to resent pressure on grandmothers to provide childcare?

Slagging your mother off because she won't kowtow to you and do your work for you is, indeed, poisonous entitlement. Stop being so dramatic. She said no, and that's that.

And there we have it - Stepford Gran Bingo!

Here's what you just said (and everyone knows it) "I like the idea of grandmothers being punished for not being servants to their adult children and their grandchildren. How dare they have wants that don't comply with my demands? They are not fully functioning humans, they are NPCs and need to service our wants. I like the idea of destroying any possible bond my children might have with my mother because I want to punish her for refusing to kowtow to me and my demands and refusing to take on my work for me. I may not (yet) be punishing her in that way but it's certainly crossed my mind. I am going to conflate my kids getting to visit their gran with coercing my mother into unpaid labour because then I don't sound like such a terrible person to myself and I can justify my unfair entitlement"

Take them or don't take them. Do as you choose. It still does not entitle you to her unpaid labour.

You are coming across as a truly nasty and entitled person. Vicious, in fact. Your mother obviously has your number.

Closer doesn't always mean better, grandmothers forced to raise grandchildren by entitled daughters may well feel resentful of their grandchildren and be eagerly awaiting the day they never have to be an unpaid servant or see any of them again.

And grandmothers who don't act as unpaid nannies can still foster relationships with their grandchildren if they want to, of course - provided their adult children aren't trying to punish them into submission by revoking visiting rights.

There are so many individual variables in human relationships that it's not possible to guess whether grandmothers will have, or even want, close relationships with their grandchildren regardless of who is doing the caregiving.

Your daughter sounds like a right entitled madam, who needs to think very seriously as to whether or not she has any more children if she can't see how lucky she is.

I would be definitely stepping back a bit from such a daughter rather than tolerating such entitlement.

Wanting occasional support from my own mother is “poisonous entitlement”? That’s a bit ridiculous and dramatic don’t you think? Unnecessarily nasty comment. I’m only saying she could help out very occasionally if she wants to build a relationship with her grandchildren. Which she does want, she complains constantly that they’re not close to her. I’m expected to take them round to see her any time she asks, which I do. If we’re talking about entitlement, why do grandparents who choose not to help feel entitled to a relationship with their grandchildren at all?

I don't think it's true but I think the relationship can be different. Just a personal anecdote but when uni student GC is down about something they phone me not the other GM who they do love but saw less of growing up as she lives 200 miles away.

Sometimes when I'm lying awake worrying it can seem like a dubious honour.

I wonder if it's a regional thing? Colleagues used to comment on how much childcare I did but when I went to the part of the UK my parents came from my cousins were all doing the same sort of thing.
Maybe an idea for some analysis.

I wholeheartedly agree with you OP. There is a disturbing sense of entitlement among some parents who seem to think their personal choice to become parents should mean others sacrificing to assist them with that choice.

Circumstances vary. I'm in my 70 s. I worked from 15 to 70 although gradually reducing my hours over the last few years. My mother worked throughout my childhood. My maternal grandmother worked as her husband buggered off and left her with three kids to bring up, her mother did the same due to having an alcoholic husband and four kids to feed and clothe. No one raised an eyebrow when I went back to work in the 70s when my eldest was a few months old. I wasn't surprised when my Dil returned to work after maternity leave.

Your post drips with poisonous entitlement.

She just doesn't want to do any of YOUR work. It's not extra work. It's YOUR work and she is saying no and has a right to do so.

No matter what she did or didn't do you're not entitled to make her do what you want her to do. Your opinions, frustrations and feelings do not matter more than hers. She has a perfect right to say no for any reason, or none.

You're not entitled to her time.

You're not entitled to her labour.

You're not entitled to anything.

She's not your servant. She is a fully functioning person independent of you with her own rights and wants and You're Not Entitled to Anything.

Process it and move on.

