to be be miffed at dh regarding ils

[NameChangedJustInCase]

ok, Iv gone back to the name change in case iabu. This is not about bashing my ILS or DH. I get on perfectly well with them, they are lovely.

I joined mumsnet when i first became pregnant (so just over a year ago) and after reading a few threads on here, i decided to have a big conversation with dh about what was and what was not acceptable to do when baby finally got here ie, birth and just after. I said that if possible i would want my sister and him to be my birth partner but i did not want ANY visitors in the hospital other than the two of them, which he said was alright (he wanted to have his mum and other family members come to the hospital but i said i would not be comfortable with that, he wasn't that happy but accepted it was my decision ) i also made very very clear that i did not want any family to visit for the first few days of being out of hospital, i wanted to slob about in my dressing gown with my boobs out comfortably trying to get breastfeeding established, trying to bond as a family with our new baby, resting when baby was resting. I didn't want to be running back and forth from the bedroom feeding dd, i explained all my reasons why i didn't want family there and made it very clear to him how uncomfortable it would make me feel. we argued a bit about it, he couldn't see why i would be ok for my dsis to be there and not his mum, because it was his baby as well ect but in the end he agreed that he would tell them no visitors for a few days til we got settled.

All good. Anyway, a couple of weeks later after an extremely long and traumatic labour i wake up to hear that dh had spoke to mil and told here that she (and the rest of the family) could come over. he told me that they would either be there that day (of me giving birth) or the next day as they were all excited and couldn't wait to celebrate and meet dd. i was upset, exhausted and defeated so i told him hed really let me down by doing this behind my back (whilst i was sleeping) but just went along with it. I had to go home, deal with this tiny new little person, tidy the house (i know i should have just left it but i really cant do that) when i just wanted to take things at my own pace.

I Know that dh loves me and he didn't do it maliciously or anything (he just got caught up and excited) but I still cant get it out of my mind. i have brought it up with him since but he says (quite rightly) that there is nothing we can do about it now,so i need to just let it go. aibu to still be seething about this months later and actually get the urge to slap him in the face when i think about how vulnerable i felt at the time? AM I????

Igggi - wow
Just make up an entire
Conversation. Projecting? That was comical. She said she gets on well with the in laws so stop being dramatic and trying to paint them as horrible people

It seems simple to me seeker-your scenario would work fine.
It wouldn't be a major trust breaker for me-I would save that for important things. We are talking about close relatives popping in.
As soon as women become mothers they often want total control of their immediate environment. They issue masses of instructions everywhere. You can only actually control yourself-certainly not the baby or anyone else. You are going to be constantly upset if you think you can.

"I think the vast majority of posters think that OP was being quite unreasonable to ban her ILs for the first few days after birth"

the OP clearly stated that this is "not about bashing my ILS or DH. I get on perfectly well with them, they are lovely"

and went on to say "i also made very very clear that i did not want any family to visit for the first few days of being out of hospital, i wanted to slob about in my dressing gown with my boobs out comfortably trying to get breastfeeding established"

that's ANY family - not just the in-laws. Yet people want to make this all about the in-laws and not about the fact that the OP wanted to have the freedom to slob about with her boobs out.

I would have hated being confined to my room, expected to sleep yet also be woken up every time the baby cried. I would have wanted to sit in front of the TV, with cakes close by, feeding the baby and perfecting the latch. Those first few days of breastfeeding are very unlikely to involve a baby who just pops onto the breast then off again in five minutes. A feed can take half and hour, an hour, maybe more. Meanwhile MIL, FIL, cousins-in law are all waiting downstairs for an hour while the OP is sitting in bed stressing over the latch, dealing with a crying baby and so on.

Seeker, your breastfeeding experience may nave been very easy with a baby who latched on, fed efficiently, didn't cry and was happy to be taken away from you as soon as it had fed but I would say that's highly unusual.

"Meanwhile, downstairs..
"And where is she then? Can't get out of bed? Oh clearly not coping well I never did think she'd cope well. Not like your sister, she was up and cooking sunday lunch ten minutes after having the triplets. It's all that breastfeeding, don't know why you don't just use a bottle and then granny can have a turn. I'll just nip upstairs and see how she's doing".
An alternative fantasy, but just as likely to happen as yours Seeker!"

Even if these ols, which the op has already said were lovely, would say such bizarre things, the whole point is that it doesn't matter! Because the "she" concerned can't hear them as she is tucked up in bed waiting for her glass of Champagne.

It's a 20 minute visit. It's not really so hard is it?! You exotic make it seem like they would be moving in!

I think that you have the wrong person kayano. I am agreeing with seeker that popping in isn't a problem.

the OP hasn't ever said how long they stayed for but I agree a 20 minute quick visit is managable - though maybe not with 6 people! Given only 20 minutes there's every chance they may only see the baby for a couple of minutes if it needed a feed and had to go up to the mum. Far better for them to come for a slightly longer visit at a time when the OP is happier, no?

well, apart from the 'not allowed to breastfeed infront of my parents' issue, which is far from reasonable but ho hum I forgot that the DH is a saint compared tothe OP.

Still, the OP isn't coming back IIRC so we will never know.

Nobody said her dh was a saint, in fact many people agreed that he was bu to suggest that she shouldn't bf in front of the ils.He shouldn't have gone behind her back but perhaps he wasn't given much choice but to agree to banning the ils in the first place. He was however quite reasonable in wanting his parents to be able to see the baby for a short time. However all this could have been avoided if they could have agreed a compromise and agreed on a short visit in the hospital, which would be noisy anyway, so hardly disturbing their peace and quiet. Then they could have asked the ils to give them some space for a few days after that.

