My SIL refuses to leave her children at my house for the weekend because of "strange men".

[TinyArmy]

A little background, DH and I have a flatmate. He is an old old friend and is practically the third person in our relationship. He is like the third parent to my children and I trust him with their lives in a heartbeat. He was with us throughout the home study and took exclusive care of our first two DC when we traveled to Pakistan to adopt DD2. He is part of our family completely.

My DB and SIL are coming for holiday near us and plan to spend at least one weekend of the holiday doing couple things and rekindling their marriage. their DC (4 and 2) were supposed to stay with us for the weekend. SIL has changed her mind upon discovering that there might be situations where our flatmate would be left alone with the children. She has known him (through us) for almost five years. She knows how close our DC is with him. We'd already planned to have them for the weekend and had rearranged our plans. Both DH and I will be home all weekend as well. Our last house was a duplex and had a small studio apartment that our flatmate lived in right over us. We have since moved to a different house in which flatmate has his own bedroom but is in the main house with us. SIL says she is uncomfortable leaving children with us now because we have a "strange man" living in our house. FFS he is not a "strange man," she KNOWS him. He has been here since before our DC and will be here till he decides to move out. He is practically a father to our DC, they love him and he them. We have already changed our plans to accommodate them and now they're going back on it and (it seems to me) insulting our friend and his relationship with our DC in the process. AIBU to be offended or is she being unreasonable about our family setting?

I think the whole point is that the friend has never been introduced as a 'family member'. I think he's been presented as a flatmate. Children of 2 and 4 are little, I wouldn't have left my children with my relative's flatmate while they popped to the shops.

That's what I'm saying, the lack of clarity of his role to the external family has lead to all kinds of difficulties. I know it's hard to be clear when you feel you are going to be judged, but if he's in their lives for the long-term, then perhaps now is a good time to start.

And, this is all immaterial to me, I would never leave my 2 and a 4 year old overnight except with my own mother!

But it's not 'leaving DC with someone they don't know' - it's leaving them with the family members they do know (OP and her H) with the possibility that the other family member (the flatmate) might be the only one in the same room as the DC when OP and H have gone for a wee or something, or one is in the bath and one's gone to the shop, or whatever. When you take small DC to a nursery, you don't get to inspect every single nursery worker. when you take them to playgroup you don't ask for CRB checks on every other parent.

I think the issue is clouded by whether or not they are living as a threesome when it is ilrelevant.

The simple fact is the sil does not want to leave her young children with the op because the op has admitted she wont be looking after them herself but leaving them some some periods with someone the sil does not know and the children do not know.
The sil is acting at as a responsible parent who will only entrust her children into the care of an adult she knows and trusts and there is nothing unreasonable about that.

solid that is not what the op is saying she agreed to have dcs then dropped the bomb shell that they may go shopping or have to work and so
the flat mate will care for them during that time. we are talking about 2 yr olds and 4 yrolds.

He is not a member of this family he is a flat mate when it suits and something else when it suits, that has not been defined (and yes I belive it should be defined, where my dcs are involved), It is sinister and decietfull to be so manipulative 1) traet people like this, but that is another thread im sure and 2) you make family members feel guilty about reasonable decissions end off, unless op wants to be fully honest about their relationship, in which case db and ds can take the time to get to know him as a true family member before entrusting the sole care of their children.

Op is looking to sensationalise her living arrangements but still slagg others off who do not agree but does not have the balls to be upfront and provide clarity so others can form an educated opinion and embrase this or err on caution for the saftey of their own dcs.

I take it op does not live in the U.K as im pretty sure LA in the uk would not agree to adoption within a family who have undefined roles and bounderies.

SGB, the OP has already said that she and her H planned to work for a few hours. It doesn't matter what the true status of the flatmate is, it boils down to the OP saying she was going to look after the children and then saying that actually she was getting someone else to do the looking after.

If he was the OP's brother, I don't actually think many people would be happy about leaving their children with him under similar circumstances. Because whoever he is, the children still don't know him, and he's still not the person who originally agreed to do the looking after.

Hang on, I have seen threads from MNers worried about BILs, the husbands of (CRB-checked) nursery nurses babysitting, uncles, and mothers' new husbands. Unanimous support on these boards, every time!

Well, I worry about it which is why I don't let my children go on sleepovers. I would not let my seven year old sleepover at a friend's for exactly that reason, I know her mum, but not the other adults in the house, so for me, it would be a no go on that area, but as I say, I wouldn't be leaving them with anyone except a very limited handful of trusted adults.

My other worry would be how well the carer would cope with four under-fives, I suspect the SIL was taken aback when the OP suggested she and her husband may not be caring for them all the time, leaving a flatmate/friend/brother to look after four tinies is a bit much whilst you pop to the shop or work, it's too many small children left with someone the SIL doesn't herself know.

The SIL is being judgy and unwilling to welcome this flatmate, but that's where the vicious circle of hiding things and not clarifying has come in, now he's not considered a family member by anyone except the OP.

PS:at my local playgroups, you aren't even allowed to leave your baby/toddler in the room with the other parents while you go outside the room, even if you're willing to leave him/her with random other parents. Is it not like that everywhere?

Oh go on then, mundanes, raise another generation of hysterical paranoid morons who regard everyone as a potential threat.

solid you are not taking any of this on board, you are closed minded and have no real argument your self, find some humility and some how resolve what you want to say, becuase you dont seem to have much other than the word mundane. which has sadly worn its self out on this thread.

Thanks, Sgb, I was just waiting for your permission! :o

darn wish there was a "like" button on mn

My brother (who lives with us actually) is always making snide remarks about DH and I never "going out" and how we're so "stereotypical"...it honestly does not seem to occur to him that we like nothing more than sitting at home, watching Fringe on DVD, with a glass of wine, in our sweatpants. He thinks he's the most open minded person in the world but it's quite the opposite.

