not to take a newborn to my in-laws for Christmas?

[Tortoiseonthehalfshell]

Do I win a prize for First Christmas-themed AIBU of the year? Perhaps a half-unwrapped sticky candy cane, with lint stuck to it?

We recently announced my pregnancy with #2, who is due at the end of November. Some few conversations later it became clear that they were still expecting us for Christmas, I said we wouldn't make it, they got cross because It's Our Turn. I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again I also don't want to go, so maybe I need an outside view.

Background:
We're in Australia. They live in a neighbouring state, which is about 1.5 hours away by plane, in the same town as various siblings, grandparents, nieces and nephews. My youngest SIL still lives at home, and my GMIL lives downstairs in a self-contained unit. My mother and brother live in the same town as we do, but that's the extent of my family.

Until a few years ago, they moved around the country a lot and we rarely, if ever, saw them for Christmas itself, usually just catching up for Big Events like my MIL's 50th, weddings, etc. Even 3 years ago, when my daughter (first grandchild) was born, they were content to have their big Christmas at home while we had our little one at our place, and they flew over after Christmas for a visit. Worked well. The next year, when we had a 1-year-old, we went to theirs, as did my other SIL, her husband and their infant.

This is relevant: it is Not Done to stay elsewhere except the family home on visits. It is a 3BD plus the self-contained bit. To fit us all in, the GMIL moved into the younger SIL's room, younger SIL took the sofabed in the lounge, elder SIL + family took the downstairs unit, we three squished into the guest room, which just fits a double bed and a travel cot, obviously the parents had their own room. It was a squish, and because the guest room was just off the main dining area, DD had trouble sleeping, but it was a holiday, so fine.

This time around, SIL will have a 2.5 year old and a 9 month old. We will have a 3 year old and a four week old, assuming I don't go late, but I didn't last time.

Here are their arguments:

1. It is our turn.
2. Newborns are portable, and easy to travel with
3. There will be lots of hands to help
4. GMIL is too frail to fly to ours/can't fit in our place along with the in-laws, so wouldn't be able to see newborn if we don't come

Here are my arguments:

1. I will have a FOUR WEEK OLD
2. And probably stitches, and lochia, and leaky boobs
3. At 4 weeks old, DD screamed for 2-3 hours every night before sleep, which rarely happened until midnight, slept in 2 hour bursts and only if in bed with me, cluster fed and vomited a lot. We coped by pacing the house all evening, then sleeping when she did, taking things very easy, and both being pretty much completely hands-on all the time. This is utterly incompatible with staying in a crowded house full of people, in a bed too small for co-sleeping, in a room where a 3 year old is also trying to sleep.
4. The amount of 'helping hands' will be drastically reduced by the fact that the in-laws will be making elaborate meals for large crowds, worrying about where the formal china was put away, arranging the larger children for formal photographs, etc. Christmas is a Big Fucking Deal at their place. 4a) And there will be a newly mobile baby there as well as two bigger toddlers. And the place is not babyproofed, at all.
5. Germy planes and newborns?
6. (Not vocalised) I haven't had a nice little family Christmas with my own mum and brother, whom I love dearly, since DD was born. Four weeks out from giving birth, I think I deserve one.

Sorry about the novel. It's the result of many hours muttering arguments to myself when I should be sleeping.

If you dont want to spend christmas with them you dont need a long list of reasons not to, just dont. However I think its a bit off to then go and spend it with your relatives.

Yanbu.

YANBU it sounds like a fecking nightmare and I'd refuse to go. You want christmas at home, stay home and see your family, sounds like it's their turn anyway.

Almost forgot- It's a squashed mince pie with rudolph's nose stuck to it.

Yanbu. Baby might not even be old enough to be allowed to fly if it's at all late.

I have no idea why people say newborns are portable. My DS was the same at that age. No way would I have got on a plane with him, or been able to cope with him away from home. And I was still very sore for several weeks after the birth - I remember mentioning it to the GP at DS's 8-week check, so definitely more than four weeks.

Also your baby could be late, so he/she could theoretically only be two or three weeks old!

YA definitely NBU. I would not want to go if I were in your position, and I would be pissed off if people didn't respect that.

Bimbo, my mum and brother lives really near me, they'd just come up to my house and we'd have a nice quiet day. The in-laws could come to ours if they wanted to, but of course they can't really because then they're not spending it with the rest of their family, which is fair enough.

You don't think I should tell my mum not to come over for lunch, just to be fair, surely?

I could just about see that someone would believe newborns may be easy to travel with, but I don't know why anyone would think new parents, especially mothers, find travelling easy.

I think you ought to say: "We will have a month-old baby. There will be more Xmases, but for this one, things will have to be different. It's a bit of a shame, but thank goodness for Facetime/Skype, eh? And don't worry, of course we intend to come for a visit at some other point soon so GMIL can see the baby"

Of course YANBU, just say no, now, and give yourself a break (high blood pressure isn't good for you when you're pregnant you know!). No, No, Noway, Nohow, No. What you are describing sounds like a total nightmare, even better get your DH to say no as it's his family.

Oh, and on the subject of turns, I'd be minded to say, the turns are one with your parents, the next year with DHs, no?

'Turns' is difficult. They came to us last year but so did my Mum - we have a bigger house than she, so we host generally - so in one sense, they came to the Tortoise family Christmas. Their position is that she, my Mum, is welcome to come to theirs this year, thus coming to the In-Laws family Christmas. That way every year we get to share it with both sets of parents.

My position, and my Mum's, is that she can't think of anything worse some years we want a Christmas which is just done the Tortoise way, because as soon as the in-laws arrive, there are more of them than us and it turns into an In-Law Christmas, just relocated.