I think I was quite clear what I meant by both sides. On one side it would be completely unreasonable for me to expect my mum to rearrange her work schedule for the children I decided to have. One the other side I don’t see why she can’t help occasionally without making me feel awful about asking. She just doesn’t want to do any extra work. And will act like she did it all herself when her children are young, even though I know that’s not true. I didn’t mention my dad because he’s never put me down and shamed me for asking for help like my mum has. And he has on occasion helped me in other ways such as financially and with house maintenance etc, so it felt a bit mean to say he doesn’t support me just because he doesn’t have the children on his own. But okay he could be doing childcare too. I’m obviously a mum myself and I know that if my children ever became parents themselves I would never want them to feel as alone and unsupported as I have felt since giving birth, and would be round to help every opportunity I got (as would my husband).

Yes, certainly anecdotally I have no memories of anybody receiving much care from their grandparents. It just wasn't a thing. Working class mothers always worked, of course, but they left their kids home alone, took them with them to work (cleaners often did this) or worked shifts around them - my mum worked nightshift 3 nights a week for this very reason. They took jobs they could do at home or near to home and they also helped one another out where they could, the mums, not the grandparents for the most part. And there were nursery schools then too, and then of course once school started the kids walked to school on their own. I was walking my younger brother to school by the time I was 7.

Grandparents being regularly enlisted as unpaid carers and the entitlement around that by so many mumsnetters is quite new to me.

It is good to know that my memory of grandparents just being relatives and, on the whole, not an army of unpaid carers is borne out by the stats.

Yes it seems dated to assume men are always the higher earner. With my four kids in two couples the woman is the higher earner and the man juggles with compressed hours/shifts to make childcare work.

I always think surely some parents, male or female, actually want time as a sahp or part-time when kids are at school regardless of career progression or pension. It always seems to be presented as such a negative thing when some of us would have loved the opportunity.

I'm very sorry about the numerous typos in this post, I was quite incensed at the rampant misogyny on display and the vicious, relentless cruelty to older women that we cannot seem to escape on this site.

There is nowhere quite like mumsnet if you're looking for the entitled tantrums of adult women who want to strip their mothers of the well earned chance to spend their remaining years making their own decisions to suit themselves and live their lives as they wish.

The older we get the more precious time becomes because we don't know how long we have left and how many healthy years we have left.
It's also a time when we have done a lot of hard work over the years and hope to have time to ourselves to do what we want to do. It's a real arrogance for anyone to think that they are entitled to use others, related or not, male or female, to care for their children. Your children are your responsibility.

I totally disagree with the notion that you can only have a bond if you provide regular childcare. I grew up seeing my maternal GM two to three times a year, for one or two nights at a time. With my paternal GM I spent couple of weeks in her farm every summer, no other visits. Both GM’s lived far away so that’s why. But I still loved both very much and as a teen and young adult, I still traveled to see them, completely on my own accord because I loved being with them.

However, my DH’s nieces were looked after my (now late) MIL, for years. She also lived on the same street. As young adults, both took her pretty much granted, avoided having to sit next to her at family functions etc.

It's frustrating to keep seeing this old myth trotted out when the opposite is true. It's just a social media thing aimed at people who want to stoke intergenerational resentment. In fact: "In the past two generations, the number of children being cared for by their grandparents has increased substantially from 33% to 82%. Almost two-thirds of all grandparents regularly look after their grandchildren"
https://www.informationnow.org.uk/article/grandparent-issues/#:~:text=joy%20to%20grandparents.-,Providing%20childcare%20for%20your%20grandchildren,billion%20nationally%20in%20childcare%20costs.

If you stop and think, it's obvious that fewer GPs looked after GCs in the 70s. There was a larger working class; few working class mothers had, sadly, expected to have a career - even after the equal pay act many were in low paid jobs & worked PT around childcare; there were far fewer single parents; older people on average had poorer health than now; children were more often left unsupervised at a younger age & expected to look after younger siblings.

I'm a boomer and of course there was more GP involvement in some families, but I expect to do more babysitting for any future GCs than my parents or GPs did. It still won't be regular though.

I completely get your frustration about taking a toddler on a train when MIL can drive. But don't let this cloud the facts.

This!

We do not have grandchildren yet but have retired early. We will be travelling for at least 12 weeks this year. Until we are not fit enough that’s what we intend to do every year. But we are at home during school holidays due to obviously the expense of school holidays and the crowds so we could step up and do lots of holiday care.

