SMs have the responsibility to do no harm and be a good role model. I think being "just dads wife" is atleast half the problem with how society views SMs.
Quoting leegirl_jm:I think you need to recognize that a SM's role is very circumstantial. What's wrong with being Dad's wife? For some people, Dad's wife is enough and very significant to the couple and the marriage.
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
No matter how big or how little of a role the SM takes in her skids lives she is still going to have a major impact on those skids(adult skids not included). SMs role is significant even if she is disengaged. Even if a SM steps back and let's BD do everything she is still a significant part of the family. Her role will still have a significant impact on the skids. I don't understand why anyone would down play the role of any SP. Pretending SM is irrelevant, insignificant, or invisible is damaging to the skids! Refering to SM as nothing more than a hostess, maid, nanny, aunt etc. Does not down play SMs impact on the skids. It just sets the stage for that impact to be negative. Or how about the "just dads wife" role.... Not only does this down play SMs it also insinuates that dad is insignificant to the skids! It's just as harmful to the skids as calling mom the 'egg donor' and just as ignorant and untrue.
I disagree, my experience is with two very strong parents, they alone parent their child, because they both do parent they alone claim all responsibility and wouldn't allow their child to disrespect their spouse. Some parents are weaker than others and do need the help of stepparents and as I said if your circumstances require you to step up and be more involved and you want to then you adjust accordingly.
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
My problem with "dads wife" is it insinuates
-dad is also insignificant
-SM is not responsible for her impact on the skids
-SM has no impact on the skids
-SM does not need to be respected by the skids
-SM does not need to respect the skids
If there are children living in your home (even if it's just EOWE) you have a responsibility to them. If you don't want that responsibility, don't marry a man with kids. If nothing else SMs have the responsibility to do no harm and be a good role model. I think being "just dads wife" is atleast half the problem with how society views SMs.
Quoting leegirl_jm:I think you need to recognize that a SM's role is very circumstantial. What's wrong with being Dad's wife? For some people, Dad's wife is enough and very significant to the couple and the marriage.
I don't get that at all.
If my mom died and my father remarried, his new wife would be Dad's wife to me. Eventually I would get to know her and she would be something more. But not right away.
I am very close to my father. How would me calling his wife "Dad's wife" affect my relationship with my Dad? My relationship with my dad would not become less signficant.
Why do you think Dad remarrying would affect his relationship with his children? If it did, that would be one of the "negative significances" I mentioned earlier. Hopefully, Dad remarrying would not change his relationship with his children.
The rest of it you listed - SD does not need to be respected, etc - I don't get where that comes from at all. All that from SM being "Dad's wife?" That's quite a leap. I don't see the connection at all.
I also don't agree that a SM has any responsibility to her husband's children EXCEPT to not interfer with their relationship. That's her one and only responsibility. And when they can't do that, they are having a negative significance.
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
My problem with "dads wife" is it insinuates
-dad is also insignificant
-SM is not responsible for her impact on the skids
-SM has no impact on the skids
-SM does not need to be respected by the skids
-SM does not need to respect the skids
If there are children living in your home (even if it's just EOWE) you have a responsibility to them. If you don't want that responsibility, don't marry a man with kids. If nothing else SMs have the responsibility to do no harm and be a good role model. I think being "just dads wife" is atleast half the problem with how society views SMs.
Let's back the bus up.
I think we can all agree that:
-dad is significant to his kids
-SM is responsible for her impact on the skids
-SM has an impact on the skids
-SM does need to be respected by the skids
-SM does need to respect the skids
Those points are not controversial.
Then we are just left with the argument of: Does calling the SM "Dad's wife" impact that list at all.
I say no.
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
My problem with "dads wife" is it insinuates
-dad is also insignificant
-SM is not responsible for her impact on the skids
-SM has no impact on the skids
-SM does not need to be respected by the skids
-SM does not need to respect the skids
If there are children living in your home (even if it's just EOWE) you have a responsibility to them. If you don't want that responsibility, don't marry a man with kids. If nothing else SMs have the responsibility to do no harm and be a good role model. I think being "just dads wife" is atleast half the problem with how society views SMs.