Both views are right, though.

YANBU! If you want another good argument (and I think your reasons are more than sensible) there's a whooping cough outbreak at the moment (certainly in NSW, not sure about the rest of Aus) and we were strongly advised to avoid crowded places with our baby until he was 6 weeks old and had had his first jabs (the docs said shopping malls and airconditioned areas were particularly bad) - I would say a plane and airport came well into that category.

Yanbu. There's no way in hell I'd do that. The Christmas after can be at theirs. Having said that, this will be our 1st Xmas with our DD, and having never spent Xmas day with the inlaws, we could be having similar discussions nearer the time.

Stick to your guns!

Yanbu just say no we will be at home for Christmas and repeat if necessary. Do not be drawn into discussions.

you would have just had a baby. Literally. That trumps christmas politics imo. There'll be other christmases you can spend with the inlaws when you're not recovering from childbirth. That may not be "fair" of me but honestly, it amazes me how selfish some people can be about this stuff. I include my own family and my inlaws in too btw.

You could have a baby as young as 2 weeks, and if you need a CS then that kind of travelling is just not possible. Well it is possible but not good if you can avoid it.

As the MN saying goes "NO is a complete sentence"

You and your DH have decided what is best for you (and if he hasnt agreed then stand on his bollocks until he does) and you do not have to explain yourselves. They will tantrum and sulk in an attempt to get their own way but if you dont give in they you will have set a precedent.

I had a similar issue with my late MIL about her boxing day gathering, and I stood my ground. SHe would often say in the following years "Oh Bogey and X and the kids wont be here I dont suppose....." and then go off on one about how selfish I was and how henpecked DH was (he didnt want to go either but she ignored that!). But she never made a fuss to us again as she knew that it was futile.

Say no this year and saying no next time, or shock horror.....staying in a hotel rather than their house, will be alot easier!

I should say that we did go to MIL sometimes, just not every year as she expected, I am not a total bitch you know :o

What does your DH say?

i would be very tempted to drop the 'turns' business as soon as possible anyway. Otherwise you are giving up, in perpetuity your right to decide what happens to your family every Christmas FOR EVER!

As regards to this year, of course you shouldn't go. It sound like a complete nightmare just on the musical beds front. Just say 'sorry we won't be coming for Christmas as I will just have had a baby' and counter any objections with the same sentence.

In future, when you DO go for Christmas, insist on renting a house nearby so you can have your own space and can have a little bit of freedom.

Good luck through your pregnancy, and here is your prize, a tinsel crown :o

Fully agree with you about xmas, but also thinking longer term here. I know you say staying elsewhere is Not Done, (same deal with my ILs) but assuming you could afford it, there's not a lot they can do if you book yourself in somewhere. We did that, after having our second, there was much muttering the first time, but now it's tacitly accepted that's what we do, and actually everyone's happier.

Gosh, thanks all. I did think I was right, but since I don't really enjoy spending Christmas with the in-laws at the best of times, I wanted to be sure I wasn't just using the baby as an excuse.

The 'turns' thing infuriates me, actually. 14 years their son has lived out of home, they finally came to ours for Christmas Day last year after he pointed out that they had never done so before, and suddenly it's 'turns'. It wasn't bloody 'turns' when they wanted us to fly to them and not reciprocate, was it?

I was thinking, as a compromise, I might suggest that MIL comes over for DD's third birthday, when #2 will be days old, and then we'll fly over to theirs at the end of January for MIL's birthday, rent a place near them and just stay for the long weekend. The baby will be 10 or so weeks then, so a little bit easier, and she gets the big formal photo opportunity. Or is that still mad, and I should toughen up?

And yes, renting a place has to be part of the deal now. I cannot stay in a 3BD with two in-laws, one frail grandmother, one teenager, a SIL & BIL and their two-under-three and my own brood.

Yanbu
get dh to tell her though after all it's his blinkin mum

Ooh Christmasses are hard to organise!! We have started a turns thing (but three-ways - once for my parents, once for DH's and one for just us and it's lovely!). Only prob is we're back to his parents' turn this year. I'll just have to be nice and go and be good.

YAdNBU, but rather than say no at this (early!! :) ) stage, say "we'll see" and then say no once baby's here! [naughty and devious planner emoticon]

Yes definitely rent somewhere whenever you do go. For Christmas, your trump card can be this - newborns are not supposed to fly till they are 8 weeks old. I'm pretty sure most European airlines won't allow it before that.

Go & visit once the baby is a bit older & when you are the only guests staying over (or rent).

We stopped travelling at Christmas years ago (all family abroad). Like you, there isn't room for us to stay with either set of grandparents if other family members are staying.

Bogeyface beat me to it - I was just going to say that your arguments are predicated on a vaginal delivery but you may well end up with a caesar.

You may still be working on getting bf established. Whooping cough has already been mentioned - our GP insisted on DD1 getting the vax the moment she was six weeks old. Taking a newborn on a long trip involving frankly overcrowded accommodation in the blistering heat is an idiotic suggestion.

Newborns might possibly be considered portable, but postnatal women are not.

Say no, not going to happen, or you will seethe about it for the next seven months (ILs brought DH and I to the brink of divorce when I was 8m pregnant, working full-time, and they expected us to go marching around in the 40'C heat every afternoon). Don't offer compromises such as hotels - just no. You're the new mother, you don't want to, discussion over.

I like the Chinese idea - new mother and baby aren't even supposed to leave the house for the first 100 days.

"I cannot stay in a 3BD with two in-laws, one frail grandmother, one teenager, a SIL & BIL and their two-under-three and my own brood."

Why in heaven's name not? Sounds like a barrel of laughs to me!!! :o :o :o