My sister did loads of care, she is a lot older than me and her children are only a little younger than me. One of her grandchildren is the exact same age as my DS. She is not well off and worked PT as a cleaner so she was at home a lot as no money for holidays or weekends away or anything much so because she was at home her kids just expected it and she did it.

The regular sort of even just one day a week commitment would be the worst for us because we just like to decide to go away in our Motorhome.

I know a woman and her DH who do a round trip of 300 miles every week to look after grandchildren over 2 days.

What are you talking about? The youngest boomers were born in 1964 and back then mums were expected to leave work to raise kids. They werent raised by grandparents. Their grandparents probably didn’t live 2 hrs away either. Who wants to drive 2 hrs to babysit???

given that boomers are now aged between 62 and 80 (effectively the full range of what was called old age pensioners back when they grew up) why the hell do you think they should be doing childcare or helping to raise your kids now?

Did you and DH wait until your 40s/50s to have your current toddler? The reality is if your parents are boomers and you wait until they are in their 60s70s or 80s to have your kids you can’t expect them to have any energy to babysit at all! Or be arsed to drive 2 hrs on a regular basis

I’m in a women against political group - as we worry about women’s rights being rolled back.

After reading this thread the political folk perhaps aren’t the biggest threat, but the continuing narrative in our culture that women are there to pick up, care and absorb costs to their career, finances, health and well-being. Rights are not just formed by legislation and policies they need to be accepted through all strata of society.

I appreciate that wanting childcare is not particularly motivated by wanting to trash rights but it is ignoring the rights mainly of your own mothers to choose how they wish to live their own lives. I think it is driven by entitlement- but why entitlement to taking over your mum’s life effectively? Not so much your Dad’s - and I know people who will go to lengths to accommodate Dad’s preference for a quiet life sans too much of the grandkids but never think the Mum may also want a bit of quiet.

Sure if she wants the grandkids of course she can - that’s her choice. But if she can’t or won’t there shouldn’t be the level of tantrum apparent from some on Mumsnet / we should all be wanting all women to make the choices they want to make surely.

I agree the level of entitlement and expectation is off the scale with some young parents it seems. Childcare is hard work especially if you are working as well.

Society is changing and the state pension age is now 67. People need to save for their retirement. This conflicts with some young parents, like those of the @ReluctantGM, who think grandma needs to cut hours / retire in order to support adult children with childcare. Those who are in their currently 50s/60s are definitely squeezed middle.

Some posters have rose tinted of times gone by when they where looked after by grandparents but in those days women often gave up work when they had children in the 60s/70s. When I had my children late 90s/early 00s my parents / in-laws were amazed that I continued in my career

I don't see why the poor feminism of men is relevant to the poor feminism of women? And you still haven't explained why it was convenient of me to focus on the poor feminism of women? If some women are being self entitled and selfish and hypocritical are we not allowed to call it out because we aren't also calling out the poor feminism and poor behaviour of men too? That sounds like 'whataboutery' to me. BTW if you stopped making so many ad hominem attacks on me it would probably make your arguments stronger.

Another thread on here had a poster wailing about her grandmother (not her mother) letting her down with respect to childcare because she had breast cancer. She was asking how long would her grandmother need off from childcare duties.
Bloody hell, I missed that one!!!
I would have made a few comments if I'd seen it!

I think some people are being deliberately combative and obtuse in their failure to acknowledge that, despite anecdotes to the contrary, their remains a societal pattern of women as default child carer. This isn't something controversial or up for debate, it's supported statistically. So there is a level of contrariness at play in posters choosing to overlook this to argue your family set up was to blame.
I imagine you're my generation. I'm 56. My DC are 20/30s and if they were alive my parents would be in their 80s.
Women in their 80s almost always did the lions share of domestics and childcare. And the odd story about someone's 85 year old dad who was their primary carer doesn't change the pattern. So when they looked after our (gen X's) children, they would often replicate this model. So this is what our adult DC grew up thinking grandma's and grandfather's did. It's grandma who does the looking after.
Our generation changed things somewhat. But in the 90s/00s the pattern remained of man as bread winner woman as primary domestic worker, and this is what our children saw.
So when they are looking for someone to care for their children, they think of you as the obvious choice because that's what they grew up seeing grandmas (not grandpas) do.
Perhaps the gen X grandfather's will step up and start changing the pattern.

