Backroads

Well, I'm pretty sure nobody except Omega said not to marry the girl.
 
What you should do is: Accept it. He doesn't owe you anything. Anything you do will exacerbate the situation and make it worse. Do not force your wife to take sides, just take sides with her. If you have made your feelings about her father clear in the past, stop it. It's not worth it. It won't hurt him. It will only hurt her and you.
 
You have asked for money, he's said 'No'. Now, the ball's in your court. You can either:
A) Start a big family row that will taint what is supposed to be the happiest day  of your lives. You still won't get the money, but at least your Father-in-Law will have made everybody miserable. So that's something.
B) Accept it and move on, showing love and support for your wife.
 
It's up to you.

Why would they act like that?  Are they just plain evil?
 
Or could they be deliberately shutting you out because they got very attached to your husband's ex, were sorry to lose her, and consider that there's no point in getting to know and love you since there's a good chance your husband won't be able to hold on to you and your kids any better than he was able to hold onto his ex?
 
The armchair pop-psychologist in me thinks that what your in-laws are doing is a self-defense mechanism, and you've got two ways of dealing with it.  The first is to be as difficult as possible (or just plain cut them out of your lives), so that there's no chance of their getting attached to you (and therefore, disappointed) the way they got attached to the ex.
 
The second way is to grin and bear their slights, love them anyways, and show them day by day that your relationship with your husband is rock-solid and that he won't lose you the way he lost the ex.  Maybe they'll come around eventually, and maybe they won't . . . but I rather suspect your husband will love you all the more for taking this course of action, and would be willing to reciprocate by sticking up for you more vocally.

I think it's coming from the list of what he isn't paying for in the original post. 

Ok, so TFP (and anyone else who wants to chime in - but he's been the most vocal against the proposed solutions) - let's suppose you're a really inefficient and (just for kicks and grins) ineffective bishop when it comes to running a ward council. I take my obligations to sustain you seriously, but your meetings are too long and too unnecessary. What can I do to sustain you?
 
I think letting you continue to waste everyone's time is not really sustaining you. Should I let yo know ahead of time that I have a hard stop 90 minutes after the meeting and walk out? Should I offer to give you training on setting and keeping agendas? Should I just tough it out and find whatever benefit I can? Should I play minesweeper in my head during the official meeting, and coordinate an informal meeting via email that's actually effective?
 
How do you want me to sustain you?
 
 
And, as a bonus, here's then Brother Monson sustaining others in the ward council (starts at 15:41):
 

When I was on the Ward Council, we had 60-90 minute meetings, twice a month.  They were great.  In fact, I think they were really good.  I was on the WC before the 2010 Handbooks and training came out, and we used to only have WC once a month, and it was mostly calendar/activity discussions, and missionaries.  After the training and new Handbooks (which all focused a LOT on WC and other councils), we switched the twice monthly meetings, and changed up our format.  We still struggled with missionaries droning on and on, but eventually that improved.  We also tabled discussion about every.single.calendar.item, and began discussing ward members instead.  We still talked about activities, but less in terms of planning specifics, and more in terms of: "how can we include primary children in this activity, other than as tagalongs?"  "How can we improve activity attendance of the older widowed population in our ward?"  "Is there a way that we can make this activity a motivator for less-active families to come?"  We discussed needs of families, regardless of auxiliary.  We made assignments and followed up.  We had good working relationships with each other because we spend real time together.  We became a council, instead of an event planning firm.
 
Twice monthly can be a good thing.  But when each meeting is over two hours long, it has probably ceased to be very productive, even if for no other reason than that no one wants to be there anymore, and everyone has mentally moved on to other things.  Perhaps in your ward's case, you need to be aiming for a 60 minute meeting, and hope that it doesn't go longer than 90, rather than planning for 90 when you know you're going to go over.
 
Personally, I see it as Christ would rather go and do something than sit around and talk about doing it.
 
I think what MOE is saying is that he would walk out if he didn't like how long God was saying it.  Not much better, but still...

I think Mormons just LOVE meetings, we LOVE them so much that we use a meeting to PLAN the next meeting. Yeah.

I think it's coming from the list of what he isn't paying for in the original post. 

I feel that DCFS is generally corrupt.

I think it's coming from the list of what he isn't paying for in the original post. 

