Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
And why? Because it's not HER kid. And although she stayed with him while he was doing an irresponsible thing (dumping his daughter on the nanny), it's his family, not hers and it's therefore not her job to castigate the BF for not taking care of his daughter. She could have drawn a few conclusions about his lack of responsibility and let those conclusions inform her judgment of him as a person, sure. But she was either in denial, or--god forbid!--content with their relationship sans a sixteen-year-old slob. People have done worse things, you know. And the fact that LW has a vagina does NOT require her to have a maternal bent, and definitely not to enjoy having this person dumped on her life, or folding this person's panties, or finding and washing a towel covered in two days' worth of this person's menstrual blood (ick, ick, ick).
What I'm getting from this is a little more perverse: LW moves in, and suddenly Dad lets the nanny go, because here's someone else he can dump his kid on--fo' FREE! When LW got involved with her boyfriend, the girl didn't live with them and it doesn't seem LW had any idea that life would deviate from this arrangement. Accepting her boyfriend's former arrangement for his kid (HIS kid! Not her kid!) is fine, because it's his family and she has no business telling him how to run it. Then she moves in, and so does the daughter. And suddenly LW is the one folding the panties and being expected to teach her how to boil water and to remind her to take a shower and to use pads instead of towels. LW, I think your boyfriend is playing you, using you as a stand-in for the parent he doesn't want to be. Please don't fall for that shit, 'kay?
I challenge any of you who criticized the LW to live with someone you love and THEN have a messy kid with questionable hygiene issues move in and THEN roll with it and not resent said kid in the slightest. Where in the letter does it say that LW isn't trying? What did you read that indicates that LW tells the girl exactly the same thing that she told Cary? My impression is that she feels some resentment and is unhappy with her life right now, but keeps it in check around the girl because believe it or not, we allow different sides of ourselves to surface around friends and advice columnists than the facets we allow around children we care for. In fact, it sounds like LW is taking on more work than is fair already (teaching a daughter basic life skills is Dad's job, not LW's). Since when are all children wonderful to live with and enjoyable, sparkling little balls of sunshine and joy? Since when are we supposed to be thrilled about folding the panties of a child not related to us? And why the fuck is LW doing the poor girl's laundry, and not her father?
Please note that I have nothing against the daughter; her life must be hell, and I feel for her. But she's not the only person in this situation, and her situation, lamentable and tragic as it is, is only one side of the coin. Condemning someone for not wanting to take on this girl is ridiculous--her situation is so very sad, but that doesn't mean she's easy to get along with, much less parent.
So, LW, Cary was right, and certain more caustic readers of Salon are wrong: you should get out. Not for the kid's sake--with parents like that, she's utterly fucked no matter what--but for your own. She's not family right now, and she therefore is not your responsibility, but if you marry this assclown she will be, and since you very understandably have no interest in being this girl's "teacher and caretaker," do what's best FOR YOU and get out while you can. Ignore the people who say that you should stay for the child's benefit--you are here to live your life, not hers, and she is your boyfriend's kid, not yours. If certain other letter writers were right and there were any sort of moral obligation to give up our lives and our happiness for the sake of kids with shit luck, we'd all have five foster children and be miserable, resentful, and bitter. (Do you hear that, other letter writers? I'll take you blowhards seriously when I see some foster kids.) By not breeding thus far, you've earned yourself the right not to have to get caught up in this crap; dating a guy with a kid, especially when he had such a distant relationship with his daughter for the majority of your time together, does NOT make you a stepmother, or in any way responsible for HIS child. Don't waste time and emotion feeling bad that his daughter is a burden to you; accept it and move on. A lack of desire to raise another's child is not a crime, especially given the mess her mother, nanny, and father have made her. It's not her fault, but it's also not yours.
And if you walk away--when you walk away--take a break, perhaps a permanent one, from guys with kids. Enjoy the lack of laundry-folding and the clean towels and the roommates who don't have to be reminded to make haircut appointments and use tampons and take showers. And, please, if you ever have kids, wait until you ARE willing to be a "teacher and caretaker," and until you meet a guy whose parenting plan is more substantial, loving, responsible and involved than nannies and co-parents in foreign countries.
Regardless of what the LW does in her relationship, the teen described in her letter is in need of an evaluation by a qualified child psychologist. As a professional, my reading of the LW's description of this teen suggested possible evaluation for a diagnosis of depression, dysthymia, Asperger's syndrome, and/or developmental delays. The evaluation is warranted given the problems described, particularly in the context of a maternal family history for mental illness. Please do this so this teen has a chance to do her best in life, rather than go through adolescence and beyond without the special support she may legitimately need.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