Extraordinarily mundane here.

Our idea of a good Friday night is mexican food and a nice episode of Better Homes and Gardens, we have even been letting DS2 stay up to join us, it is all on the edge here.

Mundane, hysterical, bigoted, I can live with all that. What I couldn't live with would be dropping my DSs off with someone who felt a little hinky and then having them pay the price for my not wanting to upset anyone. Ain't gonna happen.

It is like Stepford land here, big houses, swimming pools, SUVs, kids on bikes, BBQs, as mundane as mundane can be. And I like it.

"Everyone"? Interesting extrapolation there.

I talk about being abused throughout my whole childhood from my very first memory through to early teens because I think it is important to be open about it - to try and diminish the shame attached.
Also because people who have been abused as children are not therefore going to be overly cautious and I am usually drum banging about treating people as safe unless you have some reason to feel uncomfortable.

Ignoring the fact that this mans totally ambiguous status in the house will be problematic because of the lack of clarity rather than because of whatever his sexual relationships may be is drum banging of a different sort.
I don't give a shit what they do in their private lives. Not the tinniest. I do care that he has no clear role within this household other than trusted and intimate which makes him way more likely to be a problem than anything else could do.

Just bleating on about mundanity and calling me a moron is pretty unpleasant. And a number of other things

I don't think thinking carefully about who is in the household when you drop your 2 and 4 year old off for a sleepover is mundane at all. I don't get what is mundane about it. I am relaxed about them doing lots of activities with 'strangers', going to school, to classes, after-school club. But sleeping over where there is someone in the house I don't know who may be doing sole care, no way. At that age, the only people I trusted to do sole care was our brilliant childminder and my mum. If the childminder had told me her boyfriend was going to be looking after the children when she worked for a few hours or popped to the shops, no way.

I do agree that the SIL sounds closed-minded about the living arrangement with the flatmate, but given that it is unusual, clarity is needed from the OP about exactly how important this person is in their lives.

I don't think I'm paranoid or mundane, thinking carefully about where your 2 and 4 year old sleep over is surely quite normal.

SolidGold are you even a grown-up?! FFS! So you know everyone here who disagrees with you is raising a bunch of morons? Hmm...

As long as I have raised a moron who is equipt to think about her safety and talk about anything she experiences that may be "out of the ordinary" and make her understand the importance of bounderies, I will be very happy with my little moron thank you.

Look, abuse happens in 'respectable' 'normal' households a lot of the time. The idea that anyone whose lifestyle is unconventional is a threat to children is actually a very dangerous one - it means the predators with enough wits to put up a respectable front get away with their abuse for much longer. The squawking on here is along the lines of all those people who want gay teachers sacked because they must be abusers (when the vast majority of child abuse is heterosexual men abusing little girls).

Still doesn't change the fact it is bloody stupid and irresponsible to deliberately leave your children in the care of someone you have doubts about.

Are you saying SGB that you think parents should ignore any doubts they have over someone's suitability to care for their kids in order to appease adults feelings and not upset anyone? Is that what you are actually saying?

That no matter how we feel about a person we should just trust them to keep the peace.

Seriously?

But it isn't the same at all.

Are you not reading what anyone else is writing.

A teacher is a teacher - that is his role. His sexuality is irrelevant. Ditto a nursery helper or sports teacher or brother in law.
But an adult who is being given intimate access to a child when he has no specific role except 'mate' is something that would give me pause. Because I am being asked to trust someone who's reason for being on a close intimate basis with my child is being kept unclear.
If they said 'we are in a three person relationship' I would be way happier.

A male living on a intimate basis with two unconnected adults and not in a sexual relationship is the thing that would make me wary because of personal experience

It is a bit like leaving your child with your parents and knowing they will sometimes leave them with their 40 year old single lodger who they like enormously. He may be great, he almost certainly is but it would not be something I would feel 100% comfortable with until I knew him.

I love your posts sgb, and your viewpoint. I am just finding all this 'you are just fucking morons' a bit odd and mindless.

When ds was two or four I would have struggled to leave him overnight with anyone with whom he was not very very familiar (ie me, DH or the nanny). I would, however, have felt a bit pathetic owning up to this. Maybe OP's SIL is feeling this sort of general anxiety (compounded by the fact that she clearly dislikes SIL) but it is easier to say that she is reluctant because of the flatmate?

However daft she is being, I agree with those who say that a parent should act on any unease, whether rational or not about leaving their child with someone.

I think OP's domestic set up sounds great and that the actual risk of abuse is vanishingly small

I wouldnt not leave my dd in the care of someone respectable and normal, in any domestic situation who I do not know or have missgivings about especially based on the secrative nature of their role. because how would I know they where respectable and normal, whatever that means.

It has nothing to do with the sexual preferance or orientation of this threesome. Infact if she where to say O.K flat mate is our eaqual partner spouse and father in this household and I would my family to respect and accept him as such, then I would take the time to get to know him as such and with time entrust my children with him like any other uncle.

BUT that is not happening here is it. There is uncertanty and lack of clarity. The op lied she said she would be caring for these kids and then decided she would be letting him do it instead. that simple fact would piss me off anyway.

My dd took a dislike to male nursery worker and would be very very distressed if he changed her nappy, I requested and later insisted he didnt then change her nappy, the nursery took a very defensive stance on this because he was a male, however if my dd had reacted the same to a female nursery worker, my stance and insistance she does change my dd would have remained the same. because the simple fact is when intamce is concerned my dd has the right to feel comfertable and safe even if she is unable to arrticualate her resons why.

the fact is people have the right to excersise their choice and prefference when the welfare of their children are of concern.