AIBU to have babysitting rules...

@saraclara - you keep comparing how much time parents would spend with their kids to what I'm saying about the grandparents who clearly don't spend 24 hours a day with these kids so why can't they spend 5 hours (or less), with their grandchildren without needing a television on?

I'm not controlling, patronising or devious - I certainly wouldn't have what it takes to be any of those things.

What is it about spending that amount of time that would require a television to be turned on instead of doing something with the kids - go for a walk, do some colouring, playing fort building with sofa cushions?

How many parents are non stop attentive to their child for five hours straight? Seriously?

I was one of those SAHMs who loved every second of the toddler and pre-school years and was really into child development and playing, reading and interacting with my child (sickening, I know). But if you'd monitored me for five consecutive hours when my kids were two, you'd have found me doing housework, putting washing on, making phone calls, and yes, putting the news on.

Hiding the remote is controlling, patronising and devious.

@Nonaynevernomore & @saraclara - I suggested hiding the remote as I would feel that the grandparents if they are really wanting to spend time with their grandchild(ren), why would they want to be watching the news during that time? They will only have a few hours on the visit with the kids so why couldn't they read to them, bake with them, colour with them, play with them instead of plonking their bums on the sofa and turn on the telly?

FWIW at this stage, I don’t think you were being unreasonable at all. If something keeps your toddler up all night, it’s only fair to make sure it doesn’t happen.

My point still stands, that all these grandparents only think this way is because they are scared that their grandchildren won’t love them if they don’t give them loads of sneaky little treats that they don’t get from mum and dad. It’s pure selfishness, nothing to do with it being good for the child but just them wanting the rush of a grandchild who is sad to be returned to their parents because granny has let them eat, do and watch whatever they like. Do none of the posters who say “a little treat won’t do any harm” stop to consider that maybe the parents want to be the ones to give their own children those little treats?

That's some spectacular hyperbole going on there.

Mumsnet has a lot of grannies who are outraged at the suggestion that they don’t have rights over other people’s children, and that they can’t bribe their grandchildren into loving spending time with them by frying their ability to concentrate with six hours of Cocomelon and loading them up on sweets. Literally elder abuse.

You don’t need to constantly entertain a child. I doubt you did with your own children, I doubt your parents did with you. Set your grandchild up with a picture book and some toys and tell them you’re having a sit down for a minute.

There is no “should be able to” when you’re talking about other people’s children. If they aren’t your child, you put up with the parents’ rules/restrictions (unless they violate your morality, like requiring that you use physical chastisement) or you shut up and move along. My in laws can expect 0 unsupervised time with my children (as can my own parents, but that’s down to them having all children removed by SS) due to them demonstrating with their other grandchildren that they can’t behave reasonably, though as I have a great relationship with them and will be a housewife for their entire childhoods, I anticipate them having a wonderful grandparent relationship with them as I can take them to visit at will, and vice versa.

OP, you are completely in the right. Screen time is known to impact brain development, but people can’t accept reality. If you were to say, “I’m going against medical advice to not vaccinate my kids”, people would (rightly!) eviscerate you, but somehow wilfully destroying your child’s attention span is the choice that gets cheered in, and following the evidence is “controlling” and holier-than-thou”.

Oops. Sorry 🙈

If you have a bad sleeper it isn’t just “one shit nights sleep”.

One shit night sleep is not exactly the end of the world either.

No long term damage but if it causes him to have a shit night sleep, that's pretty awful for both the baby and the parents. I can't imagine my own parents wanting to do that to me. You'd have to be pretty selfish to think it's ok.

And most parents I know are indeed quite strict on TV and sugar for toddlers nowadays.

I disagree I hope to be like my MIL.

Her MIL didn’t listen to her requests and it soured the relationship. Like using talc when she specifically asked them not to. So now she’s very attentive GP and always asks my preferences. Her mantra is it my child so it’s my rules. Which I love and respect her for.

However my parents have constantly undermined me and it’s annoying. Having a 7 month old who had just started weaning and I hadn’t given them chocolate yet but was fed it by my parents as “it won’t hurt”…..it’s the under-minding that’s the issue.

Well if the grandparents were doing it it's unlikely to be every day is it, so that's a shit comparison.

5 hours of TV and some chocolate buttons though as a one-off? Nah, that's not going to do any long-term damage. The strict parenting though, probably will do more.