It is your husband's stewardship/responsibility to defend you and champion you to his family and friends. You and your husband need to have a talk. You need to let him know how you feel. If you have already done this, you need to have another talk, and let him know again what is happening with you and how you feel. He needs to see that his relationship to you is the one that needs to be championed. He needs to let his parents know that you are his wife, and you are here to stay. He needs to let his parents know that he accepts your children, just as you have accepted his children. If his parents refuse to accept you and your children, learn to disengage and let it go. Many second wives go through this. You are not alone.
 
As to what to do now that you have "told them off," you have several options.  You can pretend it never happened, and go on as before. You can apologize, and say something along these lines, "I'm sorry. I love you. You are _____'s parents. My feelings have been hurt because I feel you disregard me and my children. If I didn't care for you so much, it wouldn't hurt. I  love my husband. I will do anything for him and his children. I was hoping we could be a family that cares for one another." Anyway, these are just a few things that might smooth over the situation. Your husband should be saying something along those lines too. He needs to let his parents know that you are number one in his life, that your children and his children are all family.
 
Remarriage is hard. Especially if there are children involved. If you search on the internet "remarriage" you will get all sorts of articles and similar experiences from others who are experiencing what you're going through. There's lots of articles on step-parenting too. If you can get through these first five to seven years in a remarriage, then second marriages actually become less likely than a first marriage to end in divorce. Good luck!  <Hugs>

Elder Ballard has a great book titled.....Counciling with your Councils. He authored the book sometime back and has since come out with a updated version. Excellent book....not a big book and a good read.

I don't think being a people-pleaser is a personality flaw. I often act the same as you. The only time I would see it as a flaw, is if I'm lying and generally not behaving with integrity. For example, if a friend is bashing the church, I'm not going to agree with my friend. I will defend the church.  But, if it's something as benign as what to do for a girl's evening out, I usually don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, and will go along with what she wants to do. I'm just happy to get out of the house and actually doing something.

I eloped.  That meant I paid for everything.  There was no reception or honeymoon.
 
You are not entitled to someone else's assets, money, or anything else - regardless of what "cultural tradition" or anyone else says.  It's the entitlement mentality that's the problem here.  
 
He told you what he's going to do.  You can both either:
a.  accept it,
b. whine and complain about it.
 
I recommend that you take the situation as it is, make the best of it.
 
Life is a series of adjustments.  How you handle them, shows the kind of man you are, and will continue to become.

Uh... good luck finding the perfect child who was raised in a perfect family with no 'scars' whatsoever.
 
If you find one... would YOU be good enough for her?  It goes both ways.

My father was a very harsh man.  From my experience, you need to protect her from her father's anger. Accept your parents generosity and keep the wedding reception simple.  Don't ask her father for anything.  Be open to a relationship with him, but don't try to force it.  After you are married, if there are issues, explain to him that you will not allow your wife to be talked to in a harsh manner. Cut out contact if he remains mean to her.  If he repents, forgive him.  But, always be ready to comfort and defend your wife.
 
I am grateful for the emotional protection my husband provided me when I had to deal with my dad.  We almost have him trained- If he starts on one of his rampages over the phone I just hang up on him and go about my day.  He won't call for a few days, but he is more polite (for a while).
 
One other thing, be gentle with your wife. Chances are she has never had anyone model Christ's love to her.  My husband taught me so much about Jesus, not only by his words but by his actions.  You will need to show her what Heavenly Father's love is like.  It can be hard to trust a Heavenly Father when you have had a harsh earthly father.
 
Best of luck!  My prayers are with you.

Seriously?  If you don't have the money for the type of wedding you want, then shrink it down.  It is a one day thing.  Heck, go to the temple and rent temple clothes.  Why does your dad in law have to pay for anything??  
I don't think it is worth a relationship to try to get him to pay for anything.  You can do it on your own. You have over 6 months, you can save for the basics.  If you can't maybe you are not yet ready to support a wife and kids.  It isn't about the reception, fancy dress, flowers and such.  It is about you and your soon to be spouse.  
I know that came off harsh, but I don't think you should depend on anyone for that.  