I find this absolutely wild to be throwing back what the OP did for child care and saying it's hypocritical to now refuse to do it.

Times have changed massively - not least the age at which we all have kids. My parents generation had kids in their mid twenties and her parents were also in their mid twenties. So they were only in their early 50s at this point anyway.

After my grandmother had children she never worked again. That was just the way it was. But then salaries and the cost of living reflected that for middle class families in post war Britain. You could support a family on just one (male) salary and since there was limited childcare option there wasn't an alternative. My grandparents moved away from their parents for work so they didn't have available family childcare. My parents say there just wasn't a nursery industry available for child care.

Remember that women only got equal pay rights in the 1970s so expecting anything other than the women in the family to do childcare was very unusual indeed.

On my Dad's side, his father moved around a lot and he didn't live close to family either. My grandfather was however a stay at home Dad in the late 1970s/80s to his second son. He took early retirement to do it, whilst his second wife worked. That was deemed exceptionally odd for the time. Noting he was financially secure enough and old enough to do this.

So both my grandparents and parents never had help with childcare as a result. And they weren't untypical. I can look throughout my family and honestly this hasn't been a thing for generations across the board. I don't think this was unusual. You just had stay at home parents and that was that. But even by my parents, going back to work had become normal. A generation before this didn't happen so much.

Fast forward to now and it's more like grandparents are ten years older because of how much later we are having kids. Many have had to work later because of pension age changing and pension schemes being increasingly less favourable.

Both parents have to work. Even ten years ago, a stay at home parent wasn't unusual. Now it is. But childcare is available in a way it wasn't and this is crucial. The situation has changed for both grandparents and adults children.

The balance has shifted to expecting Dads to do more - sometimes because they earn less which was unthinkable probably even a generation ago. Why on earth we are blaming the OP for not doing more to be less sexist about child care when there were less paternal rights and wages were still biased to men and we didn't have the availability of funded childcare is absolutely fucking nuts.

The whole model of care has shifted from mothers to paid care to stop mothers being saddled with it, and yet we STILL have these attitudes that it's a mother's role. Some of the comments in this thread which ignore the adult sons / sons in law and ignore the grandfather are staggering and really part of the problem.

There are four parents all in the same position who could work out flexibility to suit all without asking grandma to give up even more of her life as a support human. Four parents who have much more access to childcare and have greater employment rights than the OP ever had when she had young children. They need to use the system as it stands.

Grandma needs to work because her kids attitude to taking responsibility for the care of other family members is troubling. She will not be able to retire as young as her parents and she will have to consider the cost of care in a way her parents didn't. She doesn't want to give up her financial independence only for them to dump her and not help out in the future which honestly given their attitude now, isn't unrealistic. She has to take responsibility for herself with those shitty attitudes lurking. She needs to ignore the emotional blackmail that if she doesn't provide childcare she won't see the grandkids / get care precisely because that's just emotionally abusive and puts her in a vulnerable position for the future.

I swear there are some really hard of thinking individuals who just think things are the same as they've always been or that social change is irrelevant. Of course it's not.

Realistically I don't think it's viable nor fair for most grandparents to provide childcare. It's too much.

My mum was 63 when DS was born and was still in work. She needed to work. She didn't have much of a pension of her own. And my parents got shafted by endowment mortgages in the 90s... Tbh I never wanted her to do it anyway.

I was 37 when I had DS. If he has children late, I'll be in my 70s. Looking at my mum now, it's just not viable and realistic to be looking after toddlers in your 70s.

OP, i don't think you are unreasonable in the slightest. They need to sort their shit out between themselves. The four of them could work together in mutual self interest. The bottom line is you are the easy option and seen as a cheap doormat.

Don't do it.