[ToucanLoucan]

> Translation: “I was impregnated by 3 other guys, and they all left me, and now I finally found a boyfriend but it turns out he doesn’t want to spend his money to feed my kids.”

This just in, when you date a single mother, you will probably end up being involved in her children's lives and supporting them. Didn't think we needed to spell that out but here we are.

[southernplaces7]

You simply dating her and naturally being involved in her childrens' lives doesn't make you responsible for financially supporting and raising them. This is a ridiculous viewpoint and one that implicitly places men who date a woman with children as automatic cash cows out of some grossly twisted notion of patriarchy.

I wouldn't think something so bloody obvious would need to be spelled out but here we are.

[em-bee]

nor does dating make you responsible for financially supporting your partner. but if you do financially support her, then you have to consider that her financial needs include supporting her children. if your goal is to meet her needs then you must cover that, or change the goal and agree to only cover part of her needs.

[southernplaces7]

You're essentially stating the obvious of informal adult relationships: Communicate what each is offering or can offer and see if it works for both for the sake of an agreement. The previous comment I replied to bothered me specifically because it seemed to take the position that by dating a woman, a man is automatically obligated into supporting her children and childcare needs, which is... plainly ridiculous.

[em-bee]

how is that ridiculous? if you intend to enter into a long term stable relationship, then that is effectively starting a new family. and if one partner in that new family already has children, then they are part of it and you are on the way to becoming a step parent. do not date someone with children if that is not what you want.

this is different if it is a casual relationship, then whatever. but then at least be clear from the start that this relationship will not be more than that.

there seems to be a disconnect of expectations here.

how is a relationship supposed to work if the parent has to take care of the children all the time? you'll be lucky if you get to see each other even once a week. and what are the children going to feel if they see their parent with someone who does not care about them at all? they are going to think that this person is just as bad as the other one that left them, or worse they are going to steal the other parent away from them too.

it's not rational, but children who lost one of their parents are not rational. they have experienced trauma and have anxieties. you are going to have to work with that. children need all the love they can get.

it is asking a lot. i grant you that. and it is certainly not for everyone. but it is what the children and that parent need. so it's not ridiculous at all.