The wedding reception is the least of your worries. If your fiance had/is experiencing emotional/psychological abuse from her father be prepared to deal with a whole lot of underlined issues and behavioral problems after you two get married (if you haven't seen the signs as yet). It is not going to be easy and you shouldn't take it personal but instead get the help she might need from you, good relatives and even a counselor if necessary.

Hi, Apex!
 
Your wife knows what your father-in-law is like. Don't bad-mouth him. Don't speak badly of him. Let her.
 
He is not obligated to pay for anything. He does not owe you that. Just accept that your wedding will be difficult, support your wife and tell her how much you love her.
 
If you bad mouth her father, even if you're right, it will make your wife feel bad. It will not make him feel bad. It will accomplish nothing but make your wife even more stressed out. Do not talk to the father-in-law. It will only make things worse between you and him.
 
Let it go. I'm sorry he won't help. That's a shame.

I'm sorry about this and I particularly feel for your husband, having been the spouse stuck in the middle before.  I'm happy to say everything is fine now, but it's awful.
 
Apologize to your in-laws... and then limit contact until if or when you feel safer of attempting the relationship again.
 
That being said, I don't blame you at all for telling them off.  You are their son's wife and they ought to respect you more.  Unfortunately, they aren't here for me to tell them that.  So, yes, limit your contact.  Your relationship is with your husband, not his family.

I'm going to repeat a number of things that others have said, and I will do it unapologetically.
 
First, let's clear up a few things.  The first question we should ask ourselves about our ward council meetings is, "Is the meeting effective?"  This is not a time dependent question.  If it takes 3 hours to make the meeting effective, then by all means, take three hours.  An effective meeting will ultimately coordinate the efforts of the ward council to bring maximal benefit to the needs of people discussed in the meeting.
 
The second question--of lesser importance--"Is the meeting an efficient meeting?"  That means your meeting is effective, and does so in only the smallest amount of time necessary to be effective.  
 
So that gives us three kinds* of meetings that we could encounter.  Ranking them from worst to best would be
1) ineffective and inefficient (a waste of time and effort)
2) effective and inefficient (a waste of time)
3) effective and efficient (good use of time and effort)
 
I'm not going to address effectiveness here.  I'll leave it to you to decide if the meeting is accomplishing its goals.  But even if it isn't, many of the principles of efficiency could also be applied to make the meeting more effective.
 
here is the list of things I've seen be regular contributors to long, inefficient meetings (in no particular order)
 
Poor prioritization by the ward mission leader
some of the worst ward council meetings I've attended spent well over half the time with the missionaries (not the mission leader, but the missionaries) talking about every single person they'd contacted since the last meeting.  Missionaries aren't very well trained in how to coordinate with a ward (presumably they're attending ward council to learn) and so they don't have much experience in prioritizing what needs the ward council's support.  When we put in an engaged ward mission leader, the missionaries' time dropped to about 15 minutes at the max, and the missionaries didn't speak.  All the discussion was facilitated by the ward mission leader, who would decide which matters really needed the ward council's help.
 
Too much time coordinating the calendar
This just doesn't need to be done.  The calendar is available online.  People should use it.  Some of our more efficient ward council meetings printed the calendar for the next 6-8 weeks on the agenda.  The calendar only received discussion if a member of the council saw something that needed to be removed or didn't see something that should have been there.  Questions about activities were handled outside the meeting.
 
No agenda
When we didn't have an agenda, we wasted a lot of time trying to decide what to talk about before we could actually spend time talking about it.  It is essential that all members of the council notify the executive secretary of proposed agenda topics.  He and the bishop can prioritize them before the meeting so that the most urgent matters are addressed first.  when I was on the ward council, the executive secretary usually made the prioritization by himself.  occasionally, the bishop would jump order if he had different priorities.  Sometimes a member of the council who had proposed a topic would ask to jump to something lower, saying that he or she felt it wasn't as much of a priority as something someone else had brought up.  but the key principle was that all of the stuff on the agenda got talked about before anything that wasn't on the agenda.  The assumption should be that if your issue isn't important enough to pick up the phone before the meeting, it probably isn't important enough to take time from other matters during the meeting.
 
I'll also add that I rarely sat through a meeting where we weren't able to address all of the items on the agenda.  
 