Absolutely no-one, including the OP, has suggested that the grandparents intend to put him in front of the TV for the entire five hours that they're babysitting for! You're being absolutely ridiculous.

Like most grandparents after interacting, playing with and reading to their grandchild, they might intend to pop a toddlers TV programme on for 10 minutes or so while they take a breather and make a hot drink.

No grandparent actively asks to spend time having their grandchild to themselves, and then spends that entire time ignoring them!

Is this a one off or regular babysitting? If it’s a one off, I might just suck it up this time.

I think it’s fine to say no juice or chocolate if you don’t ever give him juice or chocolate yourself but you are in a bit of a tricky situation having accepted gifts of chocolate 😂 Put yourself in their shoes. If you think your DGC is allowed chocolate but you aren’t allowed to give it to them, you might understandably feel hurt that you aren’t allowed to treat your DGC when others do or that your DIL doesn’t trust you. I would tell a white lie that the dentist has recently told you to avoid them because of your dental history.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ASK them not to let him watch TV if you explain why. You do need to give them an alternative strategy that actually works if he is upset or they need a break or something to keep him entertained while they make food. If they haven’t babysat him before, they might be shocked how much harder and exhausting 5 hours of looking after a toddler is 20+ years since you were a parent. Also, if this is new for them and new for your DS, be prepared that they all might struggle if he gets upset and wants mum and dad. Sometimes desperate times call for desperate measures! 😂 TV time and a cuddle is the last resort in our family. As much as it is horrible for you to have to deal with an inconsolable child at bedtime, it feels a thousand times worse for a grandparent to deal with an inconsolable child that they are supposed to be taking care of.

If a mother posted on here saying she lets her toddler watch 5 hours of TV on a Sunday and gives him chocolate buttons every day, she would be crucified. But it's ok if the grandparents do it. Lol.

My parents manage to be lovely involved grandparents without feeding my child sugar and letting him watch TV. How odd.

YANBU OP, it's lovely they want to spend time with the grandkids but I don't think anyone can say they're doing you a favour. And you're not asking for much, no TV but they're at your home with plenty of toys, no sugar but you're providing the food... That's hardly a rigid routine!

I don't think asking for no sugar for a 2yo is unreasonable in this situation. Especially given they don't have sugar.

My 7yo is strictly refined sugar free (for medical reasons so it's a bit different) and there are plenty of "treats" they can have!!

They should be able to last 5 hours without needing to resort to chocolate and TV.

Although I do wonder if "spirited" is a euphemismistic way of saying this child is a real handful.

I'd just ask / advise. There doesn't need to be any drama. Just tell your in-laws you don't want the kid to have an afternoon of sweets and TV.

OP I do get it when they're young and I was the same when my lovely MIL, now deceased, used to look after mine. They used to spend afternoons at McDonalds (they were a bit older than yours at the time) and then home to sit in front of the TV with her watching crap and it used to drive me insane (I was DEFINITELY BU as it was free childcare) but now they're older (17 and 15) they still remember those times with her and the fun they had together and talk about it. (and not me seething in the corner fortunately ;). Also they're very healthy, not screen or sugar addicted young adults.

I think it's absolutely fine. I know loads of people that have a no TV rule for their young children.

It's 5 hours and the grandparents sound healthy and active. If they were in poor health then maybe I could see a reason for them needing a break, but if he is only awake for 3 hours of the 5, it is absolutely not too taxing for them to play for that length of time.

Especially considering the fact that they are asking for this and you are going out of your way to ensure it goes smoothly.

I would do a breezy "we would love you to spend time with DS but just to let you know we are currently doing no TV and no sugar to see if it impacts his sleep. For the experiment to work, we all need to be consistent".

This will help them feel a part of an effort to help DC rather than you enforcing rules on them in particular. By phrasing it this way you are subtly inferring that if they give him sugar or TV, they will ruin the "experiment" for everyone.

Just tell them no TV, they are your family surely it's not the end of the world to say Jacob will lose his shit tonight if he watches too much TV so please keep it off as much as possible / only Daniel Tiger for half hour if needed

My philosophy has been "what happens at grandmas, stays at grandmas" I don't need to know - just keep them alive is about all I ask of them. Half the fun of going there for the kids is that they get to break the rules and be spoilt.

If by that you mean there would be rules to follow when looking after my grandchildren then good, there absolutely should be, and I wouldn’t have any issues with following them.