MIL lied about genetic condition

Loads of reasons. Family dynamics. Mistakenly thinking you’re protecting people. Denial. None of that makes it right but those are some reasons.

Of course she lied, by omission. How would he know to ask ? The fact that he’s having symptoms of something wouldn’t automatically prompt you to assume it’s genetic.

Like I said, I wouldn't have done what the MIL did, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who asked my advice. But I do think it is right and important that she has the right to make that decision. Especially for something that's comparatively minor.

DH needed to know about this and so did you, in only in order to consider whether had any bearing on your decision to have children together. It would have been kind of MIL to tell him. Perhaps she was too scared or didn't want to think about it, but however understandable her behaviour was, there's no moral highground to claim here.

She has the legal right to withhold the information. You can't enforce the opposite!

All medical including Psychology has specifically advised not to discuss it with them until 18. I will like the rest of my family follow the medical experts advice as opposed to blowing children's live up when they cant avail of the specialist therapy or option of testing.

And I also developed benign fasciculation syndrome during pregnancy which caused all sorts of odd twitching. And can be hereditary. It’s also completely harmless and I’m not mad at my parents for not genetically testing me for it?

It may be so legally. Morally is a totally different matter.

Maybe the parallels with Huntington's don’t apply. The fact is, he now has symptoms. If he had known he may have been able to seek earlier intervention or enacted lifestyle changes that would make a difference to the onset. It’s bloody selfish and I can’t for the life of me fathom why anyone would keep this a secret, especially when there are future generations involved.

There is a world of difference between what’s legal and what’s moral.

The law isn't the same thing as what is morally right and I think it's clear that people are responding more with what the moral thing to do is rather than the fact the law says the person doesn't have to tell their offspring they may have inherited life altering or life limiting conditions.

And laws are and absolutely should be up for debate.
That's how they get changed.

Just because something is a law, does not mean it's the right or the best thing or that it should not be debated.

This is correct.

My mum's cousin developed very early onset dementia which turned out to be Huntingdon's. I was at uni at the time. When I found out, I told mum that we all had to get tested.

"No, there's no need for that. It's not in our family."

"Mum, it might be. You can't assume it came from his mother's side." I persisted in telling her that I'd be seeing my doctor.

Pause. "His mother got pregnant when Uncle Tam was dying of pneumoconiosis. That's why your grandmother fell out with her SIL - the last bairn in Uncle Tam's family wasn't actually Tam's."

I vaguely knew the bloke that she named as the father. He and his sons all died young.

There are times when family secrets can no longer be kept secret.

It literally does.

The DH has made it to middle age without even realising his mum has this (or presumably any other) condition. The parallels with Huntington's don't apply here. There's loads of more minor hereditary conditions.

Are you really telling op to cut her off? That’s just adding even more of a mess down the line.

Why do you want your children to have a relationship with her?

Maybe she was doing the wrong thing for her own reasons. What has she said about it all? You’d be surprised what people convince themselves. Yes it’s wrong but I think the people making out she’s almost Pol Pot are wrong.

Yes. Exactly.

I have.

She has the right to medical privacy and if it's not life shortening this can't be particularly serious therefore there may be no testing available,

OP needs to not be coy and tell us what the condition is if she’s going to ask for opinions on here. What if it’s benign fasciculation syndrome. There are so so many minor neurological conditions we can’t give advice otherwise.

"not going to kill him but it’s going to impact his life, more severely as he gets older"
Says op
Old age can bring many issues anyway.

Is there something dc can do when young to avoid symptoms? If so then test.

i would limit all contact with MIL. Nasty selfish behaviour from her.

@LadyGabriella we don't know how signficant it is - he has reduced feeling (and possibly function) in one arm and reduced hearing.

That's definitely a big enough impairment to have wanted to do big ticket adventure trips before you got it....

OP said it wouldn't kill him but that doesn't mean it isn't going to substantially reduced what he can do physically.

Her right to medical privacy does not override the rights of her actual and possible descendants.

Sorry but this is just so wrong. Once it was clear they intended to have children, MiL should have disclosed so that proper counselling and advice could be given. Her right to medical privacy doesn’t take priority over a distressing disclosure when it’s too late to do anything about it. And depending on the condition there may have been steps he could have taken to reduce the risk. Same with your sons. I’m assuming the BCRA gene. Why are you waiting until age 18 to disclose when there are steps they can take to reduce the risk now ?