I honestly think it can be easier having people visit on the very first day, as the baby is likely to be quite sleepy and won't be feeding quite so much as they will a few days later. Ime anyway.

I think that if people have unrealistic expectations you don't have to follow them. Equally I would say 'rubbish' to not bfeeding in front of people. If they don't like it they can remove themselves. As a bfeeding mother I wasn't into going off on my own.

Kayano, it was meant to be comic, sorry if that wasn't obvious to you.
My point being we do not know how in-laws (the 6 of them) would have reacted, what I proposed was as likely as any other suggestion.
I do envy some of you your big houses, my living room being right next to the bedroom and bathroom in a flat, I would hear everything!

Big houses ?

glances round ex council house

Sure....

But you 'convo' had the PIL comparing op to SIL and op says her PIL are lovely making your scenario less likely, not just as likely

I do have the wrong person exotic

Mumsnet ting and feeding baby = disaster!

Sorry!

You can only actually control yourself-certainly not the baby or anyone else. You are going to be constantly upset if you think you can.

Yes! Exactly, Exotic! That's what I meant up thread when I said that certain types of people will be more likely to find it hard to cope.

(I'm going now. I'm not really here, and besides that response was not to math so it doesn't count. )

It is really saddening to see how the attempt by the OP to discuss her preferences and secure her H's agreement to doing things the way she preferred is seen by so many people here as an attempt to control her husband.

'It wouldn't be a major trust breaker for me-I would save that for important things. We are talking about close relatives popping in.'
-- It is also sad to see the attitude that if it's fine for you it should be fine for everyone else.

Six people came to visit, and we have no idea how long they stayed. They might have parked themselves there for the best part of a day for all we know.
They came despite the OP's wishes and despite the agreement she thought she had with her husband that they would enjoy a few days of privacy.

'As soon as women become mothers they often want total control of their immediate environment. They issue masses of instructions everywhere.'
--On what planet?
Who are these monsters of whom you speak?
What dark force possesses them?
Can you read what you are writing?
Do you really believe this tripe?
It is rank misogyny.

'You can only actually control yourself-certainly not the baby or anyone else. You are going to be constantly upset if you think you can.'
-- And this is also misogyny.
Here we see the idea that a woman speaking up on her own behalf, expressing her preferences, is unreasonably seeking to control others.

I don't see how that sentence is misogyny? The poster never mentioned sex, just that
People can only control themselves.

You have projected and turned that into something it is not designed to be

Only those who won't give women the benefit of the doubt and expect them to do all the compromising, MrMiyagi. And those who see a woman expressing a reasonable preference for a short period of privacy after childbirth as a transformation into a harridan and control freak.

And on the subject of compromise this husband could equally have compromised, and could equally have expected his family to compromise, and in fact the agreement the OP and her H had reached was a compromise; a few days of privacy and then visitors very welcome, but nooooo that would be far too much to expect from a man it seems.

Math.......step away from the computer.......

Kayano -- The assumption that a woman expressing a preference for privacy after childbirth is a woman being unreasonably controlling is a misogynistic assumption.

There is an underlying view there of what is an appropriate attitude for a woman to adopt, one that is founded upon the idea that women do not have a right to have preferences and certainly have no right to express them or expect men to respect agreements they have arrived at together regarding those preferences.

And as for projection -- there has been an awful lot of unexamined misogyny projected at the OP on this thread.

YANBU. I had my Dh as my birth partner and only had visitors when I decided I was up to it, which was a few days later. I would have not been happy if he had gone behind my back and invited the in laws without asking me first. I understand you had your sister there, but then again she was one of your birth partners so that's fair enough too. I think that was unreasonable of your oh, but time has passed and you need to let it go now as you can't do anything to change it. If there's a next time make a note to yourself to be more assertive about the situation.

You are a hoot mathanxiety. Agreeing to everything the woman wants without question is called compromise, and not doing so is rank misogyny.

Have you any more gems to share with us?

Math - you have expressed a mysogynistic view of your own the whole way through this thread...because you have made the assumption that in order for this woman to get her own way she had to tell it to her husband to sort it out for her.

she has a mouth of her own and access to telecommunications presumably.
she could have spoken to her MIL months before the birth and discussed the visiting arrangements herself. why use the dh as a middle man seeing as we are not in the 1950s anymore? You never know the MIL might have surprised all and understood

instead she told her husband what he was to tell them, got him to pass the message on on her behalf even though it was completely against his own wishes...and when someone is only doing something half heartedly its not likely to be successful is it?
..but because he has messed up he deserves a slap because that's how we deal with men
...but i suppose you have an answer for that too......

OP seriously i hope your marriage is ok now best of luck for the future

MrMyagi, why are you on this website? Your modes operandi seems to be to come on and disagree with whomever is starting the thread, to parrot back to people the opposite of what they say in some 'hilarious' attempt to enlighten them to the error of their ways and basically just to be as disdainful as possible.

Why are you here? You seem to think women are ridiculous, over-bearing, unreasonable and in a relentless pursuit to tighten the vice-like hold on whichever poor sap's testicles are in their vicinity.

What enjoyment do you get out of coming on here? Do you just do it to wind yourself up? Why would you spend your free time doing that? Are you some sort of martyr? A glutton for punishment?

"there has been an awful lot of unexamined misogyny projected at the OP on this thread."

please tell us what you have NOT yet examined?