Main Entry: par·ent
Pronunciation: \ˈpar-ənt, ˈper-\
Function: noun
1 : one that begets or brings forth offspring
2 : the material or source from which something is derived
—parent adjective
—pa·ren·tal \pə-ˈrent-əl\ adjective
Clearly that definition is lacking. It doesn't cover adoption, fostering, guardianship or steps/ blended families. So then how do we define 'parent'' in today's society what with IVF, sperm banks, egg donners, surrogate mothers, etc. Clearly biology no longer equals parent. One thing is clear in anyones definition and that is a child. Being a parent requires a relationship with a child. Clearly not just anyone in a relationship with a child is a parent though... So it is a specific role or part one has to or perhaps for a child? One can 'give away' this role but it requires a judge to take it. A dead parent is still a parent even if other parents are assigned. We could say that a parent must be assigned by birth or law, but even this is not true... Since an adult can find a child on the street and with the right bond or effort become a 'parent'' to that child. Biology does not define it. Law does not define it. The effort does not define it(or I'm sure we all know atleast a few that wouldn't be called 'parents'').... There is only one common factor that clearly defines all "parents"... The role or part one plays in the Childs life. That is why impact=parent
In the end only the child can decide who is a parent and who isn't and it is not a conscious choice either. It is a decision made by the heart. That is why it defies all attempts to define it, just like love.
You say the word doesn't apply to steps and bios equally, but how does anyone compare one love to another love? There is no way, no scale in which to do so?! My BM is dead. My AM raised me since 4yo. They are both my parent. They cannot be compared. They are different. One love doesn't effect the other. They have no bearing on each other. That is how it is for my skids as well. Bioparents don't start out as parents. They 'become' parents to!
Quoting whatIknownow:Your BM does have visitation, right?
The word "parent" doesn't apply to steps and bios equally. Bioparents start out as parents. Stepparents never start out as parents. They *become* parents (sometimes) over time as the relationship with their stepchildren develops. That's not the case with bioparents.
For some reason you still want to equate "parent" with "impact." why is that?
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
BM in my sitch doesn't play the role of a parent. Does that mean she's not a parent? SF plays even less of a role than BM! The skids still see him as a parent, respect him that way, vie for his approval and time etc. He is a parent. His level of authority or role that he plays, that of a friend does not make his impact any less then the other 3 parents in the skids lives.
Quoting whatIknownow:
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
No matter how big or how little of a role the SM takes in her skids lives she is still going to have a major impact on those skids(adult skids not included). SMs role is significant even if she is disengaged. Even if a SM steps back and let's BD do everything she is still a significant part of the family. Her role will still have a significant impact on the skids. I don't understand why anyone would down play the role of any SP. Pretending SM is irrelevant, insignificant, or invisible is damaging to the skids! Refering to SM as nothing more than a hostess, maid, nanny, aunt etc. Does not down play SMs impact on the skids. It just sets the stage for that impact to be negative. Or how about the "just dads wife" role.... Not only does this down play SMs it also insinuates that dad is insignificant to the skids! It's just as harmful to the skids as calling mom the 'egg donor' and just as ignorant and untrue.I agree with this, BUT saying she isn't a parent (in a certain situation where she does not, in fact, play a parental role) is not saying she's insignificant. It's not downplaying her role at all.
Why do you have to add the words "nothing more than" to "hostess, maid, nanny, aunt?"
(although I have never heard ANYone suggest that a SM should have a maid-like role, but we often say she should [when appropriate] have a nanny-like role or aunt-like role).
These roles are not insignificant.
Sometimes the SM really is "just dad's wife." What about a SM who joins the family when the kids are grown already? Wouldn't "just dad's wife" apply to her? And is that so bad? As "dad's wife" she can have a wonderful adult relationship with his kids.
I think the problem is, people refuse to recognize that there are many, many roles a SM can play that are not parental, but still significant. You don't have to be parental to be significant.
Quoting whatIknownow:Remember also, that the "significance" of the SM is often a negative significance. She doesn't always contribute positively to the stepchild's life.
and usually when she contributes negatively, it's because she has been trying to fit into an inappropriate role. So we do SMs a disservice in general, when we try to tell them that one role or another is the right role for them, rather then just letting them settle into the role that their situation supports.
Quoting whatIknownow:Let's back the bus up.
I think we can all agree that:
-dad is significant to his kids
-SM is responsible for her impact on the skids
-SM has an impact on the skids
-SM does need to be respected by the skids
-SM does need to respect the skidsThose points are not controversial.
Then we are just left with the argument of: Does calling the SM "Dad's wife" impact that list at all.
I say no.
Quoting Ms.Gwen:
My problem with "dads wife" is it insinuates
-dad is also insignificant
-SM is not responsible for her impact on the skids
-SM has no impact on the skids
-SM does not need to be respected by the skids
-SM does not need to respect the skids
If there are children living in your home (even if it's just EOWE) you have a responsibility to them. If you don't want that responsibility, don't marry a man with kids. If nothing else SMs have the responsibility to do no harm and be a good role model. I think being "just dads wife" is atleast half the problem with how society views SMs.
I'm going to have a shirt made...
- Ms.Gwen
on May. 21, 2012 at 9:00 AM