No discipline toward the agenda
If your ward council members, particularly your bishop, refuse to adhere to the agenda, you're hosed.  My preferred solution for someone that refuses to respect the agenda would be at best, a request that one of the counselors attend the meeting instead, or possibly a release.  It is my belief that people that won't respect the agenda either don't have the foresight to call ahead, or they are so self centered as to believe their stuff is always more important than others'.  This should not be tolerated.
 
Lack of coordination and communication outside of the meeting
The first place a member of the council should look to for advice and support is his or her counselors and secretary.  If they don't have the expertise or advice to solve the issue, then go to the ward clerk or executive secretary.  Confidential matters can be taken to the bishop or (preferably) one of his counselors.  It's also perfectly appropriate for the Elders Quorum president to call up the Relief Society president and consult with her about an issue (and vice versa).  If the Primary president knows she is going to need extra staffing on a given Sunday, she can contact the other organization presidents to ask for help with recruitment.  These kinds of problems don't need to be addressed in ward council.  
 
Too many times, I've seen time in ward council meetings wasted because someone waited until the meeting to do all of the coordination they could have done at home.  I don't think it's unreasonable to say that ward council meetings should take 3-4 hours each, so long as only 1 - 1.5 of those hours are spent in a room with all the other council members (mean, 1.5 - 3 hours of external communication).
 
Talking about things that could be read
If you're printing an agenda, you have a beautiful medium for informing the council about any announcements, policy updates, procedural updates, etc.  There's no need to talk about the stakes new policy on hours for the meetinghouse library.  Just print it on the agenda and expect people to read it.  If the announcement is unclear, then someone can ask that it be discussed.  
 
 
The one other thing I've noticed that makes ward council meeting run long--but isn't necessarily a bad thing--is people having fun.  Toward the end of my time on the ward council, I think a lot of us actually looked forward to ward council meeting.  Sure, there were weeks that we could have finished a 90 minute meeting in 75 minutes.  But we enjoyed each other's company and enjoyed the work that we were doing.  There is some value in that because the ward council works a lot better when those who sit on it enjoy being together.  Besides, I felt a lot better about those fun 90 minute meetings where lots was accomplished than I did the dreadful 60 minute meetings where nothing got done.
 
 
 
* There is no such thing as an efficient and ineffective meeting.  By definition, if the meeting wasn't effective, it can't be efficient.

This is a sore spot for me.  We were having them for at LEAST three hours twice a month.  Here's why I think it was happening, maybe you can find some help in dealing with it.
 
No agenda:  Probably the biggest culprit
 
"magnifying" calling:  Hey, if one hour once a month is good, THREE hours twice a month should be AWESOME!!!
 
Personality types:  Some folks really like hanging with the saints/feeling important in a meeting/avoiding problems, responsibilities at home.   Coupled with no agenda, and the meetings would really drag on.
 
Boyd K Packer had a talk in a training meeting about overloading members and compared it to loading a camel.  You can load a camel to a point, but one thing too much and the camel will just sit down and won't move at all until it is completely unloaded.  A three hour meeting is disrespectful of a members time (particularly Sunday-sacred time) to be with and edify family and self.  
 
Anyway, good luck.  I ended up quitting my calling over this very issue.

2 1/2 hours is insane. 1 1/2 hours is too long. If you're going that long, your bishop isn't leading the meeting properly and needs to learn time management skills. If it were me, I would just excuse myself and leave unless there is a clear need for me to remain in the meeting. If you do that enough, the bishop will start thinking about how valuable your time is and consider respecting it by conducting ward business in a timely manner.

In my experience the primary culprits when meetings run long are:
 
Visiting/Non-business chatter Poorly organized reporting Tangent chasing

Seems excessive. Why don't you raise the issue. Meeting that are that long take leaders away from their families needlessly. As part of the ward council you certainly have the right to raise the concern.

I'd agree that friendship shouldn't have a price . . . directly.
 
But the higher the price tag of an item that a "friend" absconds with; the more grave my concerns about that "friend's" personal integrity become.  It's one thing to get a DVD mixed in with my collection of 100+ other DVDs and just plain forget that it was borrowed--or even to lose the DVD entirely.  It's quite another when it's a major appliance that I know darned well isn't mine.
 
Fundamentally, though, I like your rule of not lending stuff to friends.  :)
 
And, Dahlia--"Go all Mormon on this" might have just become my new favorite phrase.