BM and I had a chat last night and this morning. She keeps insisting that if BF really wanted what was best for SS that he'd drop the whole custody thing because it's "not what SS wants" and is "pushing SS away". She never has understood that just because she says SS feels a certain way doesn't make it true and doesn't make us believe her, especially when we're told straight from the horse's mouth that what she says isn't how he really feels. I wish we could record the conversations that we have with SS where he tells us how much he can't stand his Mom, and when he talks about how much she hurts his feelings and tries to make him feel guilty about enjoying his time with us. I'd like her to see videos of when he cries because he has to go home and holds onto his dad for dear life before they leave to make the trip to her house. I'd like to see what she thought about that. I asked her if she honestly believed that everything SS told her was the truth and everything SS told us was a lie, because that's what she's asking us to believe. Why is it OK for her to believe SS when he tells her how he supposedly feels but BF is expected to not believe SS? He's his son. Who wouldn't believe their own son? Then she told me that he should just drop the petition because it's "based on allegations that are totally untrue." I said that the only allegation BF has made is that she's unemployed. If that wasn't true and she had a job, there would be no petition. She said that she has a weekly income so in the eyes of the law she has a job. I said that if she had a job then I would think she would provide proof of that to BF's lawyer since she wants this dropped so badly. She said that in the eyes of the law, getting paid unemployment is the same as being employed because you still have a steady income so therefore it is seen as the same thing. I said it was oxymoronic to consider yourself employed as unemployed, and that there was a difference between working for your money and sitting at home getting paid to not work.

Then because she realized she was getting nowhere with me on that point, she started in on how "BF never took interest in SS from the beginning" and if he really cared about SS then he would just walk away completely. She actually said that sometimes doing the right thing meant walking away. What? What kind of a father would that make him if he was to give up his rights to SS? BF took a very big interest in SS from the beginning but unfortunately because BM decided to take a year off from work after he was born, BF had to work 60+ hours a week to make ends meet. Then when BF got home BM wouldn't let him feed, change, or even spend time alone with SS. But yet she claims he never took interest and uses that as an excuse to call him a bad father and say he should "just walk away" now.

Then, this is the kicker. She says that if he was to give up his rights to SS that he would be able to focus on me and my child, and that my child would be entitled to everything from BF and it would make things easier on us. WTF? Why would I ever, ever want the man that I love to give up his child? I can't believe she even thought that that would sound appealing to me. She actually asked if I would ask him to do it! I'm sorry but I don't just run away when things get tough and I'm not just in this for an easy ride and some extra spending money. I go to work every day and bust my ass to bring home my livelihood, and I'm proud to have made it to where I am on my own. I am 23 and own two homes (on my own, BF doesn't own any part of them), I'm department head at work in a salaried position with commission and benefits, I have a wonderful boyfriend of four years and a baby on the way. How would BF giving up his rights to SS help me out at all? And what kind of person would that make me if I asked? "Honey, I'd really like it if you would give up your rights to your son so that you can better focus on raising our daughter." Uh, no. Sorry BM, I'm not selfish like you!